Wednesday, 2014-07-23

*** MarkAtwood has quit IRC00:03
*** eghobo has quit IRC00:08
*** chuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-300:09
*** SumitNaiksatam_ has joined #openstack-meeting-300:09
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC00:11
*** SumitNaiksatam_ is now known as SumitNaiksatam00:11
*** banix has quit IRC00:16
*** lcheng has quit IRC00:20
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC00:26
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC00:27
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-300:27
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC00:36
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC00:39
*** terryw has joined #openstack-meeting-300:39
*** jaypipes has quit IRC00:50
*** yamamoto has quit IRC00:52
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-301:03
*** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-301:10
*** coolsvap has quit IRC01:12
*** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-301:22
*** thomasem has quit IRC01:22
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting-301:22
*** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting-301:23
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC01:27
*** m1dev has quit IRC01:27
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-301:28
*** m1dev has joined #openstack-meeting-301:28
*** kevinbenton has quit IRC01:33
*** kevinbenton has joined #openstack-meeting-301:33
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting-301:41
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-301:43
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC01:50
*** baohua has joined #openstack-meeting-301:53
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-301:57
*** jcoufal has quit IRC02:13
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting-302:16
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC02:17
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-302:17
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC02:21
*** baohua has quit IRC02:30
*** baohua has joined #openstack-meeting-302:31
*** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-302:38
*** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan03:13
*** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away03:13
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-303:16
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-303:25
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-303:35
*** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC03:59
*** flaviof_zzz is now known as flaviof04:02
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-304:13
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-304:19
*** HenryG is now known as HenryG_afk04:19
*** Longgeek has quit IRC04:19
*** flaviof is now known as flaviof_zzz04:20
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-304:26
*** Longgeek has quit IRC04:29
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-304:29
*** armax has left #openstack-meeting-304:32
*** lcheng has quit IRC04:33
*** Longgeek has quit IRC04:34
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-304:36
*** tomoe_ has quit IRC04:39
*** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-304:39
*** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-304:40
*** Longgeek_ has joined #openstack-meeting-304:45
*** Longgeek has quit IRC04:48
*** briancurtin has quit IRC04:56
*** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting-305:05
*** terryw has quit IRC05:22
*** banix has quit IRC05:24
*** cjellick_ has joined #openstack-meeting-305:32
*** k4n0 has joined #openstack-meeting-305:33
*** cjellick has quit IRC05:35
*** cjellick_ has quit IRC05:37
*** amitpp has joined #openstack-meeting-305:49
*** amitpp has quit IRC05:49
*** MarkAtwood has quit IRC05:58
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-306:03
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-306:03
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC06:11
*** cjellick has quit IRC06:12
*** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-306:13
*** seizadi has quit IRC06:28
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting-306:30
*** eghobo has quit IRC06:37
*** rhagarty_ has joined #openstack-meeting-306:45
*** rhagarty has quit IRC06:46
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-307:08
*** cjellick has quit IRC07:13
*** iovadia has joined #openstack-meeting-307:36
*** iovadia has quit IRC07:40
*** iovadia has joined #openstack-meeting-308:00
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-308:01
*** nacim has joined #openstack-meeting-308:05
*** safchain has joined #openstack-meeting-308:13
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC08:23
*** lcheng has quit IRC08:30
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-308:31
*** zz_johnthetubagu is now known as johnthetubaguy08:34
*** alexpilotti_ has joined #openstack-meeting-308:47
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC08:48
*** alexpilotti_ is now known as alexpilotti08:48
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting-308:49
*** lcheng has quit IRC08:49
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC08:58
*** yamamoto_ has joined #openstack-meeting-309:05
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC09:10
*** yamamoto_ has quit IRC09:14
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-309:29
*** MaxV_ has joined #openstack-meeting-309:36
*** MaxV has quit IRC09:36
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-309:44
*** amotoki has quit IRC09:49
*** yamamoto has quit IRC09:50
*** tomoe_ has quit IRC10:14
*** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-310:15
*** tomoe_ has quit IRC10:19
*** MaxV_ has quit IRC10:31
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-310:33
*** yamamoto has quit IRC10:38
*** yamahata has quit IRC10:39
*** chuckC has quit IRC10:48
*** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-311:02
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-311:06
*** tomoe_ has quit IRC11:06
*** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan11:08
*** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away11:08
*** iovadia has quit IRC11:10
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-311:10
*** yamamoto has quit IRC11:11
*** chuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-311:12
*** cjellick has quit IRC11:15
*** obondarev has joined #openstack-meeting-311:20
*** jamielennox is now known as jamielennox|away11:26
*** chuckC has quit IRC11:27
*** obondarev has quit IRC11:30
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-311:34
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC11:37
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-311:43
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-311:45
*** yamamoto has quit IRC11:50
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-311:52
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-311:57
*** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-312:01
*** mrunge has quit IRC12:02
*** k4n0 has quit IRC12:05
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting-312:13
*** obondarev has joined #openstack-meeting-312:17
*** lsmola has joined #openstack-meeting-312:24
*** yamahata has quit IRC12:26
*** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-312:28
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-312:28
*** MaxV has quit IRC12:30
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-312:31
*** iovadia has joined #openstack-meeting-312:49
*** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting-312:49
*** stanzgy has quit IRC12:53
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-312:59
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-313:00
*** baohua has quit IRC13:01
*** yamahata has quit IRC13:01
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-313:02
