Here a draft proposal for the introduction of the new decomissioning state in Netbox and our Lifecycle.

Current definition:

Proposed changes (diffs are highlighted):

Proposed new transition diagram:

It's still not fully clear to me where an online host with the spare::system Puppet role should live in this picture, but my best bet is that we should go towards not using that Puppet role at all IMHO.

@RobH, @Cmjohnson, @Papaul, @wiki_willy, @faidon thoughts?

In T222352#5153812, @Volans wrote:

Here a draft proposal for the introduction of the new decomissioning state in Netbox and our Lifecycle.

Current definition:

Server Lifecycle	Netbox	Racked	Power
requested	none, not yet in Netbox	no	n/a
spare	PLANNED	yes or no	off
staged	STAGED	yes	on
active	ACTIVE	yes	on
failed	FAILED	yes	on or off
decommissioned	INVENTORY	yes	on or off
unracked	OFFLINE	no	n/a
recycled	none, not anymore in Netbox	no	n/a

Proposed changes (diffs are highlighted):

Server Lifecycle	Netbox	Racked	Power	Comments
requested	none, not yet in Netbox	no	n/a
spare	INVENTORY	yes	off	Permanent state for spare hosts
planned	PLANNED	yes or no	off	Temporary state for new hosts during the commissioning process
staged	STAGED	yes	on
active	ACTIVE	yes	on
failed	FAILED	yes	on or off
decommissioned	DECOMMISSIONING	yes	on or off	Same behaviour, just different state name
unracked	OFFLINE	no	n/a
recycled	none, not anymore in Netbox	no	n/a

Proposed new transition diagram:

It's still not fully clear to me where an online host with the spare::system Puppet role should live in this picture, but my best bet is that we should go towards not using that Puppet role at all IMHO.

@RobH, @Cmjohnson, @Papaul, @wiki_willy, @faidon thoughts?

Please note @Volans had previously reviewed this with me in IRC. This looks great to me, and I'm looking forward to the status results being a bit more logical-seeming in their naming =]

I think this is an excellent change.

In T222352#5153812, @Volans wrote:

It's still not fully clear to me where an online host with the spare::system Puppet role should live in this picture, but my best bet is that we should go towards not using that Puppet role at all IMHO.

@RobH, @Cmjohnson, @Papaul, @wiki_willy, @faidon thoughts?

We need to split this role into a few different names that do basically the same thing but also match status:

role::staged (basically role spare but for systems awaiting their proper role and push into service)
role::decommissioning (role spare but service owners push their server into this when they want dc ops to decommission the hardware)

planned state doesn't need a puppet role, since that is pre-OS installation. That should clarify the role::spare issue, right?

Change 508671 had a related patch set uploaded (by RobH; owner: RobH):
[operations/puppet@production] splitting role::spare into staged and decomisssioning

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/508671

Mentioned in SAL (#wikimedia-operations) [2019-05-09T11:49:04Z] <volans> updated netbox statues for decommissioning and spare hosts according to T222352

I've updated the Server Lifecycle page, see the diff at:
https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Server_Lifecycle&type=revision&diff=1825673&oldid=1823280
It might need some tweaking and fine-tuning, I've tried to keep the diff at a minimum.

I've updated Netbox devices, here the new lists:

• Spare: https://netbox.wikimedia.org/dcim/devices/?q=&status=5
• Planned: https://netbox.wikimedia.org/dcim/devices/?q=&status=2
• Decomissioning: https://netbox.wikimedia.org/dcim/devices/?q=&status=6

Please review the list of Spare vs Planned to make sure I've applied them correctly.

Change 508671 abandoned by RobH:
splitting role::spare into staged and decomisssioning

Reason:
Agreed!

https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/c/operations/puppet/ /508671