| *** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:19 | |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:20 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 00:21 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 00:23 | |
| *** fungi has quit IRC | 00:30 | |
| *** cjellick has quit IRC | 00:31 | |
| *** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:32 | |
| *** fungi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:36 | |
| *** cjellick has quit IRC | 00:37 | |
| *** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:42 | |
| *** mfer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:48 | |
| *** rockyg has quit IRC | 00:56 | |
| *** fungi has quit IRC | 01:00 | |
| *** fungi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:01 | |
| *** annegentle has quit IRC | 01:02 | |
| *** glenc has quit IRC | 01:04 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 01:11 | |
| *** mfer has quit IRC | 01:12 | |
| *** lblanchard has quit IRC | 01:13 | |
| *** TravT has quit IRC | 01:15 | |
| *** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:20 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:20 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:32 | |
| *** eguz has quit IRC | 01:33 | |
| *** wchrisj has quit IRC | 01:33 | |
| *** jpomero has quit IRC | 01:39 | |
| *** jrist has quit IRC | 02:02 | |
| *** coolsvap has quit IRC | 02:05 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:07 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 02:08 | |
| *** jrist has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:10 | |
| *** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:10 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:13 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 02:20 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:24 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 02:31 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:33 | |
| *** devlaps has quit IRC | 02:35 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 02:43 | |
| *** alexpilotti has quit IRC | 02:49 | |
| *** enykeev has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:55 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 02:57 | |
| *** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan | 03:24 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 03:25 | |
| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 03:36 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 03:47 | |
| *** mfer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 03:50 | |
| *** mfer has quit IRC | 03:55 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 04:00 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:01 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 04:01 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:03 | |
| *** coolsvap has quit IRC | 04:05 | |
| *** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:07 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:17 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:22 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 04:48 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:49 | |
| *** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away | 05:01 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:33 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 05:39 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:39 | |
| *** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:46 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 05:50 | |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:02 | |
| *** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:04 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 06:04 | |
| *** iziv has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:22 | |
| *** iziv_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:26 | |
| *** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan | 06:43 | |
| *** iziv has quit IRC | 06:46 | |
| *** iziv has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:50 | |
| *** iziv has quit IRC | 06:50 | |
| *** iziv has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:50 | |
| iziv | xx | 06:52 |
|---|---|---|
| *** iziv has quit IRC | 06:55 | |
| *** sweston is now known as sweston|away | 06:57 | |
| *** sweston|away is now known as sweston | 06:57 | |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 07:05 | |
| *** lsmola has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:09 | |
| *** eguz has quit IRC | 07:13 | |
| *** d0ugal has quit IRC | 07:27 | |
| *** d0ugal has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:29 | |
| *** d0ugal has quit IRC | 07:29 | |
| *** d0ugal has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:29 | |
| *** mrunge has quit IRC | 07:35 | |
| *** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:52 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:45 | |
| *** safchain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:48 | |
| *** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away | 09:08 | |
| *** overlayer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 09:09 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 09:16 | |
| *** overlayer has quit IRC | 09:28 | |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 10:41 | |
| *** HenryG has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:55 | |
| *** jamie_h has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:07 | |
| *** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan | 12:16 | |
| *** briancurtin has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:29 | |
| *** xuhanp has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:36 | |
| *** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:39 | |
| *** jamie_h has quit IRC | 12:59 | |
| *** jamie_h has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:00 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:01 | |
| *** overlayer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:04 | |
| *** peristeri has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:12 | |
| *** coolsvap is now known as coolsvap|afk | 13:13 | |
| *** coolsvap|afk is now known as coolsvap | 13:13 | |
| *** overlayer has quit IRC | 13:17 | |
| *** overlayer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:17 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:19 | |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:20 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 13:20 | |
| *** jpomero has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:20 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:28 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 13:28 | |
| *** scotty95747 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:30 | |
| *** overlayer has quit IRC | 13:41 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:46 | |
| *** coolsvap is now known as coolsvap|afk | 13:57 | |
| *** mrunge has quit IRC | 14:02 | |
| *** wchrisj has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:16 | |
| *** wchrisj has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:17 | |
| *** BrianB_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:17 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:28 | |
| *** mwagner_lap has quit IRC | 14:30 | |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 14:32 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 14:35 | |
| *** TravT has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:37 | |
| *** safchain has quit IRC | 14:44 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:46 | |
| *** jamie_h has quit IRC | 14:57 | |
| *** jamie_h has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:57 | |
| *** Sudhakar has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:58 | |
| *** mfer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:58 | |
| *** nacim has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:58 | |
| *** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:00 | |
| carl_baldwin | hi all | 15:01 |
| pcm_ | hi! | 15:01 |
| Sudhakar | hi .. | 15:01 |
| carl_baldwin | pcm_: Sudhakar: hi | 15:01 |
| xuhanp | hi | 15:01 |
| carl_baldwin | #startmeeting neutron_l3 | 15:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Apr 24 15:02:06 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is carl_baldwin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:02 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_l3' | 15:02 |
| carl_baldwin | xuhanp: hi | 15:02 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic Announcements | 15:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:02 | |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron-L3-Subteam | 15:02 |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:02 | |
| carl_baldwin | Sounds like the selection process for summit sessions is moving right along. The deadline for submitting topics has passed. | 15:03 |
| carl_baldwin | Any other announcements? | 15:03 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic l3-svcs-vendor-* | 15:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "l3-svcs-vendor-* (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:04 | |
| carl_baldwin | pcm_: hi, any updates since last week? | 15:04 |
| pcm_ | just to have people review the specs that are out. | 15:04 |
| pcm_ | I'm trying to create a simple prototype of validation calling sequence. Will put it out in gerrit to get thoughts | 15:05 |
| carl_baldwin | Great. I encourage working through as much as possible before summit. I think the discussion will be more productive that way. | 15:06 |
| *** nextone92 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:06 | |
| pcm_ | There are a bunch of ways to handle, so will want to get something that everyone likes. | 15:06 |
| pcm_ | Yeah, plan is to get something on Gerrit, just to discuss. | 15:06 |
| carl_baldwin | I’m trying to pull up the blueprints page but I’m having trouble with launchpad. Is it just me? | 15:06 |
| carl_baldwin | It must be launchpad. I can hit gerrit without a problem. | 15:07 |
| pcm_ | For the spec, is OK: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88406/ | 15:07 |
| pcm_ | Right, BP page is not coming up | 15:07 |
| Sudhakar | yep..launchpad not loading for me too.. | 15:07 |
| pcm_ | carl_baldwin: Well, just imagine this really great BP :) | 15:08 |
| carl_baldwin | pcm_: Do you have all three specs up or just the one? | 15:08 |
| pcm_ | all three | 15:08 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88406/ | 15:08 |
| pcm_ | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88482/ | 15:08 |
| pcm_ | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89366/ | 15:08 |
| pcm_ | Been mostly thinking about the validation one. | 15:08 |
| carl_baldwin | Feel free to use the (#)link syntax to get the links in to the meeting minutes. | 15:08 |
| carl_baldwin | Okay, I will read through them. I encourage others to do the same. It will be good preparation for the summit discussion. | 15:09 |
| pcm_ | Not much though on how to do the client caps one (89366) other than broad strokes. | 15:09 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/88482/ | 15:10 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89366/ | 15:10 |
| carl_baldwin | ^ Just to get them in to the minutes. | 15:10 |
| carl_baldwin | pcm_: Anything else? | 15:10 |
| pcm_ | ah, thanks. Will try to remember that! | 15:10 |
| pcm_ | no. thanks! | 15:10 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic l3-high-availability | 15:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "l3-high-availability (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:11 | |
| Sudhakar | pcm_:good work... | 15:11 |
| pcm_ | Sudhakar: thanks! | 15:11 |
| carl_baldwin | ^ pcm_ I echo that too. Thanks for getting those specs up so quickly. | 15:11 |
| carl_baldwin | safchain: Are you around? | 15:12 |
| * pcm_ someone had to be the guinea pig for Kyle :) | 15:12 | |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/l3-high-availability,n,z | 15:12 |