*** jcoufal has quit IRC13:05
*** flaviof_zzz is now known as flaviof13:11
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-313:16
*** xuhanp has joined #openstack-meeting-313:17
*** mfer has joined #openstack-meeting-313:18
*** lcheng has quit IRC13:20
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-313:20
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-313:20
*** HenryG_afk is now known as HenryG13:24
*** peristeri has joined #openstack-meeting-313:26
*** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-313:30
*** briancurtin has quit IRC13:32
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-313:32
*** briancurtin has quit IRC13:37
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting-313:44
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-313:50
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-313:50
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-313:50
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-313:53
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-313:53
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-313:56
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting-313:57
*** thangp has joined #openstack-meeting-313:58
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC14:02
*** baohua has joined #openstack-meeting-314:04
*** hurgleburgler has quit IRC14:04
*** hurgleburgler has joined #openstack-meeting-314:06
*** baohua has quit IRC14:06
*** baohua has joined #openstack-meeting-314:07
*** mrunge has joined #openstack-meeting-314:07
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-314:10
*** cjellick has quit IRC14:10
*** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-314:10
*** baohua has quit IRC14:16
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-314:19
*** carl_baldwin_m has joined #openstack-meeting-314:25
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-314:27
*** marun has joined #openstack-meeting-314:27
*** Swami has joined #openstack-meeting-314:27
*** WormMan has joined #openstack-meeting-314:27
mesteryHi parity folks!14:29
mestery#startmeeting neutron nova-network parity14:30
openstackMeeting started Wed Jul 23 14:30:23 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mestery. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.14:30
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron nova-network parity)"14:30
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'neutron_nova_network_parity'14:30
mestery#startmeeting n-nn-parity14:30
openstackmestery: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress.  Use #endmeeting first.14:30
mestery#link Agenda14:30
Swamihi everyone14:31
* mestery waits a few minutes to let anyone else filter in.14:31
mestery#topic Gap Analysis Plan14:31
*** openstack changes topic to "Gap Analysis Plan (Meeting topic: neutron nova-network parity)"14:31
mesterySo, maybe to start, we could quickly go over where we're at for each item in this plan?14:32
*** briancurtin has left #openstack-meeting-314:32
*** Rajeev has joined #openstack-meeting-314:32
markmcclainwant me to run through it?14:32
mesterymarkmcclain: Please do :)14:32
markmcclain#info Gap 0 is complete14:32
*** jlibosva has joined #openstack-meeting-314:33
markmcclainwe merged a healing migration that updates the various schema branches that had formed to the canonical version that includes all models14:33
mesteryThat was awesome work by the team working on gap 0!14:34
markmcclainyeah I was super happy to see everyone working to develop a solution for it14:34
markmcclainGap 1 Tempest testing is nearly done14:35
markmcclainthe lone holdout is enabling the full tempest job for voting14:35
markmcclainsalv-orlando is working on that bit14:35
*** beagles has joined #openstack-meeting-314:35
markmcclainGap 2 is resumption of Grenade testing14:35
mestery#link Full Job Email Update14:36
*** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-314:36
markmcclainmestery: thanks for the link14:37
mesterymarkmcclain: np14:37
markmcclainfor Gap 2 we have to make some changes to the way devstack sets up Neutron14:37
markmcclainbasically we need to stop misusing enable_service14:38
markmcclainI'm working on those and should have them proposed shortly14:38
markmcclainFor Gap 3 is dependent on Gap 1 and 214:39
mestery#link Neutron as default in devstack14:39
markmcclaincool.. just need to track down the failures14:40
markmcclainGap 4 is the where we are hurting the most14:40
markmcclainthe spec within Nova did not get approved by the deadline14:41
markmcclainoops.. Gap 5 spec did not get approved14:41
mesteryWait, you meant gap 614:41
mestery4 is missing API calls :)14:41
* markmcclain needs more coffee14:41
* mestery hands markmcclain coffee with kahlua 14:42
marunobondarev - you want to update on your progress?14:42
markmcclainGap 4 API calls is complete14:42
markmcclainGap 5: is DVR work which is on track14:42
obondarevmarun: sure I will14:42
mesteryobondarev: This is for Gap 6 now (nova-net to neutron migration)14:43
obondarevmestery: ok14:43
obondarevso according to nova team feedback on the spec the overall design of the neutron migration was slightly changed14:43
obondarevnow instead of migrating to neutron within one compute host the idea is to migrate between hosts14:44
obondarevand make neutron migration as part of existing live-migration mechanism14:44
mestery#link Neutron migration specification14:44
obondarevwhich is reasonable as it is the usual way to perfom big upgrades14:44
mesteryobondarev: ++14:44
obondarevI mean host-by-host14:44
obondarevmestery: thanks for the link14:45
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC14:45
obondarevcurrently I'm working on agreeng the design with the nova team and implementing POC in parallel14:45
obondarevthanks to dansmith for his reviews and suggestions!14:45
*** carl_baldwin_m has quit IRC14:45
*** mrunge has quit IRC14:46
obondarevthere are some difficulties with POC as now I'm not even able to perform an original live migration on a multinode devstack14:46
marunI notice that daniel berrange has provided contradictory advice as to the chosen strategy on the most recent patch :/14:46
marunHopefully we can hammer out the contradictory advise at the mid-cycle meetup next week.14:46
obondarevmarun: right14:46
mesterymarun: ++, you and markmcclain will be busy with that next week14:46
obondarevI followed the guide from official openstack docs but still facing some issues with live-migration14:47
dansmithhe said that live migration can't always work, which is what I said regarding make sure that cold migration works as well14:47
marunobondarev: as per dan's comment, maybe the starting point is more properly cold migration, since it doesn't have hypervisor dependencies?14:47
marundansmith: ah, gotcha.14:47
marundansmith: though there was a comment from him that talked about in-place network switch14:48
obondarevis cold migration is that one that is not a "true" live migration?14:48
marundansmith: on line 11914:48
mesteryI'm concerned that cold migration won't satisfy the downtime requirements the TC put forth though, just wanted to through that out there.14:48
marunmestery: where is this requirement?14:48
mesterymarun: Documented in the TC meeting minutes from last April I'm afraid :(14:49
dansmithmarun: yeah, I wonder if he reviewed the previous version of this and saw what that implied14:49
mesterymarkmcclain: Thoughts on this?14:49
marunmestery: I think we should pull it out of the minutes and formalize it in the gap coverage page14:49
mesterymarun: ++ I'll take na action to do that.14:49
marunmestery: the lack of visibility is a problem both on the nova and neutron sides14:49
dansmithmestery: I would expect that "zero downtime for any and all VM types" is probably not a reasonable requirement anyway14:49