| carl_baldwin | These review have been neglected during the push to Icehouse. | 15:13 |
| carl_baldwin | I’m not sure if there is a spec written and posted to gerrit yet. | 15:13 |
| *** YorikSar has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:14 | |
| carl_baldwin | #action carl_baldwin will follow up with Sylvain about the spec. | 15:14 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic bgp-dynamic-routing | 15:14 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "bgp-dynamic-routing (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:14 | |
| Sudhakar | carl l3 HA is now targeted for Juno1? | 15:14 |
| nextone92 | I have an action item to check in the spec into gerrit | 15:15 |
| carl_baldwin | Sudhakar: I believe so. | 15:15 |
| Sudhakar | ok.. | 15:15 |
| carl_baldwin | nextone92: Do you have a timeline yet? | 15:15 |
| *** coolsvap|afk is now known as coolsvap | 15:15 | |
| nextone92 | I'll get that done this week | 15:15 |
| carl_baldwin | BTW, great job nextone92 on getting your session accepted for summit. | 15:16 |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:16 | |
| nextone92 | Thank you, I'm excited to have this opportunity to discuss dynamic routing :) | 15:16 |
| Sudhakar | nextone92 Congrats :) | 15:16 |
| carl_baldwin | There are a lot of sessions being combined. Let’s find a time to chat about how to best utilize the time for a good discussion. | 15:16 |
| nextone92 | That sounds good | 15:17 |
| carl_baldwin | nextone92: Could you send an email to the ML when the spec is posted? | 15:17 |
| carl_baldwin | nextone92: Maybe tag me as a reviewer as well. | 15:17 |
| nextone92 | Okay, I'll do that | 15:17 |
| carl_baldwin | … and any other team members as well. | 15:18 |
| nextone92 | #action nextone92 submit dynamic routing blueprint spec on gerrit | 15:18 |
| carl_baldwin | nextone92: great! | 15:18 |
| carl_baldwin | Anything else this week? | 15:19 |
| nextone92 | I received and responded to comments from Igor - thank you! | 15:19 |
| nextone92 | And that's it | 15:19 |
| carl_baldwin | nextone92: Thanks | 15:19 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic rootwrap-daemon-mode | 15:20 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "rootwrap-daemon-mode (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:20 | |
| carl_baldwin | ajo: YorikSar: hi | 15:20 |
| YorikSar | o/ | 15:20 |
| carl_baldwin | Anything to report? | 15:20 |
| YorikSar | I didn't spend too much time on rootwrap this week. | 15:20 |
| YorikSar | I've managed to provide more low-level workaround for that problem though. | 15:20 |
| YorikSar | And it actually worked :) | 15:21 |
| YorikSar | So now I have to see what fails in tempest. | 15:21 |
| carl_baldwin | That is great! So, does that take care of the big blocker? | 15:21 |
| YorikSar | I haven't provided more info to that Ubuntu bug yet though... | 15:22 |
| YorikSar | It looks very much like it. | 15:22 |
| YorikSar | But I think it'd be good to push that backport at least to Ubuntu. | 15:22 |
| YorikSar | And I still haven't got around to testing on CentOS or just Python 2.6. | 15:22 |
| carl_baldwin | Okay. Good progress though. | 15:23 |
| carl_baldwin | Unfortunately, there is another blocker. :( The new process will require a blueprint merged in to the neutron-specs repository. | 15:23 |
| YorikSar | Yes, I've seen someone (was it you?) -1ing my change because of that. | 15:23 |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:24 | |
| YorikSar | I think my bp in neutron will be rather small, so I think I'll do it today or tomorrow. | 15:24 |
| carl_baldwin | I don’t recall doing that but I probably would have. -1 isn’t so bad. ;) Some changes are -2’d because of that. | 15:24 |
| pcm_ | FYI #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints#Neutron | 15:25 |
| YorikSar | That was Sean M. Collins (don't know his nick) | 15:25 |
| carl_baldwin | pcm_: Thank you for the link. There is a bit of a learning curve with the new process. A nice template is provided though. | 15:26 |
| carl_baldwin | YorikSar: Anything else? | 15:26 |
| pcm_ | Yeah, lot of items to fill out, but makes you think about design. | 15:26 |
| YorikSar | Nope. That's it on this topic. | 15:26 |
| carl_baldwin | Great work on that work-around and thanks for the update. | 15:27 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic neutron-ovs-dvr | 15:27 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "neutron-ovs-dvr (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:27 | |
| carl_baldwin | #undo | 15:27 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x3808e50> | 15:27 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic *-dns-resolution | 15:28 |
| YorikSar | <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x3808e50> - how cool is that! :) | 15:28 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "*-dns-resolution (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:28 | |
| * carl_baldwin is not exactly sure what that means | 15:29 | |
| Sudhakar | YorikSar good catch ;) | 15:29 |
| YorikSar | carl_baldwin: That means that bot tried to write some Python object without converting it to string :) | 15:29 |
| carl_baldwin | YorikSar: thanks. :) | 15:30 |
| *** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:30 | |
| carl_baldwin | I got a couple of blueprints up on the topic of DNS resolution and got a session topic accepted. | 15:30 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/internal-dns-resolution | 15:30 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/external-dns-resolution | 15:31 |
| Sudhakar | carl Congrats! | 15:31 |
| carl_baldwin | Sudhakar: thanks. | 15:31 |
| carl_baldwin | That is all I have to report. Just that the blueprints are up for review. I look forward to discussing them in gerrit and at the summit. | 15:31 |
| carl_baldwin | I don’t see Swami on yet. | 15:33 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic pluggable-ext-net | 15:33 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "pluggable-ext-net (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:33 | |
| carl_baldwin | This is another blueprint I’ve filed. | 15:33 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/pluggable-ext-net | 15:33 |
| carl_baldwin | I had hoped Swami would be on to discuss this along with DVR. | 15:34 |
| carl_baldwin | The idea started with addressing and eliminating the need to consume public IP addresses for the compute nodes when DVR is in use. | 15:35 |
| carl_baldwin | This was a loose end in the original DVR plan that needed some more thought while allowing DVR to progress without it. | 15:35 |
| carl_baldwin | It will also allow the flexibility to use introduce dynamic routing on ext-net per nextone92 ’s blueprint. | 15:36 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic neutron-ovs-dvr | 15:37 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "neutron-ovs-dvr (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:37 | |
| *** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:37 | |
| carl_baldwin | I’ll try to report what I know. Feel free to jump in if you have anything to report. | 15:38 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/neutron-ovs-dvr,n,z | 15:38 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/neutron-ovs-dvr,n,z (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:38 | |
| carl_baldwin | #undo | 15:39 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x398ec90> | 15:39 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/neutron-ovs-dvr,n,z | 15:39 |
| carl_baldwin | Oops. | 15:39 |
| carl_baldwin | The team continues to post patches as they are able to get them merged to master. | 15:39 |
| carl_baldwin | The patches as they appear in gerrit are not quite sufficient to test the whole solution yet. | 15:40 |
| carl_baldwin | Target is still Juno-1 | 15:41 |
| carl_baldwin | I believe that they have still have an action item to post the blueprint specification to gerrit. | 15:41 |
| carl_baldwin | #action Swami post blueprint specification to gerrit | 15:42 |
| xuhanp | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89934/ there is one on gerrit | 15:42 |
| carl_baldwin | xuhanp: Great, I did not see that post yesterday. Thank you for the link. | 15:43 |
| carl_baldwin | #undo | 15:43 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Link object at 0x3800e10> | 15:43 |
| carl_baldwin | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89934/ | 15:44 |
| carl_baldwin | DVR is a top priority for Juno. It would be great to get eyes on this review soo. | 15:44 |
| carl_baldwin | *soon | 15:45 |
| carl_baldwin | That is all that I can think of for DVR. | 15:45 |
| carl_baldwin | Is there any topic that I’ve missed? | 15:47 |
| Sudhakar | nope | 15:47 |
| carl_baldwin | #topic Open Discussion | 15:48 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: neutron_l3)" | 15:48 | |
| Sudhakar | carl good thought of linking the DNS hostnames to the dnsmasq ... | 15:49 |
| carl_baldwin | Sudhakar: thanks. The thought has been out there in one form or another. Just wasn’t getting any traction and there were a lot of loose ends that hopefully the blueprint addresses. | 15:50 |
| Sudhakar | true.. all these days I happy enough to see IP addresses pinging after the deployment... ;) | 15:51 |
| carl_baldwin | Also, that needed to be address before we could start thinking about integrated DNS externally. | 15:52 |
| Sudhakar | agreed... | 15:52 |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 15:53 | |
| carl_baldwin | Well, if there is nothing else. We can end. | 15:54 |
| carl_baldwin | Great work in a lot of areas. We have a handful of summit sessions. Great job on that as well. | 15:54 |
| carl_baldwin | #endmeeting | 15:55 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 15:55 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Apr 24 15:55:02 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:55 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_l3/2014/neutron_l3.2014-04-24-15.02.html | 15:55 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_l3/2014/neutron_l3.2014-04-24-15.02.txt | 15:55 |
| pcm_ | bye | 15:55 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_l3/2014/neutron_l3.2014-04-24-15.02.log.html | 15:55 |
| *** pcm_ has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:55 | |
| Sudhakar | bye.. | 15:55 |
| carl_baldwin | bye all | 15:55 |
| nextone92 | bye! | 15:55 |
| *** Sudhakar has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:58 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:58 | |
| *** bobmel has quit IRC | 15:59 | |
| *** lsmola has quit IRC | 16:00 | |
| *** overlayer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:03 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| *** devlaps has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:08 | |
| *** xuhanp has quit IRC | 16:10 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:11 | |
| *** nbouthors has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:11 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 16:13 | |
| *** nbouthors has quit IRC | 16:15 | |
| *** nacim has quit IRC | 16:21 | |
| *** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:23 | |
| *** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:26 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 16:27 | |
| *** BrianB_ has quit IRC | 16:31 | |
| *** zehicle_at_dell has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:33 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | w00t - I'm joining from my flight! | 16:33 |
| zehicle_at_dell | sorry...waiting for Refstack meeting, disregard | 16:34 |
| *** jamie_h_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:48 | |
| *** catherineD has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:51 | |
| *** catherineD has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:51 | |
| *** jamie_h has quit IRC | 16:52 | |
| *** catherineD has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:53 | |
| *** jamie_h_ has quit IRC | 16:54 | |
| *** overlayer has quit IRC | 16:55 | |
| *** rockyg has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:01 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | o/ | 17:01 |
| *** catherineD has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:01 | |
| rockyg | o/ | 17:01 |
| *** fcarpenter has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:01 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:01 | |
| *** waiman has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:01 | |
| davidlenwell | o/ | 17:01 |
| davidlenwell | #startmeeting refstack | 17:02 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Apr 24 17:02:02 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is davidlenwell. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 17:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: refstack)" | 17:02 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'refstack' | 17:02 |
| *** waiman is now known as RaymondWong | 17:02 | |
| *** catherineD has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:02 | |
| davidlenwell | roll call?!? | 17:02 |
| RaymondWong | hi | 17:02 |
| rockyg | o/ | 17:02 |
| catherineD | Hello | 17:02 |
| zehicle_at_dell | o/ | 17:02 |
| zehicle_at_dell | ___O___ | 17:03 |
| davidlenwell | ha ha rob is flying | 17:03 |
| rockyg | <snicker> | 17:03 |
| fcarpenter | hello | 17:03 |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 17:04 | |
| rockyg | no praveen yet | 17:04 |
| rockyg | What's the first topic? | 17:05 |
| davidlenwell | on the agenda today: Tests, API Versioning, TCUP, packaging execute_test | 17:05 |
| davidlenwell | #topic Tests | 17:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Tests (Meeting topic: refstack)" | 17:05 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 17:06 | |
| davidlenwell | So it occured to me yesterday while digging into some refstack code that we.. the people who are supposed to test things.. have written 0 tests to cover our own code | 17:06 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 17:06 | |
| davidlenwell | So I'm no longer going to approve code without test coverage as a starting point.. and we'll need to start working it in as we go for the rest of it .. | 17:07 |
| davidlenwell | thoughts .. objections .. questions ??? | 17:07 |
| rockyg | Developers generally hate writing tests. and I understand. Unit test is the first step. | 17:07 |
| zehicle_at_dell | not sure how to test some of TCUP work | 17:08 |
| RaymondWong | davidlenwell: will you be able to put in some sample test? | 17:08 |
| *** coolsvap is now known as coolsvap|afk | 17:08 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | I'd ask to hold off until after summit on the testing requirement | 17:08 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: yes . I will | 17:08 |
| RaymondWong | and it is hard to test GUI | 17:08 |
| zehicle_at_dell | (FWIW, I <3 tests) | 17:09 |
| *** nextone92 has quit IRC | 17:09 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | davidlenwell, I am +1 on the requirement tho | 17:09 |
| davidlenwell | unit testing just runs the code and insures it has the right exceptions... the right values come in and out .. you can easily write tests for the web.py methods and the api methods .. mostly I'm interested in testing the api to stay in spec | 17:09 |
| rockyg | GUI should be tested at the layer below the display (the interface to the rest of the system) until it is reasonably stable. | 17:10 |
| zehicle_at_dell | +1 on API tests | 17:10 |
| davidlenwell | zehicle_at_dell: we can discuss the timing of the requirement at a later time | 17:10 |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:10 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | davidlenwell, +1 | 17:10 |
| rockyg | +1 on unit tests and API tests | 17:10 |
| davidlenwell | okay .. then next topic | 17:10 |
| davidlenwell | #topic API Versioning | 17:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "API Versioning (Meeting topic: refstack)" | 17:11 | |
| rockyg | \o | 17:11 |
| davidlenwell | So last night I threw this at the specs folder .. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/90044/ | 17:12 |
| rockyg | This might be related: I've been following the Tempest no branch model discussion. I went to the QA IRC meeting and suggested a meeting between us and them to discuss how it would impact us, what to expect, how to work with it. I'm going to look at the spec now... | 17:13 |
| davidlenwell | its a first draft .. I'd appriate a review from rob and catherineD and RaymondWong to make sure Its not missing any important api calls | 17:13 |
| davidlenwell | rockyg: we should probably find time at the summit to sit down with them | 17:14 |
| rockyg | davidlenwell: +1 | 17:14 |
| zehicle_at_dell | davidlenwell, +1 | 17:15 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD and RaymondWong so you'll notice if you look at the spec I left out the get_script method.. | 17:15 |
| davidlenwell | as I mentioned last week I do not feel like it is a secure way of passing executable code into a container. | 17:16 |
| RaymondWong | but it can guarantee the executable is at the same level as the Refstack code (in the case of local refstack w/ docker) | 17:17 |
| zehicle_at_dell | how about using a git pull? | 17:18 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: that is the entire point of versioning the api | 17:18 |
| davidlenwell | zehicle_at_dell: I'd preffer it pip installed the tester | 17:18 |
| RaymondWong | people may have downloaded and installed a local copy of refstack, and it may not match the one in git... | 17:18 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: where did they download it from ? | 17:19 |
| RaymondWong | originally from git hub... | 17:19 |
| *** praveen_dell has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:19 | |
| RaymondWong | if i download it from master of git hub now... it may be changed tomorrow... | 17:19 |
| davidlenwell | pip allows us to version control the test clients | 17:20 |
| davidlenwell | if the api changes it will change the required version of the test client | 17:20 |
| zehicle_at_dell | I'm confused - git clone would be the way to get the code if you wanted it. | 17:20 |
| RaymondWong | only if the code hasn't been updated in the same branch. | 17:20 |
| davidlenwell | therefore if your api is out of date.. its sitll requiring the older version of the tester | 17:20 |
| davidlenwell | so they will be in line | 17:20 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:20 | |
| davidlenwell | does that makes sense? | 17:21 |
| davidlenwell | if you up date your api.. it will then have the newer version of the tester in its requirments | 17:21 |
| davidlenwell | but an old out of date api .. will use a version of the tester it works with .. always | 17:21 |
| RaymondWong | davidlenwell: right, api and tester have to be matched. | 17:22 |
| davidlenwell | its how python-novaclient and the nova api stay in sync without having to force the client to be downloaded from the nova api | 17:22 |
| RaymondWong | i am not sure how you specify it with git | 17:22 |
| rockyg | Yeah. All APIs should be versioned. It reduces problems when you figure out what you did wrong the first time ;-) | 17:22 |
| davidlenwell | you don't .. thats why we use pip and versioning | 17:23 |
| zehicle_at_dell | question - we're assuming that we'll keep both v1 and vNext working for now? | 17:23 |
| rockyg | What davidlenwell said | 17:23 |
| * zehicle_at_dell jumps ahead | 17:23 | |
| davidlenwell | pip requirements allow you to be specific with the version of the client you are installing | 17:23 |
| rockyg | It's possible the first release GA will be >1 | 17:23 |
| davidlenwell | we'll call it v1 anyways | 17:24 |
| rockyg | Until v2 | 17:24 |
| zehicle_at_dell | davidlenwell, +1 | 17:24 |
| zehicle_at_dell | GA = API not changing contract | 17:24 |
| rockyg | Yes. | 17:24 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: I know it sounds whacky but it does work and its well practiced within openstack and in python in general | 17:24 |
| * zehicle_at_dell 's plan is starting to decend... may get booted out soon | 17:25 | |
| davidlenwell | so the next topic is | 17:25 |
| davidlenwell | #topic TCUP | 17:25 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "TCUP (Meeting topic: refstack)" | 17:25 | |
| davidlenwell | before rob gets booted | 17:25 |
| RaymondWong | i agree with versioning, and to make sure the code version match... we can work out the implementation details... probably i can understand it better when i see the code or spec. | 17:25 |
| zehicle_at_dell | 10Q! | 17:25 |
| zehicle_at_dell | I've updated the spec based on Rocky's review and also added a graphic | 17:26 |
| davidlenwell | So rob has put a lot of time into a spec for tcup | 17:26 |
| davidlenwell | rob .. I reviewed it last night | 17:26 |
| rockyg | Yay! | 17:26 |
| davidlenwell | zehicle_at_dell: had s few notes | 17:26 |
| rockyg | I'll review again. | 17:26 |
| zehicle_at_dell | cool, thanks. Should be able to update tonight | 17:26 |
| davidlenwell | generally I think you are on the right track | 17:26 |
| zehicle_at_dell | right now, we're making sure that tempest runs manually from TCUP | 17:26 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: RaymondWong can you review his spec | 17:27 |
| zehicle_at_dell | so that I have a baseline | 17:27 |
| zehicle_at_dell | praveen_dell, is helping document that so people can test it | 17:27 |
| rockyg | My requirements exercise has helped me focus a bit on possible holes in design | 17:27 |
| zehicle_at_dell | I want to make sure that we've got a baseline | 17:27 |
| rockyg | +1 baseline | 17:27 |
| catherineD | zehicle_at_dell: so you have a base line data? | 17:27 |
| zehicle_at_dell | and I'm working on executing davidlenwell 's code to run from env variables | 17:27 |
| davidlenwell | zehicle_at_dell: have you tried using execute_test ? | 17:28 |
| zehicle_at_dell | So I can point to TCUP running Tempest | 17:28 |
| catherineD | zehicle_at_dell: can you share that data? | 17:28 |
| zehicle_at_dell | w/o worring about the config builder | 17:28 |
| zehicle_at_dell | it's docuemntation | 17:28 |
| zehicle_at_dell | basically, just how to run tempest, but in the context of the container | 17:28 |
| zehicle_at_dell | while I'm working on the config injection it occures to me to make sure the Dockerbuild file is valid | 17:29 |
| rockyg | #link https://review.openstack.org/88587 | 17:29 |
| zehicle_at_dell | that can go in parallel | 17:29 |
| *** thinrichs has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:29 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | I think I'm very close to having David's code working - I just need to be in place to test | 17:30 |
| rockyg | CatherineD: review the spec and add your comments. If we can get all comments in today, Rob only needs one more pass, hopefully | 17:30 |
| zehicle_at_dell | and play | 17:30 |
| catherineD | rockyg: Has your team being able to collect some Tempest data? I am interesting in seeing sometempest test data | 17:30 |
| * zehicle_at_dell letting DefCore and that Dell stuff get in the way :( | 17:31 | |
| *** gyee has quit IRC | 17:31 | |
| catherineD | IN my env, I passed 998 test cases of 1296 | 17:31 |
| catherineD | I would like to see other's data | 17:31 |
| rockyg | Not as yet. Is it ready to test again? | 17:31 |
| rockyg | We have a Grizzly cloud, so we should get quite a number of fails | 17:31 |
| zehicle_at_dell | anyone try against trystack? | 17:32 |
| davidlenwell | I was just going to complain that you guys are far behind .. but we're still on grizzly too | 17:32 |
| rockyg | 998 is a pretty good result. | 17:32 |
| zehicle_at_dell | davidlenwell, I have a topic for next meeting > we need to discuss control process for some important JSON data like driver test info & must-pass test lists | 17:32 |
| catherineD | davidlenwell: and rockyg: so you will not colect data? | 17:32 |