mestery#action mestery to scour meeting minutes around downtime requirements for migration and add to coverage wiki14:49
mesterymarun: agreed14:49
mesterydansmith: I agree, just throwing it out there from my memory of the TC meeting.14:49
markmcclainright… so originally we specified that network connections can/will drop14:49
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-314:50
markmcclainbut committed to keeping the VMs running if it is impossible than we can always go back and say that keeping them running will be problematic and why14:51
mesterymarkmcclain: Makes sense to me.14:51
dansmithkeeping them running and doing it in-place would be awesome, but I'm not sure it's worth what we'll have to do in order to support it14:52
*** krotscheck has quit IRC14:52
obondarevdansmith: by cold migration do you mean "nova migrate..." one?14:53
markmcclainagreed… there are some that don't want to reboot everything to upgrade14:53
dansmithobondarev: yes14:53
markmcclainI just think we have to document everything properly14:54
marunthere is some question, though, of just how valuable a migration mechanism is - who the target audience is, and what kind of use cases they have for migration14:54
marunwe need something, but it's not clear what without more involvement from deployers who want to use it14:54
*** jaypipes has quit IRC14:54
marunis it worth raising the question on the operators list?14:54
dansmithright, I think we're missing some definition about these details and requirements14:54
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-314:55
*** krotscheck has joined #openstack-meeting-314:55
markmcclainso part of the issue is that if we EOL nova-net then they operators have to hae something14:55
marunmarkmcclain: sure.  I don't think that precludes doing some research to see what 'something' should e14:55
*** lsmola has quit IRC14:55
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC14:56
marunand maybe that should be driven from the TC side, given that its them that are setting the requirements14:56
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-314:56
markmcclainI'll work on narrowing the scope a bit14:56
marunfrom the TC side you mean?14:57
marundansmith mentoined that there could be folks from metacloud at the mid-cycle next week (if we're lucky)14:58
markmcclainmarun: yes14:58
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC14:58
maruneven if not, it might be worth engaging with them since they're a pretty heavy nova network user14:58
dansmithknowing what they'd expect a migration to have to look like before they'd be willing to take it would be good data14:58
*** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting-314:59
markmcclaingood point14:59
marunmarkmcclain: so, we can leave it to you to drive narrowing the requirements from the TC side14:59
Swamimestery: I need to quit, I have to be in the DVR status meeting, if you need any info please ping me.14:59
marunmarkmcclain: and I'd hope you'd raise the point of engaging with operators so that the effort is able to be grounded in actual requirements14:59
mesterySwami: will do, thanks!14:59
markmcclainmarun: yeah.. I'll try to make items more specific15:00
markmcclainre cold vs live migraiton15:00
*** erecio has joined #openstack-meeting-315:00
dansmithmarkmcclain: also, it'd be good to know if the TC expects every possible vertex on the matrix of configurations to be migratable, without downtime, etc15:00
dansmithmarkmcclain: because it could be that just providing a nova-manage command to tweak the database while everything control-plane-wise is shut down would be sufficient for folks that can't do migrations15:01
mesterydansmith: we didn't delve into that level of specifics at the meeting, there is a definite gray zone here.15:01
markmcclainwe know there will be configurations that cannot be universally upgraded, so part of the process is documenting the ones that cannot be done15:01
dansmithmarkmcclain: and then let nova-compute startup migrate the VIFs on the next startup15:01
markmcclainand then give the operator options to manually resolve15:02
dansmithmarkmcclain: okay, well, we should be able to make serious progress on this next week, in terms of ideas and feasibility I think15:02
markmcclaindansmith: agreed15:02
obondarevalso Nachi Ueno has proposed another possible way for neutron migration recently15:04
obondarevhi Nachi15:05
nati_uenoit's still in idea phase, but I think using nova-network manager code is also simple way15:05
marunI'm not sure of the value of the proposed approach, since it still requires migrating responsibility between nova network and neutron15:05
obondarevThe idea looks nice as it requires minimal nova-side changes and seems can be implemented fairly quickly15:05
marunwhat does this intermediate step buy us?15:05
nati_uenoI think we can make no downtime15:05
*** nacim has quit IRC15:05
dansmithnati_ueno: this is more like what I was expecting us to have15:06
obondarevbut it is still not a true neutron migration I think15:06
dansmithnati_ueno: changes to nova-network to bridge the gap until we could "go direct to neutron" after some amount of small transition15:06
nati_uenoso current our approach is 100% neutron compat 50% nova compat.15:06
nati_uenoI thinks we should start with 100% nova compat 50% neutron compat15:06
nati_uenothen we can improve compatibility in neutron side15:06
nati_uenodansmith: ya15:06
Swamisorry wrong place.15:07
nati_uenoso I believe north bound api and data plane downtime matter15:09
dansmithnati_ueno: ah, this is why you were asking about the migrate_* methods :)15:09
nati_uenodansmith: yes.15:10
nati_ueno_setup_network_on_host is missing in neutron side, but we can call it when we craete/delete port15:10
marunI think this proposal is a nicer solution, but it's not clear to me what the implementation cost would be compared to the strategies already proposed.15:11
markmcclainwe considered this approach earlier too… there are still some issues with how different elements that are currently shared between Nova and Neutron cooperate15:11
marunand we'd need clarity from a user perspective to decide whether that cost was worth paying15:11
marun(of course, if it's cheaper and simpler, it would be hard to argue against it)15:11
nati_uenomarkmcclain: what's issue did you have?15:11
mesterymarun: ++15:11
markmcclainiptables is one of them15:12
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-315:12
nati_uenomarkmcclain: For that part, we can use neutron side driver15:12
*** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-315:12
nati_uenomarkmcclain: nova-network has no security group code15:12
nati_uenoAnyway, I agree with marun. I'll try to POC this.15:13
nati_uenomay be, if it works, it can be one option, right?15:13
nati_uenoit may take 1 week, or 3 month :)15:13
markmcclainit can definitely be an option15:13
marunnati_ueno: I would recommend collaborating with obondarev to add details to the spec as a secondary step15:13
mesterymarun: Yes, we should coorinate this as much as possible.15:14
nati_uenomarun: sure15:14
marunnati_ueno: we'll need comparison between proposed approaches if we're to make a decision15:14
markmcclainbut we probably should to fail fast vs letting it linger15:14
*** erecio has quit IRC15:14
nati_uenoya. anyway, this is still just an idea. Let me POC it15:15
nati_uenoso team should go existing way15:15
*** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-315:15
mesterynati_ueno: Thanks!15:15
mestery#topic Open Discussion15:16
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: neutron nova-network parity)"15:16
mesteryThat's all I had on the agenda for this week.15:16
mesteryGoing over the gaps and reporting progress.15:16
mesteryAnything else from anyone?15:16
markmcclainthat's all from me15:17
mesteryOK, thanks everyone!15:17
mesterymarkmcclain and marun and dansmith: I hope you folks make some serious progress in person next week at the nova mid-cycle.15:17