| zehicle_at_dell | I'd like to prep that w/ you | 17:33 |
| RaymondWong | when david renamed execute_test, refstack (local w/ docker) doesn't work anymore. i can put in a temporary fix so it can run again, until someone workout he pip thing. | 17:33 |
| rockyg | Yes, we will collect data. It just won't pass as many tests. | 17:33 |
| zehicle_at_dell | that's ok | 17:33 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: we're in the process of migrating to icehouse right now .. skipping havana .. piston will be posting data after that | 17:33 |
| *** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away | 17:33 | |
| catherineD | rockyg: I can help your team to start testing ... I am eager to see data .. | 17:34 |
| RaymondWong | rockyg: when refstack is working again, you can simply change the config to use grizzly tempest url, and it can generate data for you. | 17:34 |
| * zehicle_at_dell thinks that's a reasonable idea | 17:34 | |
| rockyg | Kewl! | 17:34 |
| zehicle_at_dell | it would be really good for the API to accept which version you are testing - I'll check the spec and see | 17:34 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: I like your plan of temporarly fixing the docker build thing to work with the new code .. | 17:34 |
| zehicle_at_dell | question > there was a request for the output of TCUP to be available locally | 17:35 |
| *** prasadv has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:35 | |
| *** eguz has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| zehicle_at_dell | should this be added to the requirements? I've been trying to have 0 leavebehind footprint | 17:35 |
| zehicle_at_dell | could easily be a flag | 17:35 |
| catherineD | davidlenwell: I thought Refstack is based on Havan only for now ? When will Refstack support Icehouse? | 17:36 |
| davidlenwell | agreed | 17:36 |
| rockyg | Maybe we can get a havana devstack up quick to test against. | 17:36 |
| zehicle_at_dell | DefCore only needs Havana | 17:36 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: sooner than you think | 17:36 |
| rockyg | We definitely need to be able to export TCUP data to a local location. | 17:36 |
| zehicle_at_dell | I suspect most of the Refstack users will want later releases | 17:36 |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:36 | |
| catherineD | davidlenwell: great because we also need to test Icehouse | 17:36 |
| zehicle_at_dell | rockyg, I updated the spec to make it optional. Easy to add capability | 17:36 |
| davidlenwell | zehicle_at_dell: catherineD icehouse is the present .. we have to support it | 17:36 |
| zehicle_at_dell | +1 | 17:37 |
| * zehicle_at_dell putting seatbacks up....laptop closing | 17:37 | |
| *** prasadv has quit IRC | 17:37 | |
| rockyg | The requirements from the Use cases says a user wants to compare runs. On a private cloud, that means local data | 17:37 |
| davidlenwell | rockyg: that is covered by running your own copy of refstack | 17:37 |
| *** zehicle_at_dell has quit IRC | 17:37 | |
| rockyg | Right. | 17:37 |
| davidlenwell | tcup doesn't need that | 17:38 |
| rockyg | But saving the data... | 17:38 |
| RaymondWong | i think that is better for user to install local refstack, then they can run multiple tests, store the data, and possibly download the data and compare. | 17:38 |
| davidlenwell | the point of tcup is that it runs and posts its data back to a refstack api some place .. could be refstack.org .. could be your own copy of refstack | 17:38 |
| davidlenwell | its flexible that way .. | 17:38 |
| davidlenwell | if you want to colate local data .. run refstack | 17:39 |
| rockyg | Need to be able to specify where TCUP ships the data to when it finishes up....Ah. Okay. | 17:39 |
| davidlenwell | if you just want to post test results to refstack .. use tcup | 17:39 |
| catherineD | Is there a goal for Refstack(certification process ) at summit | 17:39 |
| catherineD | is tcup working? | 17:39 |
| rockyg | We should make sure that is commented in the code for extraction to docs. | 17:39 |
| davidlenwell | I left notes to that effect on the review of the spec | 17:39 |
| davidlenwell | right now tcup doesn't work .. tcup is a spec | 17:40 |
| rockyg | Thanks. | 17:40 |
| davidlenwell | once the spec is compelete we can make it work like designed in the spec | 17:40 |
| davidlenwell | rob is toying with prototypes of tcup | 17:40 |
| catherineD | then why don't we use something that work to collect data? Unless data collection is not important at this time? | 17:40 |
| catherineD | I guess we are the only one have collected data now? | 17:41 |
| catherineD | Is data collection important for DefCore to define "Core"? | 17:41 |
| davidlenwell | data collection is important for a lot of reasons .. that is one that defcore cares about | 17:41 |
| rockyg | Yes. Data collection is very important. Which may be why it's taking so long to get to. | 17:42 |
| catherineD | then can we concentrate on that aspect by using what is working | 17:42 |
| catherineD | we waiste a lot of time (> 3 weeks) so far .. | 17:42 |
| RaymondWong | i.e. install local refstack and run the test with docker. | 17:42 |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:43 | |
| rockyg | I am going to try to convince a DB engineer to join our effort. That should help get some focus on data collection. | 17:43 |
| catherineD | I know the code is not perfect and we can work on that but at the same time we should proceed with data collection | 17:43 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: that doesn't cover the requirments for massive data collection | 17:43 |
| catherineD | rockyg: I will help as much as I can ... | 17:43 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: RaymondWong I understand that it is frustrating that we are not jumping in and using what we have already prototyped | 17:43 |
| RaymondWong | davidlenwell: right, we are missing the "upload/sync data back to refstack.org" part. | 17:43 |
| davidlenwell | RaymondWong: hold up | 17:44 |
| rockyg | davidlenwell: right. CatherineD, you a good db dev? | 17:44 |
| davidlenwell | rockyg: you are going off topic .. hang on a sec | 17:44 |
| rockyg | not a problem. TCUP. | 17:44 |
| davidlenwell | the problem with the current code path is that its not simple to install | 17:44 |
| catherineD | davidlenwell: Exactly... Even that it is prototped and not pertect it can produce data fro DefCore | 17:45 |
| davidlenwell | the idea of tcup is that we have have lots of people run it easily without having to install things | 17:45 |
| rockyg | Really needs either a package or pip install | 17:45 |
| davidlenwell | if we can get tcup working we'll have a lot more data than if we just collect data from the few people we can get to set up the current path | 17:45 |
| davidlenwell | rockyg: thats actually the next topic | 17:45 |
| catherineD | Raymond got a version of TCUP working .... but we block that | 17:45 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: that version of tcup didn't meet the requirements ' | 17:46 |
| catherineD | did any one look at Raymond's code? | 17:46 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: yes it tested .. but depended on too many things being set up right .. | 17:46 |
| davidlenwell | I did review his code | 17:46 |
| catherineD | But it is TCUP , it can collect data right? | 17:46 |
| rockyg | CatherineD: perhaps we can work two paths: use a working version that doesn't meet spec to experiment with data collection/format | 17:46 |
| catherineD | rockyg: +1 | 17:46 |
| davidlenwell | rockyg: catherineD going two paths isn't the right answer | 17:47 |
| davidlenwell | please read robs latest spec for tcup .. he does a very good job explaining the requirments | 17:47 |
| rockyg | We just want to focus on getting a usable data set, taking care of skipping tests, etc | 17:47 |
| RaymondWong | i don't get which spec/requirement it is not meeting... maybe some simple fix. | 17:47 |
| catherineD | Data is data ... | 17:47 |
| rockyg | OKay. Will review. Maybe CatherineD and I can come up with a data spec. | 17:48 |
| davidlenwell | okay .. lets table this discussion until after you guys all read and review robs latest spec | 17:48 |
| rockyg | Okay. Next topic? | 17:48 |
| davidlenwell | if your code meets the requirements I will approve it . but until the spec is approved and the requirements are agreed upon I am not approving any code that covers that use case | 17:49 |
| RaymondWong | davidlenwell: +1 | 17:49 |
| rockyg | We're not talking code. We're talking spec. | 17:49 |
| davidlenwell | yes | 17:49 |
| RaymondWong | yes | 17:49 |
| davidlenwell | so please .. use the spec review process to give your opinions | 17:49 |
| davidlenwell | they are valid .. I want you to contribute .. | 17:50 |
| davidlenwell | I do not want divergant code paths just so we can collect data faster | 17:50 |
| davidlenwell | are we all on the same page? | 17:50 |
| rockyg | Yes. | 17:50 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: RaymondWong? | 17:51 |
| davidlenwell | #topic packaging execute_test and renaming it to refstack-tester | 17:51 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "packaging execute_test and renaming it to refstack-tester (Meeting topic: refstack)" | 17:51 | |
| RaymondWong | yes, no TCUP testing until later... but we can still help rocky or others to setup local refstack to start test (if they want to) | 17:51 |
| rockyg | Yes, packaging. | 17:51 |
| catherineD | + 1 for furture code ... -1 for data collect ... I think we should execute both in parallel ... using the existing code to collect data . | 17:52 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: we can discuss that offline if you wish | 17:52 |
| rockyg | 8 min. Let's get this packaging stuff out there. | 17:52 |
| davidlenwell | phone call later today? | 17:52 |
| catherineD | Let's do ... | 17:52 |
| catherineD | maybe after this IRC ends .. | 17:53 |
| davidlenwell | okay.. so packaging .. | 17:53 |
| davidlenwell | catherineD: I have to commute to the office after this meeting .. so maybe in an hour or so ? | 17:53 |
| catherineD | sure sure | 17:53 |
| davidlenwell | agreed | 17:53 |
| davidlenwell | alright ... lets talk about packaging execute test.. | 17:53 |
| davidlenwell | I've already done some of the initial things that will be needed to spin this code off | 17:54 |
| davidlenwell | it has its own requirements.txt file and setup.py | 17:54 |
| davidlenwell | for now because having lots of repo's is a pain we'll keep it in the tools folder in refstack | 17:54 |
| rockyg | agreed. | 17:54 |
| catherineD | great .. so you will return execute_test to the tools folder ? | 17:55 |
| davidlenwell | its already there in a folder | 17:55 |
| RaymondWong | no, it is in tools/execute_test folder | 17:55 |
| davidlenwell | it will stay were it is | 17:55 |
| davidlenwell | but the installer will put it in the path | 17:55 |
| davidlenwell | so the full path doesn't need to be used to execute | 17:55 |
| catherineD | I thought you move that out ... | 17:56 |
| davidlenwell | until we're further along I don't want a lot of repo's to manage | 17:56 |
| davidlenwell | so we'll leave it where it is and put some work into the installer | 17:56 |
| *** marun has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:56 | |
| davidlenwell | so the installer for execute test requires tempest havana stable right now .. | 17:57 |
| rockyg | So, when it gets' moved the installer just needs an update for the new location? | 17:57 |
| davidlenwell | sure .. its just updating a path | 17:57 |
| davidlenwell | it will just make a sym link in /usr/bin to /what/ever/path/python/libs/get/installed/to/refstack/tools/execute_test | 17:58 |
| rockyg | K. What form will the installer be in? Python? pkg? yum? | 17:58 |
| davidlenwell | python package | 17:58 |
| davidlenwell | so it will end up evenutally in pypi | 17:58 |
| rockyg | Good. Not OS dependent | 17:58 |
| davidlenwell | so it can be pip installed | 17:58 |
| rockyg | Really good. | 17:58 |
| davidlenwell | I'll even do the extra work on that package to make sure its python 2.6 compatible | 17:59 |
| *** hemanthravi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:59 | |
| rockyg | Will there be a way to get a copy for isolated clouds? | 17:59 |
| davidlenwell | so rockyg.. the way that works is that you can download the egg from pypi and install it | 17:59 |
| rockyg | That's good. | 17:59 |
| catherineD | davidlenwell: +1 | 18:00 |
| davidlenwell | or you can do what a lot of folks do in isolated env and use a pip wheel to store dependancies | 18:00 |
| rockyg | I wondered what thoses eggs were :-) | 18:00 |
| *** jpomero_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:00 | |
| davidlenwell | whcih is essentially a precompiled hash of all your stuff you need installed | 18:00 |
| rockyg | Quick before everyone leaves: I'd like to have a F2F to get the req matrix in better shape next week. Anyone interested? | 18:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hi | 18:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | neutrons here? | 18:01 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: hi | 18:01 |
| davidlenwell | I guess we're out of time | 18:01 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: hi | 18:01 |
| davidlenwell | #endmeeting | 18:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 18:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Apr 24 18:01:20 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/refstack/2014/refstack.2014-04-24-17.02.html | 18:01 |
| *** songole has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:01 | |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/refstack/2014/refstack.2014-04-24-17.02.txt | 18:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/refstack/2014/refstack.2014-04-24-17.02.log.html | 18:01 |
| *** fcarpenter has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:01 | |
| davidlenwell | lets migrate to #refstack for a quick wrapup | 18:01 |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:01 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:01 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | davidlenwell: thanks! | 18:01 |
| *** praveen_dell has quit IRC | 18:01 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix hemanthravi: hi! | 18:02 |
| *** jpomero has quit IRC | 18:02 | |
| *** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:02 | |
| *** mandeep has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:02 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong prasad ronak there? | 18:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura mandeep: hi | 18:02 |
| mandeep | hi SumitNaiksatam | 18:02 |
| rkukura | hi | 18:02 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: hello | 18:02 |
| mandeep | Do we have this room for full 60 minutes now? ;-) | 18:03 |
| banix | hi everybody | 18:03 |
| mandeep | banix: hi | 18:03 |
| banix | mandeep: 57 mins | 18:03 |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:03 | |
| banix | :) | 18:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i think we can go a little over | 18:03 |
| s3wong | banix: maybe not - last time we went slightly overtime and on one kicked us out | 18:03 |
| *** thinrichs has quit IRC | 18:03 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | i dont think there is anything immediately after this | 18:03 |
| *** rms_13_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:03 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | lets get started, i think we have critical mass | 18:04 |
| banix | sounds good | 18:04 |
| mandeep | SumitNaiksatam: Let us get started | 18:04 |
| mandeep | ;-) | 18:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #startmeeting networking_policy | 18:04 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Apr 24 18:04:18 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:04 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 18:04 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy' | 18:04 |
| rms_13_ | Hello team GBP | 18:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #info Group Policy wiki: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/GroupPolicy | 18:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we were overloading the the meeting page with other design and code information | 18:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so, thanks to banix, we have moved those contents to the wiki | 18:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | going forward lets use the meeting wiki for meeting specific information, and the GP wiki for all other stuff | 18:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: thanks for populating the wiki! | 18:05 |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 18:05 | |
| banix | Added the pointer to neutron-specs review as well | 18:06 |
| banix | sure no problem | 18:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes, noticed that, thats our first item | 18:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | topic | 18:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic GP spec gerrit review | 18:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "GP spec gerrit review (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 18:06 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89469 | 18:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hopefully everyone noticed this by now | 18:06 |
| rms_13_ | SumitNaiksatam: Neat work. Thank you | 18:07 |
| mandeep | SumitNaiksatam: Thanks! That was phenomenal work | 18:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks to the entire team to get the content ready | 18:07 |
| marun | i'm a bit ignorant of the spec requirements, is there a reason to provide the python code at the end? | 18:07 |
| hemanthravi | +1 to that | 18:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_ mandeep: thanks you guys had as much a part | 18:07 |
| banix | yes great specs and also great cleaned up google doc | 18:07 |
| *** prasadv has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:07 | |
| marun | spec != implemenatation in my book | 18:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: my understanding is that the attribute map infromation can be expressed either as a table or the attribute map itself | 18:08 |
| hemanthravi | the gdoc is very comprehensive | 18:08 |
| marun | yuck | 18:08 |
| marun | let's hope we change that and soon | 18:08 |
| marun | it's way too easy to miss the forest for the trees with the current api definition mechanism | 18:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: it would have been much easier to represent in tables, if we did not have a hard requirement to put this in ascii tables | 18:09 |
| *** catherineD has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:09 | |
| marun | or maybe I'm the only one whose eyes glaze over at blocks of largely undifferentiated data? | 18:09 |
| banix | marun: we can change and put in tables | 18:09 |
| marun | It's fine if that's the current way of doing things. I'm just hoping that we evolve the spec requirements before too long to make them more readable. | 18:10 |
| rkukura | marun: I added a sample table to the example spec for this sort of thing | 18:10 |
| banix | makes sense and as things get reviewed we will clean up the specs | 18:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok any techincal questions on the spec? | 18:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | questions -> discussions | 18:11 |
| banix | there were a good number of questions in emails; Ronak are you here? | 18:11 |
| *** nbouthors__ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:11 | |
| rms_13_ | Yes sir | 18:11 |
| mandeep | marun: This development on this spec has been in progress for some time, and we are trying to retrofit what we have done into a new process. Given the history, IMO it makes sense to continue with this as it is complete and correct | 18:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i think getting the spec in was a good start (because earlier the criticism was that we were dealing with a google doc and not the gerrit review) | 18:11 |
| prasadv | SumitNaiksatam: I agree | 18:12 |
| banix | rms_13_ hi, was not sure about the alias. just wondering if you plan to make your comments on the review board | 18:12 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: agreed | 18:12 |
| rms_13_ | banix: ye | 18:12 |
| rms_13_ | *yes | 18:12 |
| rms_13_ | By end of today. | 18:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: go ahead | 18:12 |
| banix | as i understand it if there are shortcoming wrt presentation or substance we can address them throughout the review process | 18:12 |
| banix | rms_13_: thanks | 18:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes | 18:13 |
| marun | I apologize if this is a dumb question, but has there been any consideration as to traceability/troubleshooting? | 18:13 |
| rms_13_ | I would also like to capture that somewhere in GP docs. Suggestions? Reason is that there would be multiple patchsets and the comments can get lost very easily | 18:13 |
| marun | i.e. being able to trace low-level primitives to their source policy? | 18:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i would imagine that is not specific to this feature | 18:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: ah ok, i typed over you | 18:13 |
| rms_13_ | marun: Agree with Sumit. Shoudlnt that be a generic feature? | 18:13 |
| marun | and vise-versa | 18:13 |
| banix | one good thing is we do not have the 3rd party CIs voting on neutron-specs | 18:13 |
| rms_13_ | banix: :) | 18:14 |
| marun | saying it should be generic is kind of valid... | 18:14 |
| marun | except | 18:14 |
| marun | if this is the first abstraction of its kind, and depends on this so-called 'generic' capability....? | 18:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: yes, the current model should will allow you to trace the tie in from the new policy constructs to the classical neutron constructs | 18:14 |
| marun | Is there a reason it's not included in the spec? Or would that be a future spec? | 18:15 |
| mandeep | SumitNaiksatam: And that was an explicit goal (and constraint) for the model design | 18:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | what is not included in the spec? | 18:15 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: can a contract_scope wild-card contrac-id with a specic label, for eg: <*, label-secure-web-server> | 18:15 |
| mandeep | hemanthravi: Yes | 18:16 |
| marun | being able to trace the impact of a policy across primitives | 18:16 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: ^ | 18:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: the mapping from policy to classical neutron constructs is included in the spec | 18:16 |
| banix | marun: don't think we have spent much time on this beyond the fact that resources can be traces through the standard resource relationships; so nothing beyond that that need to be specified in the spec | 18:16 |
| marun | so there is no way to query that data through the api? | 18:16 |
| marun | i understand that those relationships have to be represented, but there doesn't seem to be any provision for their visibility | 18:17 |
| marun | I would like to know if that's intentional because it will be done in the future, or whether it's not considered important. | 18:17 |
| mandeep | marun: the current model has the mapping ... waht more did you need? | 18:17 |
| marun | uh | 18:17 |
| marun | ^^ | 18:17 |
| marun | see 'visibility' | 18:17 |
| rkukura | marun: The mapping extension extends the group policy extension with attributes linking the group resources to the core resources. | 18:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: #link see https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89469/5/specs/juno/group-based-policy-abstraction.rst L642 onwards | 18:18 |