mesteryWe'll have hte meeting next week as well.15:17
mesteryThanks everyone!15:17
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"15:17
openstackMeeting ended Wed Jul 23 15:17:59 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)15:18
openstackMinutes (text):
*** carl_baldwin_ has joined #openstack-meeting-315:18
*** MaxV_ has joined #openstack-meeting-315:18
*** MaxV has quit IRC15:19
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC15:20
*** carl_baldwin_ is now known as carl_baldwin15:20
*** WormMan has left #openstack-meeting-315:20
*** samchoi has joined #openstack-meeting-315:26
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC15:27
*** jlibosva has quit IRC15:28
*** xuhanp has quit IRC15:29
*** iovadia has quit IRC15:32
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC15:44
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-315:45
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-315:45
*** MaxV_ has quit IRC15:47
*** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-315:47
*** MaxV has quit IRC15:47
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC15:49
*** carl_baldwin has quit IRC15:52
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-316:00
*** eghobo has quit IRC16:00
*** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-316:01
*** hurgleburgler has quit IRC16:01
*** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-316:01
*** Swami has left #openstack-meeting-316:03
*** hurgleburgler has joined #openstack-meeting-316:04
*** pcm_ has quit IRC16:17
*** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-316:17
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC16:20
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-316:20
*** celttechie has joined #openstack-meeting-316:23
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-316:25
*** pcm_ has quit IRC16:25
*** seizadi has quit IRC16:36
*** tjones has joined #openstack-meeting-316:43
*** jcoufal has quit IRC16:54
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-316:55
*** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-316:55
*** jcoufal has quit IRC16:56
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-316:57
*** tjones has left #openstack-meeting-316:58
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC16:58
*** regXboi has joined #openstack-meeting-317:07
*** yamahata has quit IRC17:08
*** seizadi has quit IRC17:12
*** banix has quit IRC17:14
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC17:14
*** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC17:19
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-317:19
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-317:24
*** songole has joined #openstack-meeting-317:25
*** vinay_yadhav has joined #openstack-meeting-317:28
*** anil_rao has joined #openstack-meeting-317:29
*** natarajk has joined #openstack-meeting-317:30
*** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-317:30
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-317:31
*** pcm___ has joined #openstack-meeting-317:31
*** hemanthravi has joined #openstack-meeting-317:31
*** LouisF has joined #openstack-meeting-317:31
*** marios has joined #openstack-meeting-317:31
SumitNaiksatamhi all17:32
SumitNaiksatamapologies for the delay, i had problems connecting17:32
SumitNaiksatamlets get started17:33
SumitNaiksatam#startmeeting Networking Advanced Services17:33
openstackMeeting started Wed Jul 23 17:33:11 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.17:33
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)"17:33
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'networking_advanced_services'17:33
SumitNaiksatam#info Spec approval deadline has passed17:33
SumitNaiksatamindeed, especially for thos specs which got left out17:33
SumitNaiksatamand definitely not funny!17:34
SumitNaiksatamso if you feel strongly that you would still like your spec to be considered for Juno17:34
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting-317:34
SumitNaiksatamplease petition for a SFE17:34
SumitNaiksatamspec freeze exception17:34
*** badveli has joined #openstack-meeting-317:34
mariosSumitNaiksatam: out of interest, when are those expected until (is there a deadline)17:35
SumitNaiksatamthat said the likelihood of it going through are pretty slim17:35
vinay_yadhavto whom should we address it to17:35
*** Swami has joined #openstack-meeting-317:35
SumitNaiksatammarios: honestly i am not aware of it17:35
mariosvinay_yadhav: see the mailing list, there are lots already17:35
SumitNaiksatamvinay_yadhav: you can send to -dev mailer, there are a few17:35
vinay_yadhavthanx marios17:35
vinay_yadhavsumit: thnx17:35
SumitNaiksatamour team has alread been give one for flavors17:35
cgoncalvess3wong: +1 for SAD17:35
cgoncalvesI mean, SAD as in sad upper-case :-)17:36
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves, vinay_yadhav: i definitely feel your frustration17:36
mariosi was wondering what was happening/gonna happen with flavors and the deadline17:36
SumitNaiksatambeen there several times before!17:36
s3wongsalvortore said that at current rate (and volume), he advises not accepting any more exception other than some --- well - exception cases17:36
SumitNaiksatammarios: lets discuss that in the agenda item17:36
s3wongmarios: flavor has requested SFE, and most likely will be accepted17:36
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: yes, but I kind of would like to stress out here today the unexpected approval of the service chain spec17:37
SumitNaiksatamanything anyone wanted to discuss here in terms of the process?17:37
mariosSumitNaiksatam: yeah thx, i was mostly responding to your update (missed the sfe for that)17:37
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: nothing against you or mandeep, though17:37
marioss3wong: thx17:37
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves: any reason you say “unexpected”?17:37
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: I feel like it was approved without a broad discussion from the community and very few +1's17:37
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves: last i check there were no negative votes on that17:37
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-317:38
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves: and i personally was happy with what was mentioned in there since this is what we have been saying for the past three summits17:38
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves: hence my +217:38
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: although I can't complain much because I had no time to review it17:38
SumitNaiksatami cant speak for the other reviewers though17:39
anil_raoCan I ask a question regarding the review process?17:39
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: sure17:39
*** lcheng has quit IRC17:39
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: I know17:40
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves: we can discuss service chain spec in the agenda item if you have concerns17:40
anil_raoI find that several +1s can be wiped out by a single -1, even if most folks don't agree with the reasons behind the -1. How does that work?17:40
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: ok17:40
vinay_yadhavAnil: +117:40
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: yeah these things are subjective17:40
cgoncalvesanil_rao: +117:41
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: its not necessarily the case that the -1s are “wiped” out17:41
mariosi should point out that anil_rao's point applies to neutron or even openstack more generally, its not an advanced services specs issue.17:41
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: but that shows some level of disagreement and hence the possibility of more discussion17:41