| marun | i'm not saying something is wrong, i'm saying I'm confused | 18:18 |
| mandeep | marun: And that can be quried | 18:18 |
| banix | you want tp querry a contract and see for example the services used? that kind of info is there | 18:18 |
| marun | what about the reverse? | 18:19 |
| marun | query a port and know what policies are affecting it | 18:19 |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 18:19 | |
| *** dlenrow has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:19 | |
| mandeep | marun: a port belongs to an EP and an EP has policies applied on it via an EPG, you can query all that. | 18:20 |
| marun | I think I liked the google doc better :/ | 18:20 |
| mandeep | marun: (not belongs - associated with) | 18:20 |
| mandeep | marun: And you definitely do not want to duplicate that information in a second resource in the model - that will lead to other problems ;-) | 18:21 |
| marun | I'm not suggesting duplication | 18:22 |
| rkukura | marun: I think you’d be able to query to find the EP associated with a given port ID, and navigate from their. | 18:22 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: yes, that is correct | 18:22 |
| banix | anything beyond the above, then can be built on top of the basic model. Special client side commands maybe? | 18:22 |
| SumitNaiksatam | from EP you can get to EPG, contract, etc | 18:22 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes agree | 18:22 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: do you need to add a extended attr on port for that? | 18:23 |
| mandeep | marun: In that case I misunderstood. As you can query that information as Port -> EP -> EPG -> Contract -> Policy rule | 18:23 |
| marun | ah, so visiblity is on primitives only | 18:23 |
| marun | fair enough | 18:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: perhaps you are asking if there is an easy way to do the above ^^^ | 18:23 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I think so | 18:23 |
| banix | marun: are you suggesting we have cli commands that do provide the info in a single call or something along that line? | 18:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: and that can probably added as a follow up, if it adds avalue | 18:23 |
| mandeep | marun: The assumption being that the tools/code can do the appropriate level of resolution (as needed) | 18:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: extended attribute to do what? | 18:24 |
| marun | I think that's a bad assumption from a performance perspective, but as SumitNaiksatam says optimization can happen where needed | 18:24 |
| hemanthravi | to find the ep associated with a port | 18:24 |
| s3wong | marun: I think that belongs to the driver / renderer (for performance) | 18:24 |
| mandeep | marun: I agree. There are many solution for optimization - but first we need to get our data model correct. | 18:25 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: to find the ep associated with a port | 18:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: you should be able to query the endpoints and filter on the port_id | 18:25 |
| banix | hemanthravi: that is there | 18:25 |
| s3wong | hemanthravi: I don't think it is appropriate to add EP information on a generic neutron port object | 18:25 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: ok | 18:25 |
| banix | hemanthravi: the way SumitNaiksatam suggests above | 18:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: yes, we are trying to avoid that | 18:26 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: unlike security-groups? | 18:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: yes, unlike security-groups | 18:27 |
| banix | s3wong: agree; the question becomes if a querry EPs and filtering become prohibitively costly in large systems but may be not to worry about now | 18:27 |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 18:27 | |
| rkukura | The get API does have filters for this purpose, and the SQL queries shoudn’t be that bad performance-wise | 18:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura banix: agree | 18:27 |
| mandeep | marun: One of the drivers of the group policy is the scale. And by dealing at larger groupos we make the system a lot more efficient for normal use-case. Do not read the the query chain that I showed you as the normal use case. That is possible, but the implementation at aggregate levels can be far more effecient | 18:27 |
| s3wong | banix: agreed | 18:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun hemanthravi: good points to bring up! | 18:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | gets our thinking oriented towards that goal as well | 18:28 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks for bringing it up | 18:28 |
| marun | mandeep: I'll believe the assertion about scale when I see the scale testing ;) | 18:28 |
| mandeep | marun: ;-) | 18:28 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thats a good segue | 18:28 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Functional tests | 18:28 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Functional tests (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 18:28 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | not quite scale tests | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and we dont even have the funcationality implemented :-) | 18:29 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: long term thinking? :) | 18:29 |
| marun | heh | 18:29 |
| rms_13_ | Perfect time to do functional testing | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but i wanted to bounce this off, to get started on this | 18:29 |
| marun | I'm going to be pushing for test plan inclusion in specs at summit | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: ok | 18:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_ seemed to be interested in taking this up for GP | 18:30 |
| marun | We'll need some education and framework to make it work, of course. Not everyone has a QA background. | 18:30 |
| mandeep | rms_13_: +1 | 18:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: yes, we are definitely looking forward to you for that | 18:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | forward -> up | 18:30 |
| marun | not me, but we have some QA folks here at Red Hat that have offered to bootstrap the effort | 18:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: ok you can facilitate | 18:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | or whoever | 18:31 |
| mandeep | marun: Is there some specific framework that is being suggested? | 18:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: you still interested in looking at this? | 18:31 |
| marun | There is a place that folks here could start at on their own, though | 18:31 |
| rms_13_ | SumitNaiksatam: Sure | 18:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: ok | 18:31 |
| rms_13_ | I can take a look | 18:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks | 18:31 |
| marun | mandeep: framework in terms of 'how to write a good test plan' instructions and templates | 18:31 |
| s3wong | rms_13_: thanks!!! | 18:31 |
| marun | not a runtime framework | 18:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | anyone else interested, please let us know as well | 18:31 |
| mandeep | marun: Got it | 18:32 |
| marun | the starting point would be 'what's the simplest operational test that we could write against the implemented spec' | 18:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: are we planning to have a framework? | 18:32 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: For functional testing, it will be stuff we write to simulate whatever we need | 18:32 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: for integration testing, as per usual, Tempest | 18:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i dont have an opinion one way or the other, but i just want to know what are our dependencies | 18:32 |
| rms_13_ | marun: How would you proceed on writing ft for feature like this? | 18:32 |
| marun | rms_13_: The starting point is functional api tests | 18:33 |
| marun | rms_13_: ensuring that the api spec works in practice | 18:33 |
| marun | rms_13_: as simple as 'create resource, resource is created' | 18:33 |
| marun | rms_13_: delete resource, resource is deleted | 18:33 |
| marun | rms_13_: i.e. not actually checking that any network state changes happen | 18:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: you have a patch for retargetable functional tests | 18:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: for the benefit of everyone here, can you summarize what it is meant for? | 18:34 |
| rms_13_ | marun: got it. some of these we might already have as part of ut. Dumb question but can we inherit those? | 18:34 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I do. That's a good starting point for api tests. I'll aim to have that merged before summit, but it can be the basis of efforts pre-merge if folks are eager | 18:34 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: sure | 18:34 |
| rms_13_ | marun: thx. will take a look | 18:35 |
| marun | So, retargetable functional api tests are written against an abstraction of the neutron api | 18:35 |
| mandeep | marun: Is there a gerrit for for that? | 18:35 |
| mandeep | (gerrit review that is ;) | 18:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/72585/ | 18:35 |
| marun | the abstraction ensures that we can target both the python api (no running service required) and a running service | 18:35 |
| prasadv | marun:any document for this | 18:35 |
| marun | the idea is that it's easier to develop a test against an api | 18:36 |
| marun | and then nice not to have to repeat the work to test a live deployment | 18:36 |
| marun | there is an example of a retargetable test a the bottom of this file: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/72585/12/neutron/tests/api/base_v2.py | 18:36 |
| marun | it uses a 'client' attribute that is provided at runtime, and in this patch can be either targeting the plugin api or a rest client that tempest defines | 18:37 |
| marun | but the test is the same in either case | 18:37 |
| marun | the specifics are a bit tricky, but hopefully the test itself is straightforward to everyone | 18:38 |
| marun | I don't think an understanding of all the machinery will be necessary to make use of it | 18:38 |
| rms_13_ | marun: thanks. Ya it is. | 18:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: okay, i think it will take some time for people to absorb, and we can hopefully get back to you with questions | 18:38 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: sounds good. I'll also be working on docs and instructions to present in a summit session. | 18:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: nice | 18:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | since this is a large feature (GP), certain things will land before others | 18:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | if, as a community, we can converge on the object model, it makes it easy to make progress | 18:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | easy -> easier | 18:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic PoC Status Update | 18:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "PoC Status Update (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 18:40 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | on the model side, i made some incremental progress | 18:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but the model was evolving based on the feedback | 18:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura helped me with some of the UTs | 18:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so at this point, EPG and EP is in there | 18:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | along with the resource definition of everything else | 18:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix has also been looking at the db schema and reviewing what i have been putting | 18:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | if no questions for me or banix, then i can hand over to rkukura s3wong for the driver update | 18:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: ? | 18:43 |