*** johnthetubaguy is now known as zz_johnthetubagu17:41
SumitNaiksatammarios: yes definitely17:42
anil_raothe reason I ask is I would like to know how to avoid such a scenario going forward.17:42
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: sure17:42
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: though i would like to point out that this is not a novel experience and unique to you17:43
vinay_yadhavhow do we make sure we have address all concerns when things are commented on the very last week or day :)17:43
SumitNaiksatamanil_rao: as marios pointed out17:43
SumitNaiksatamits across the project17:43
SumitNaiksatamvinay_yadhav: absolutely17:43
s3wongvinay_yadhav: that happens very often :-)17:43
anil_raoWe need to have some system where the collective +1s from several well meaning reviewers hold some weight.17:43
SumitNaiksatamvinay_yadhav, anil_rao: to be honest, the amount of attention that the tap as a service spec got as a part of this team is unprecedented for a new feature17:44
SumitNaiksatamit typically takes longer for a new feature to incubate and get through17:44
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-317:44
anil_raoWe are very thankful for that, which is why I was hoping that the support we got here counts. :-)17:44
mariosvinay_yadhav: anil_rao: I didn't submit a spec so I won't pretend to understand how p****d off you guys must be right now. i think this isn't something SumitNaiksatam can really address... IMO an email to the mailing list to provide feedback on the specs review process (and these last minute drive-by's) would probably be better targetted17:45
mariosmy 2c17:45
vinay_yadhavsumit: we are happy that advanced services group commented on the spec extensively and help improve it17:45
anil_raovinay_yadhav: +117:45
SumitNaiksatamif you approach other members of the community, they will politely tell you, please contribute by reviewing other blueprints as well and participating in  the Neutron priority activities like Nova network parity :-)17:45
*** mandeep has joined #openstack-meeting-317:45
SumitNaiksatammarios: absolutely great suggestion17:46
vinay_yadhavmarios: thanx will try that17:46
marios:( sorry17:46
SumitNaiksatamand again, i can uenquivocally say, that i feel the pain of the folks whose spec did not get approved (i have been throught that before!)17:46
SumitNaiksatamand i am not being fatalistic here17:47
SumitNaiksatamand i think we as a team owned these specs17:47
SumitNaiksatamso its “sad” for the entire team17:47
vinay_yadhavi guess we can all try to make the system better for the future17:47
SumitNaiksatamthat said, like i mentioned privately to cgoncalves, vinay_yadhav, anil_rao before, it is very difficult to argue against the accepted priorities of the project17:48
SumitNaiksatamand that priority in the J release has been pretty much on nova network parity (and DVR such that it supports the mutli-host feature)17:49
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC17:49
regXboiI would point out the following ... any new patch wipes out all +1 and -1s17:49
SumitNaiksatambut does that mean that we close our shop and twiddle thumbs17:49
SumitNaiksatamregXboi: true17:50
regXboiand -1s mean that something should be addressed in the comments17:50
SumitNaiksatamregXboi: yes17:50
regXboiI would argue that collective +1s shouldn't outweight a -117:50
regXboibecause the -1 may be uncovering a case not thought of yet17:51
SumitNaiksatamregXboi: that might be true in cases17:51
regXboiand I can say that I've pushed back on at least one -1 successfully17:51
SumitNaiksatamregXboi: but in this case the -1 was from cores17:51
vinay_yadhavregXboi: true, but the +1 should not be wiped off either imho17:51
SumitNaiksatamso while there is reason to be frustrated, hopefully if we keep marching in terms of the discussion, i think we have a head start for K17:52
cgoncalvesregXboi: while that's true, some specs got -1 from core reviewer(s) just because j3 was already swamped with approved specs17:52
regXboiso... in order....17:52
SumitNaiksatamas  a parallel activity, definitely do provide your feedback on the mailing list on the process, if you have concerns17:52
regXboi+1s being wiped from new revisions actually makes sense17:52
regXboisecond order - I can't speak to the why of -1s (I'm not a core, so don't ask :) )17:53
*** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-317:53
mandeepregXboi: I believe, any solution is going to have holes (removing +1s or -1s), I would just like better reporting that shows all +1/-1s across versions so that you do not have to go re-assert them again.17:54
vinay_yadhavregXboi: it makes sense when the reviewer review the new patch and +1 or -1 it again :)17:54
regXboimandeep: that *would* be nice17:54
regXboibut I'm not sure it's practical from gerrit's perspective17:54
vinay_yadhavmandeep: +117:54
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-317:54
regXboiI'm just agreeing with SumitNaiksatam that expressing that on the ML is the way to go17:55
SumitNaiksatami think we have heard everyone, and been on this for about 25 mins now17:55
kevinbentonmandeep: i think that’s what happens for workflow votes, but only cores have those17:55
SumitNaiksatamso, lets move on for now17:55
kevinbentonmandeep: although that might just be the -2’s…17:56
SumitNaiksatamand feel free to reach out to me as well if you feel the need to continue this conversaton17:56
*** rudrarugge has joined #openstack-meeting-317:56
mandeepkevinbenton: Yes, I think that -2 form cores is sticky.17:56
SumitNaiksatami have already preemptly reached out to the owners of the specs which did not get through17:56
*** pcm___ has quit IRC17:56
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_: there?17:56
SumitNaiksatam#topic Flavors17:57
*** openstack changes topic to "Flavors (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)"17:57
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_: i believe we got the FFE for this17:57
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_: and you have posted a WIP patch17:57
enikanorov_right, the patch is actually ready for review17:57
*** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-317:57
enikanorov_and i've got some comments from stephen already17:57
enikanorov_which i'm going to resolve17:58
SumitNaiksatami am not sure what the plan is on the bp spec, since markmcclain was away on vacation last week17:58
*** yamamoto has quit IRC17:58
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_: dont we need to get the spec approved first?17:58
enikanorov_i'm working on cli also, hope to post it this week17:58
enikanorov_SumitNaiksatam: yes, sure... :)17:58
enikanorov_I asked markmcclain to folloup on spec17:58
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_: i am one of the assigned cores, so i am waiting on activity on the spec review in gerrit17:58
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_: thanks17:58
enikanorov_or i can do that if he don't have enough time17:58
enikanorov_so basically i can update the spec if he agrees17:59
markmcclainI'll rev the spec17:59
SumitNaiksatamany questions for enikanorov_  or markmcclain?18:00
*** SumitNaiksatam has left #openstack-meeting-318:00
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC18:00
*** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-318:00
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-318:00
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC18:01
SumitNaiksatamenikanorov_ markmcclain: thanks18:01
*** hurgleburgler has quit IRC18:02
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-318:02
SumitNaiksatam#topic Service base and insertion implementation update18:02
*** openstack changes topic to "Service base and insertion implementation update (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)"18:02
SumitNaiksatams3wong, kevinbenton: ?18:02