| rkukura | OK | 18:43 |
| rms_13_ | SumitNaiksatam: Thanks. I have expressed some comments/suggestions on that via email. That is my start of doing review at the noiro branch. | 18:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: sure, you can comment on the gerrit review | 18:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: thanks, btw | 18:43 |
| rkukura | I’m working now on bridge domain, since that maps to neutron network. | 18:43 |
| rkukura | So no real progress on the mapping driver itself yet, but should be getting their soon | 18:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: ok thanks | 18:44 |
| rkukura | One question is whether the mappings to network, subnet, and port should be established immediately when resources are created, or deferred until they are actually needed? | 18:45 |
| s3wong | I started looking at rkukura 's code under rkukura/mapping, but can't make much progress until the service model is defined | 18:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: i agree | 18:45 |
| *** overlayer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:45 | |
| *** overlayer has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| rkukura | s3wong: Yes, so far I’ve really just been helping SumitNaiksatam with the API, model, and UTs | 18:45 |
| rms_13_ | SumitNaiksatam, rkukura: Is the mapping mandatory? | 18:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: its a part of the reference implementation | 18:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but its an extension to the policy model itself | 18:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so in theory, you could do your own mapping | 18:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: perhaps a late binding | 18:47 |
| rkukura | rms_13_: In theory, you could have a pure GroupPolicy implementation that doesn’t provide the mapping extension. | 18:47 |
| rms_13_ | got it | 18:47 |
| banix | yes for PoC definitely need the mapping | 18:47 |
| s3wong | rkukura: when they are actually needed? meaning that only when groups are attached to a contract? | 18:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: but i am thinking that for the PoC it might be easier to do an immediate (default) binding | 18:47 |
| rms_13_ | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 18:48 |
| *** overlayer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:48 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: i agree, policy construct binding is late | 18:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i think rkukura is asking the mapping to classical neutron | 18:48 |
| rkukura | Immediate is probably less work, but might not be too difficult to defer mapping to network and subnet until the Endpoint is created and a neutron port has to be created | 18:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: agree | 18:49 |
| s3wong | rkukura: yes | 18:49 |
| *** sballe has quit IRC | 18:50 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: this is an unfair question, but i will ask nevertheless - any update on the client, CLI? :-) | 18:50 |
| rms_13_ | Will it work though in scaled environment? Lets say you try to boot 50 VMs together. You are getting 50 create_port(). You start creating network and subnet on 1st. Other 49 needs to wait. | 18:50 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: pushed a branch with inital commit for ep, epg | 18:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: oh sweet | 18:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: as long as you have a good handle on it | 18:51 |
| s3wong | hemanthravi: nice | 18:51 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: create/delete should are done...update wip | 18:51 |
| banix | hemanthravi: thanks! | 18:51 |
| rkukura | rms_13_: Good point, but the trade-off is that once mapped to neutron ports, pretty much nothing is mutable. | 18:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: the model might change a bit as we receive feedback, so be prepared (i know you dont like me already :-P) | 18:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: yes, nothing is mutable with the classical neutron mapping, hence late binding is better | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | binding -> mapping | 18:52 |
| hemanthravi | SumitNaiksatam: do realize that...but should be easy to make the changes..once code for the existign model is in | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: sweet | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi: what about Horizon, you said you would check with prasadv? | 18:52 |
| rms_13_ | rkukura: correct. The more I think the more late binding becomes complex. To give it enough thought, should we start with immediate mapping till summit for PoC? | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | oh prasadv is also around | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: yes we need to balance it out | 18:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hemanthravi prasadv: any thoughts on the Horizon work? | 18:53 |
| prasadv | SumitNaiksatam: i thought we commited to Heat resources | 18:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: ah ok, i was trying my luck | 18:53 |
| banix | :) | 18:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: Heat is next on the agenda | 18:54 |
| rkukura | rms_13_: I’ll start with the path of least resistence ;) | 18:54 |
| s3wong | prasadv: GREAT! | 18:54 |
| prasadv | I have not done yet | 18:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: do you think someone like Subra might have time to look at Horizon? | 18:54 |
| rms_13_ | rkukura: make sense | 18:54 |
| *** RaymondWong has quit IRC | 18:54 | |
| prasadv | SumitNaiksatam: when does horizon work need to start. I guess CLI need to be done right | 18:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: yes client needs to be ready first | 18:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: then CLI (though both go hand in hand) | 18:55 |
| prasadv | i mean horizon calls CLI o the back end | 18:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: horizon after that | 18:55 |
| *** zehicle_at_dell has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:55 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: but i just wanted to get some folks thinking about that as well | 18:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: else it will slip through the cracks | 18:55 |
| rkukura | I’d appreciate feedback on some comments I posted in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/89469/ regarding navigability between EPGs, BDs, and RDs. | 18:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | anyone else here interested in pitching in on the horizon work? | 18:56 |
| *** dlenrow has quit IRC | 18:56 | |
| mandeep | A good UI model for this is going to be challenging. But we can get started with something simple | 18:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rkukura: sure | 18:56 |
| prasadv | SumitNaiksatam: I understand. Am crunched for resrouces here. hence hesitating | 18:56 |
| *** dlenrow has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:56 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: absolutely, and please dont misunderstand, dont mean to put you on the spot | 18:56 |
| mandeep | prasadv: We get that. No problem | 18:56 |
| prasadv | I will get back toyou end of day today ok? | 18:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: like i said, i am just trying my luck :-) | 18:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: no worries | 18:57 |
| banix | Heat is certainly the more important piece in comparison with Horizon | 18:57 |
| prasadv | we will get started on heat | 18:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | if we dont have an owner for this, all of us will need to sit in a room, and do this | 18:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | else we cant get the feature out | 18:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | prasadv: thanks | 18:57 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: are you thinking to have it done by the summit? | 18:57 |
| mandeep | SumitNaiksatam: I agree. I will take the responsibility to get some resource on it | 18:58 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: horizon piece | 18:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mandeep: ok, thanks | 18:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | same thing goes for functional tests and tempest | 18:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | if we cant do those, we cant get the feature out | 18:58 |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:58 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes, for the summit | 18:58 |
| rms_13_ | I will look into FT | 18:59 |
| rms_13_ | Do you see FT completed before summit? | 18:59 |
| prasadv | SumitNaiksatam: what level of resource is needed for FT? | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: thanks | 18:59 |
| marun | Given that the unit tests as written are largely functional.... | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_ prasadv: its not clear | 18:59 |
| marun | They could be rewritten without too much effort. | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: let’s say its highly desirable | 19:00 |
| rms_13_ | SumitNaiksatam -> PLM | 19:00 |
| rms_13_ | :) | 19:00 |
| *** jpomero_ has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: ha | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: actually the community is the PLM here | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | oh we are already out of time | 19:01 |
| rms_13_ | cool. are we over time? | 19:01 |
| mandeep | rms_13_: :-) | 19:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | since we have not yet been kicked | 19:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | couple of other items | 19:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Summit | 19:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Summit (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 19:01 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | our design summit session was accepted | 19:01 |
| rms_13_ | Yay | 19:01 |
| mandeep | Cool | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we have a slot on thursday at around noon i believe | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so we will get 40 mins | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | much of what we discuss here goes to discussions there | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | regading the conference presentation slot (also on thursday) | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix was leading that charge | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: any updates? | 19:02 |
| banix | working on the slide; should have a first cut soon | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: thanks | 19:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: did you get a chance to think about it? | 19:03 |
| s3wong | banix: thanks! | 19:03 |
| banix | checking the time for the general session talk; i think it is Thursday afternoon | 19:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes | 19:03 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: thinking about the presentation? only we need to demo something :-) | 19:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: if we have it ready :-) | 19:03 |
| banix | we do not *have to* have a demo but having it would be great | 19:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: i think that was our original goal | 19:04 |