SumitNaiksatamand marios18:02
SumitNaiksatammarios: sorry i did not get a chance to respond to your email18:03
*** rudrarugge has quit IRC18:03
mariosSumitNaiksatam: haha, i was about to apologise for not checking my email18:03
SumitNaiksatammarios: no worries18:03
kevinbentonSumitNaiksatam: did you need me to describe the issue?18:04
SumitNaiksatams3wong: i believe you are repurposing kanzhe’s earlier implementation on the db and api18:04
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC18:05
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: i believe you are referring to the discussion on where the service interface is implemented18:05
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-318:05
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: go ahead18:05
mariosSumitNaiksatam: first off, thanks for all your last minute efforts on this last week!18:06
SumitNaiksatammarios: np18:06
kevinbentonyes. if we have the service interface API as a top level object, there won’t be an easy way to tell what type of service is being referenced by the creation of the service interface18:06
*** jomara has quit IRC18:06
kevinbentonbecause it will just be a UUID18:06
*** jomara has joined #openstack-meeting-318:06
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: even before we reach that point18:07
s3wongSumitNaiksatam: sorry, talking to rkukura in office now18:07
kevinbentonSumitNaiksatam: go ahead. I’m not sure what context is necessary18:07
*** pcm_ has quit IRC18:07
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: the neutron manager needs to decide where to dispatch the create service interface call to18:08
*** pcm___ has joined #openstack-meeting-318:08
mariosi thought it was the backwards compat issue for the clients (though what kevinbenton describes sounds like another issue)18:08
s3wongSumitNaiksatam: and yes, I am working on moving kanzhe's code to the latest model18:08
SumitNaiksatammarios: we will come to that next18:08
marioss3wong: is the code in gerrit?18:08
s3wongmarios: not yet18:08
*** jamielennox|away has quit IRC18:08
marioss3wong: i also have wip for vpn (and also needs conversion over to serviceinterface etc)18:08
marioss3wong: k thx18:09
SumitNaiksatamso we are proposing to implement a separate “service plugin” to implement the service interface18:09
marios(very early wip)18:09
SumitNaiksatamthis “service plugin” will then make a call on the appropriate fwaas/vpnaas/lbaas service plugin18:09
SumitNaiksatamthis is where we face the second issue of deciding which sevice instance object is associated with the uuid (this is what kevinbenton was referring to)18:10
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: i have some thoughts on that18:10
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: we could potentially leverage notifications (say when a firewall is created) and have the new “service plugin” listen to that18:11
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: when it gets the notification, it keeps a reference to in its own db as a firewall object18:11
*** jomara has quit IRC18:11
kevinbentonSumitNaiksatam: then it won’t work with services created before the plugin was activated. is that okay?18:11
*** jamielenz has joined #openstack-meeting-318:12
SumitNaiksatamhopefully we can ensure the order18:12
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: but good point, and something to think about it18:12
kevinbentonSumitNaiksatam: I mean way before, like during an Icehouse deployment :-)18:12
SumitNaiksatami think for the benefit for everyone else, this will probably be cleared with some WIP code18:12
s3wongSumitNaiksatam: during Monday's conversation, I think we say that the service object (i.e. FWaaS object) DB has a attribute pointing back to ServiceBase entry?18:12
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: ah, backward compatibility18:13
marioss3wong: that's how i understand it (to a serviceinterface)18:13
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: there would be no service insertion feature for icehouse18:13
s3wongmarios: actually to a serviceBase, then from the ServiceBase, we get the list of ServiceInterfaces18:13
s3wong(that's the DB model)18:13
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: i mean, the default insertion performed by the service happens in that case18:14
marioss3wong: yeah, i assumed when it said 'servicebaseentry' it meant to one of the interfaces18:14
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: so for example, firewall is inserted on all routers18:14
kevinbentonSumitNaiksatam: oh, it’s not possible to change the insertion for an existing service?18:14
*** jamielennox|away has joined #openstack-meeting-318:15
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: at least in my mind we did not set out to provide that level of backward compatibility18:15
SumitNaiksatamkevinbenton: that will be a hard problem to solve and i am not sure its worth the effort18:15
SumitNaiksatamfwaas and vpnaas still have experimental APIs18:15
SumitNaiksatamand LBaaS is going through a change18:15
SumitNaiksatamso on the backward compatiblity18:16
s3wongmarios: servicebase maps one to one to each service instance; and servicebase holds the list of serviceinterfaces associated with that service instance18:16
*** jamielenz has quit IRC18:16
SumitNaiksatami proposed a solution to marios (vpnaas) and sridaK (fwaas)18:16
*** jamielenz has joined #openstack-meeting-318:17
SumitNaiksatammarios: you are comfortable with that?18:17
marioss3wong: right18:17
mariosSumitNaiksatam: i think it sounds sane right now, but we need to retain the router id for example (for vpn)18:17
SumitNaiksatammarios: yes, we retain that18:17
*** flaviof is now known as flaviof_zzz18:17
mariosSumitNaiksatam: i think we can try stuff out and come back to it next week18:17
SumitNaiksatammarios: i think we should strive to be as less intrusive as possible18:18
pcm___sorry, as my connection dropped a bit. Is there a BP for this?18:18
SumitNaiksatammarios: sure18:18
mariosapologies, have to put my 2year old to bed... hopefully brb18:18
SumitNaiksatampcm___: we are discussing the service base and insertion bp18:18
SumitNaiksatammarios: no worires, thanks for joining18:18
*** rharwood has quit IRC18:18
SumitNaiksatampcm___: that includes the implementation for vpnaas, fwaas and lbaas18:19
hemanthravis3wong: are the new apis implemented in the new plugin or servicebase?18:19
Swamisumitnaiksatam: can you post the link here, it would be useful.18:19
pcm___goal being to have a common service?18:19
*** jamielennox|away has quit IRC18:19
s3wonghemanthravi: with SumitNaiksatam 's suggestion, the APIs would be on the new plugin18:19
*** jamielennox|away has joined #openstack-meeting-318:20
*** julim has quit IRC18:20
hemanthravican't these be done in servicebase?18:20
*** jcoufal has quit IRC18:20
SumitNaiksatamhemanthravi s3wong: the REST APIs are handled in the new “service plugin”18:20
s3wonghemanthravi: I don't think we have plugin for servicebase per se, though18:20
s3wongit is abstract18:21
SumitNaiksatamhowever, the service base will stil need to have these methods as well18:21
pcm___SumitNaiksatam: Do the service's APIs come into the service base and then get forwarded to the respective service?18:21
s3wongSumitNaiksatam: for other services to implement their own inherited methods?18:21
*** jamielenz has quit IRC18:21
SumitNaiksatamso the flow would be: REST call for creating service interface -> new “service plugin” -> fwaas service plugin18:21
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-318:22
SumitNaiksatampcm___: so the service base as defined in the spec stays the way it is (or may be a close variant of that)18:22
garyduanDo we have a WIP patch about new "service plugin"?18:22
mariosSumitNaiksatam: so the point of the plugin is to maintain the association between fwaas_UUID and the interface, until that fwaas instance is inserted18:22
SumitNaiksatamhowever, the service interface resource gets implemented in a new service plugin18:22
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: perhaps you missed activity over the weekend, we just got the spec approved :-)18:23
*** rharwood has joined #openstack-meeting-318:23
SumitNaiksatammarios: the main point of the new service plugin is to be able to honor the CRUD for the service interface18:23
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-318:23
garyduanyes. I saw that, I wanted to +1, but it's already approved18:23
*** jamielenz has joined #openstack-meeting-318:24
SumitNaiksatammarios: since the existing plugins cannot be used to implement the service interface resource18:24
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: np18:24
*** jamielennox|away has quit IRC18:24
SumitNaiksatammarios: otherwise you will have each of fwaas/vpnaas/lbaas implementing the same resource/extension18:25
*** jomara has joined #openstack-meeting-318:25
SumitNaiksatammarios: and the neutron manager (api layer) will not know which service plugin to send the call to18:25
garyduanSumitNaiksatam: i see the implementation issue now18:25
garyduanSumitNaiksatam: I should say, I understand the issue now18:26
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: yeah, its a little difficult to explain in text here, hence i was saying it will be clearer with a WIP patch18:26
mariosSumitNaiksatam: thanks, a lot of this is still new to me18:26
garyduanSumitNaiksatam: right. Look at the code is easier.18:26
SumitNaiksatammarios: the side effect of the above is that we need to still dispatch to the fwaas plugin, and hence we need to know that a particular uuid in the service interface create call is a firewall object18:26
*** jamielennox|away has joined #openstack-meeting-318:27
SumitNaiksatamso we went much deeper into this discussion than planned18:27
SumitNaiksatam#topic Service Chains18:27
*** openstack changes topic to "Service Chains (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)"18:27
mariosSumitNaiksatam: so then would 'create_service_interface' still need to  be implemented in each service, or is that what you're saying here. that this will be implemente3d in the service plugin only18:27
marios(as an example)18:27
mariosSumitNaiksatam: nm18:27
SumitNaiksatammarios: we would (the service base will change)18:27
mariosSumitNaiksatam: next tinme, sorry18:27
SumitNaiksatammarios: thanks18:27
SumitNaiksatamsongole mandeep: ?18:27
SumitNaiksatamquick update?18:28
SumitNaiksatami know cgoncalves you had questions on the spec?18:28
SumitNaiksatamif we can keep it short18:28
mandeepSumitNaiksatam: Sorry, I was pulled in a different discussion ...18:28
SumitNaiksatamfor this time, and we can continue the conversation later18:28
SumitNaiksatammandeep: no worries18:28
SumitNaiksatamsongole: my understanding is that you are on track for the implementation?18:28
SumitNaiksatamimplementation/WIP patch18:29
songoleSumitNaiksatam: yes. We are finalyzing on the plan18:29
SumitNaiksatamsongole: ok good, perhaps you can report next week18:29
SumitNaiksatam#topic Open Discussion18:29
*** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)"18:29
mandeepYes, no new status update. There was a request from LouisF to allow for different forward and reverse paths, and we can look into that for a later versiion18:29
*** beyounn has joined #openstack-meeting-318:30
SumitNaiksatammandeep songole: thanks18:30
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: sorry, lagged connection18:30
SumitNaiksatamsorry, we did not get a chance to discuss traffic steering and Tap18:30
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: what's the plan for implementing a PoC for SC?18:30
SumitNaiksatamalthough my proposal is to still keep these on the agenda for this meeting leading into K18:30
LouisFmandeep: i think the bp is incomplete as is18:30
*** jamielenz has quit IRC18:30
cgoncalvesmandeep: maybe you can better answer to my question18:30
SumitNaiksatamso next time onwards we wil try to give at least some time to these specs such that we dont have to restart the discussion later18:31
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC18:31
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-318:31
*** jamielennox|away has quit IRC18:31
*** jamielenz has joined #openstack-meeting-318:31
mandeepcgoncalves: What was the question? I missed earlier part of the meeting.18:31
SumitNaiksatamwe are a little over time, so lets keep the discussion short, and we can continue over the mailer or next week18:31
mandeepSumitNaiksatam: OK18:31
SumitNaiksatammandeep: cgoncalves is asking what is the plan for a PoC?18:31
cgoncalvesmandeep: plans on PoC for service chain18:31
SumitNaiksatammandeep: is there a time frame planned18:31
SumitNaiksatamcgoncalves: i believe songole is also working on this18:32
mandeepcgoncalves: Plan was to work on that (plan) this week18:32
cgoncalvesmandeep: ah! ok :)18:32
cgoncalvesSumitNaiksatam: nice, thanks18:32
SumitNaiksatammandeep: can we get something by next meeting?18:32
mandeepSumitNaiksatam: Sure18:32
SumitNaiksatamhave a plan ready, say by tomorrow, and socialize in the next meeting (or earlier if you chose to use the mailer)18:32
SumitNaiksatammandeep: thanks!18:33
SumitNaiksatamanything else?18:33
mandeepLouisF: Can you email me the concern that you had?18:33
LouisFmandeep: ok18:33
SumitNaiksatamthanks all for reviewing the blueprints over the weekend18:33
SumitNaiksatamhopefully it wont be the same rush with the reviews for J318:33
*** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-318:33
marios\o g'night all18:34
SumitNaiksatamalright thanks all, and if you have any concerns please feel free to send me an email18:34
SumitNaiksatamthanks all!18:34
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"18:34
openstackMeeting ended Wed Jul 23 18:34:31 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)18:34
openstackMinutes (text):
*** anil_rao has left #openstack-meeting-318:34
*** mandeep has quit IRC18:35
*** regXboi has left #openstack-meeting-318:35
*** vinay_yadhav has quit IRC18:35
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC18:35
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan beyounn badveli natarajk there?18:35
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-318:36
*** flaviof_zzz is now known as flaviof18:36
*** eghobo has quit IRC18:36
* pcm___ lurking18:37
SumitNaiksatam#startmeeting Networking FWaaS18:37
openstackMeeting started Wed Jul 23 18:37:51 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.18:37
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)"18:37
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'networking_fwaas'18:37
SumitNaiksatampcm___: hi18:37
SumitNaiksatampcm___: thanks for joining as well18:38
pcm___sure np. Someone has to keep an eye on you guys :)18:38
SumitNaiksatampcm___: thanks for carrying out that imp task! perhaps you will extend it to the reviews as well ;-)18:39
SumitNaiksatam#info spec approval deadline has passed18:39
SumitNaiksatami think we managed to get the specs approved that we had planned18:39
SumitNaiksatamanything we missed18:39
badvelithanks sumit18:39
SumitNaiksatambadveli: sure18:39
SumitNaiksatamif we missed something, and you want to petition for an exception, please send an email to the mailer18:40
*** hemanthravi has quit IRC18:40
SumitNaiksatamalthough the chances of getting an exception are pretty slim18:40
SumitNaiksatamok moving on18:40
SumitNaiksatam#topic action item review18:40
*** openstack changes topic to "action item review (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)"18:40
*** celttechie has quit IRC18:41
SumitNaiksatami was planning to set up a f2f with Swami18:41