| marun | stage intended behaviour in a video ;) | 19:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: that is a good idea | 19:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | lets keep it as a goal | 19:04 |
| banix | i think we should have the demo recorded | 19:04 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: and as banix wrote the original abstract, we have to have a story on service | 19:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: agree | 19:04 |
| mandeep | We do need the PoC purely as a spike thru the design and validate that it "hangs well together" ;-) | 19:04 |
| rms_13_ | I need to run folks. Sorry. See you all at next meeting. | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: agree | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | rms_13_: thaks | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | alrighty, anything else folks? | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we are well over time | 19:05 |
| banix | s3wong: yes i think that will be more interseting imho | 19:05 |
| *** rockyg has quit IRC | 19:05 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: we need another services discussion :-) | 19:05 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: I think that is a given :-) | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok thanks everyone! | 19:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #endmeeting | 19:06 |
| banix | for the talk we can have the service part really high level so do not need to have all the details worked out by then | 19:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 19:06 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Apr 24 19:06:11 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 19:06 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_policy/2014/networking_policy.2014-04-24-18.04.html | 19:06 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_policy/2014/networking_policy.2014-04-24-18.04.txt | 19:06 |
| mandeep | ;-) | 19:06 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_policy/2014/networking_policy.2014-04-24-18.04.log.html | 19:06 |
| banix | bye | 19:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes, if it comes to that | 19:06 |
| rkukura | bye | 19:06 |
| hemanthravi | bye | 19:06 |
| *** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:06 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: hopefully we will have story sorted out by that time | 19:06 |
| s3wong | banix: yes - as the audiences of the talk should be non-Neutron folks | 19:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: dont need to have implementation for services’ ready | 19:06 |
| *** mandeep has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:06 | |
| s3wong | banix: though for ourselves, we should still want to have a good story on services | 19:07 |
| banix | s3wong: yeah that has been the challenge… not to get bugged down by too much info | 19:07 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:07 | |
| banix | s3wong: yes absolutely but the complexity there worries me a bit. | 19:07 |
| s3wong | banix: looking forward to seeing your first draft presentation :-) | 19:07 |
| *** prasadv has quit IRC | 19:08 | |
| banix | s3wong:sorry for being late; should have something early next week. can't believe we have essentially two weeks before the summit. | 19:08 |
| marun | er, audience for which talk should be non-neutron? | 19:08 |
| marun | s3wong: ^^ | 19:08 |
| banix | the talk on general session | 19:09 |
| s3wong | marun: conference presentation during the Summit | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: this is the group policy conference talk | 19:09 |
| banix | not the design session | 19:09 |
| marun | ah, right | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: its s3wong’s expectation | 19:09 |
| marun | get people fired up about neutron for a change! | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but i believe there will be neutron folks as well | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: no worries | 19:09 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: from experience from last summit they will be mainly non neutron | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: dont be hard on yourself | 19:10 |
| marun | bye! | 19:10 |
| *** Adri2000 has quit IRC | 19:10 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: there is time, and we have all been busy | 19:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: thanks for joining | 19:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bye | 19:10 |
| *** rockyg has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:10 | |
| *** gduan has quit IRC | 19:10 | |
| s3wong | banix: yeah - actually SumitNaiksatam and I are thankful that you are taking a lead on this | 19:10 |
| *** garyduan has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:10 | |
| banix | last time it was in a different track; this time we are on networking track so it may be different | 19:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: +1 | 19:10 |
| *** Adri2000 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:10 | |
| banix | wait until you see the slides! | 19:11 |
| banix | just kidding :) | 19:11 |
| *** hemanthravi has quit IRC | 19:11 | |
| banix | Hopefully the design session doesnt get too close to 1:30 on Thursday when the talk is. | 19:12 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: you had a time for the design session meeting? | 19:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yeah its some thing like 12 pm | 19:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: i have four back to back sessions that days (including the conference session talk) | 19:13 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: all GBP stuff happening during lunch :-) | 19:13 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: is advanced service also on that day? | 19:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: :-) | 19:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: yes | 19:14 |
| banix | ok thanks so as long as they do not overlap we will have to manage. | 19:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix s3wong: GP at 11.50 AM | 19:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yeah, we will take whatever we get | 19:14 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: what time is advanced service's session? | 19:15 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: ok thx. not the best timing but we have to do... | 19:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong banix: yeah | 19:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i am just looking at: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-juno-summit-sessions | 19:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i dont know if this is current | 19:15 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: Oh wow, they literally put you back to back to back | 19:16 |
| banix | byye guys | 19:22 |
| *** soconnor-miranti has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:22 | |
| *** soconnor-miranti is now known as oak2278 | 19:23 | |
| s3wong | banix: bye | 19:24 |
| *** david-lyle_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:26 | |
| *** jpomero has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:27 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: yeah | 19:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix s3wong: bye | 19:35 |
| *** dlenrow has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| *** dlenrow has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:37 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:39 | |
| *** sdague has quit IRC | 19:41 | |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 19:41 | |
| *** sdague has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:42 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:42 | |
| *** rand738 has quit IRC | 19:43 | |
| *** coolsvap|afk has quit IRC | 19:44 | |
| *** rand738 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:45 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 19:53 | |
| *** oak2278 has quit IRC | 19:55 | |
| *** oak2278 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:55 | |
| *** david-lyle_ has quit IRC | 19:56 | |
| *** dlenrow has quit IRC | 19:57 | |
| *** dlenrow has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:57 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 19:58 | |
| *** lblanchard has quit IRC | 19:59 | |
| *** oak2278 has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| *** zehicle_at_dell has quit IRC | 20:05 | |
| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 20:11 | |
| *** sweston has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:15 | |
| *** dlenrow has quit IRC | 20:16 | |
| *** dlenrow has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:16 | |
| *** _sweston_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:20 | |
| *** sweston has quit IRC | 20:20 | |
| *** rockyg has quit IRC | 20:22 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 20:24 | |
| *** oak2278 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:26 | |
| *** scott-millward has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:26 | |
| *** oak2278 has quit IRC | 20:30 | |
| *** scotty95747 has quit IRC | 20:33 | |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 20:34 | |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 20:34 | |
| *** marun has quit IRC | 20:40 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 20:45 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:46 | |
| *** songole has quit IRC | 20:47 | |
| *** zehicle_at_dell has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:47 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 20:52 | |
| *** oak2278 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:52 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:54 | |
| *** mwagner_lap has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| *** jpomero has quit IRC | 21:10 | |
| *** oak2278 has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| *** oak2278 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:19 | |
| *** oak2278 has quit IRC | 21:20 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 21:23 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 21:24 | |
| *** _sweston_ is now known as sweston | 21:28 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:42 | |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 21:42 | |
| *** rms_13_ has quit IRC | 21:47 | |
| *** ttrifonov_zZzz is now known as ttrifonov | 21:52 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 21:57 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** mfer has quit IRC | 22:06 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:09 | |
| *** peristeri has quit IRC | 22:26 | |
| *** beyounn has quit IRC | 22:31 | |
| *** beyounn has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:35 | |
| *** beyounn has quit IRC | 22:36 | |
| *** ttrifonov is now known as ttrifonov_zZzz | 22:37 | |
| *** enikanorov_ has quit IRC | 22:42 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 22:50 | |
| *** lifeless has quit IRC | 23:04 | |
| *** lifeless has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:05 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 23:07 | |
| *** overlayer has quit IRC | 23:13 | |
| *** beyounn has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:15 | |
| *** beyounn has quit IRC | 23:18 | |
| *** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:19 | |
| *** eguz has quit IRC | 23:19 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 23:23 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 23:25 | |
| *** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:31 | |
| *** rockyg has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:36 | |
| *** rockyg has quit IRC | 23:36 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:55 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 23:57 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!