*** songole has left #openstack-meeting-318:41
SwamiYes sumit.18:41
SwamiAre you guys on for the meet, I did not hear anything from you.18:41
SumitNaiksatambadveli beyounn garyduan, what say, one day we drive to sacramento?18:41
SumitNaiksatamSwami: still convincing people to make the trip :-)18:42
SumitNaiksatamSwami: we will get back to you on this18:42
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC18:42
SwamiSumitNaiksatam: Sure18:42
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-318:42
SumitNaiksatam#action fwaas team to discuss f2f team with DVR team18:43
SumitNaiksatamanother action item was for Swami to bring up the FWaaS/DVR spec in the L3 meeting to pave the way for approval18:43
SumitNaiksatamso we are good on this as well18:43
SumitNaiksatamSwami and team, thanks again for all the last minute interaction and for pushing this forward18:44
natarajkyes the meetings really helped in finalizing the spec18:44
*** banix has quit IRC18:45
SumitNaiksatamthe third action was for garyduan to provide an estimate on supporting flavors for fwaas and provide an update (in response to salvatore’s comment) in the flavors bp spec18:45
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-318:45
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-318:45
SumitNaiksatamnatarajk: +118:45
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan please follow up in case you havent18:45
SumitNaiksatam#topic Bugs18:46
*** openstack changes topic to "Bugs (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)"18:46
SumitNaiksatamone pending bug was reduced in severity from high to medium18:46
SumitNaiksatamwe still need to review18:47
SumitNaiksatamany other bugs that caught anyone’s attention?18:48
garyduanI did comment on both falvor spec and patch18:48
natarajkSumitNaiksatam: I'll review bug 9057518:48
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: great18:48
SumitNaiksatamnatarajk: thanks18:48
SumitNaiksatamBTW, our bug Czar - SridarK is out today18:49
SumitNaiksatambut SridarK did a pass yesterday and reported that he did not find anything which was critical18:49
SumitNaiksatambadveli: i believe you are also looking at this?18:49
badveliyes i followed that link18:50
SumitNaiksatambadveli: i mean scrubbing bugs?18:50
badvelii looked at the link some days back18:50
SumitNaiksatambadveli: ok great, good to have multiple keep an eye on this18:50
badvelicurrently submitting a patch for the comments i have for service groups18:50
SumitNaiksatam#topic blueprint tracking18:50
*** openstack changes topic to "blueprint tracking (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)"18:51
badvelii will take a look at it again18:51
SumitNaiksatambadveli: thanks18:51
*** s3wong has quit IRC18:51
SumitNaiksatamFWaaS/DVR support18:51
SumitNaiksatambadveli: SridarK mentioned you were trying to get an installation going18:52
SumitNaiksatambadveli: i mean just the DVR installation18:52
SwamiGuys there was fix that went in for the FIP yesterday in the L3 agent, I recommend you to restack with the latest code for testing.18:53
SumitNaiksatamSwami: thanks for the heads up18:53
badvelisridar asked if  i have two servers, but we did not yet discussed on it18:53
SumitNaiksatamSwami: so its merged, right?18:53
SwamiYes will be merged anytime soon.18:54
SwamiIt is ready to be merged.18:54
SumitNaiksatamSwami: that said i believe we were earlier pointed to a private repo earlier18:54
SwamiBut you can still pick up from Carl's repo18:54
SumitNaiksatamSwami: ah my question18:54
SwamiAll patches have not landed up in the upstream18:54
SumitNaiksatamSwami: so we continue to go to Carl’s repo?18:54
SumitNaiksatamfor now18:54
SwamiThat is the reason we recommend to pick up from Carl's repo, that is updated constantly.18:54
Swamisumit: yes18:54
SumitNaiksatamSwami: okay good18:54
SumitNaiksatamSwami: so does Carl’s repo have the entire implementation, or that is also evolving?18:55
SwamiSumitNaiksatam: I need to step out, if you need any other information please let me know offline.18:55
SumitNaiksatamSwami: ok we will ping you, thanks for joining18:55
SwamiSumitNaiksatam: Carl's repo has the entire code base.18:55
SumitNaiksatamSwami: ok18:55
SwamiThanks sumit18:55
SumitNaiksatambadveli: sorry, did not notice your earlier response18:56
SumitNaiksatambadveli: so you are planning to start installing the DVR in parallel?18:56
badvelino problem, i am trying to study on the wiki on how to install18:57
SumitNaiksatambadveli: great, i think that will be very helpful preparation until SridarK comes back, so that we can make some immediate progress after he is back18:57
SumitNaiksatamok anything more on FWaaS/DVR?18:57
badvelisumit, i am actively working on the patches for the service groups18:58
SumitNaiksatamyes, thats next18:58
SumitNaiksatamService Objects/Groups18:58
SumitNaiksatambadveli: any blockers there?18:58
*** redrobot has joined #openstack-meeting-318:58
badvelii will be submitting a patch for the db part addressing comments and also some of the spec's latest updates18:58
badvelithe reference implementation is another patch which is wip18:59
badvelithanks for your help, if we can get the cli and the configs part reviewed19:00
badvelithe data modelling19:00
SumitNaiksatambadveli: sure, but the CLI review will typically happen in earnest after the neutron pathces are in a good stage19:00
SumitNaiksatambadveli: but yeah we need to keep working on them in parallel, so that people can test end to end19:01
*** iovadia has joined #openstack-meeting-319:01
badvelisumit: can it happend that the cinfig and the db patches will be merged19:02
SumitNaiksatambadveli: i am behind on the reviews for code patches19:02
SumitNaiksatambadveli: links?19:02
*** briancurtin has left #openstack-meeting-319:02
badvelibefore the cli patch19:02
badvelii send the email,19:02
SumitNaiksatamoh btw, can you all please update: #link
SumitNaiksatamwhenever you post a patch19:03
*** rkukura has left #openstack-meeting-319:03
badvelifine sumit19:03
SumitNaiksatambadveli: i meant can you paste the links here for the benefit of those in this meeting19:04
badveliyes sumit will do it19:04
SumitNaiksatambadveli: in terms of review and merging, the expectation is as follows19:04
SumitNaiksatam1. the patches should be small19:04
SumitNaiksatam2. if the feature is large, the patches should be broken into relatively self-contained parts in the form of a series19:05
*** LouisF has quit IRC19:05
SumitNaiksatamin this case, Resource model/API, and DB can be one patch19:05
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-319:05
SumitNaiksatamplugin/agent/driver can be a second patch19:05
SumitNaiksatamdepending on the size, if they turn out to be too large, we wil have to break them further19:06
badveliSumit: We are doing exactly the same way19:06
*** julim_ has joined #openstack-meeting-319:06
SumitNaiksatam3. for a feature to merge, the refer implementation (that goes all the way to the datapath) should be available for review19:06
garyduanThere will be some overlap with the flavor support, as both touch fwaas plugin19:06
SumitNaiksatamand testing19:06
badvelitheResource model/API, and DB is one patch and the plugin/agent/driver is another patch in wip19:06
SumitNaiksatambadveli: great19:07
SumitNaiksatambadveli: will take a look19:07
SumitNaiksatambadveli: to your earlier question, the neutron patches will merge before the CLI patches19:07
SumitNaiksatambadveli: i did not quite understand what you meant by the config patches19:08
*** rfolco has quit IRC19:08
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: agreed, for now i would say lets not create dependencies19:08
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: i think we can take the hit of resolving merge conflicts in the interest of letting these proceed in parallel19:08
garyduansure. should be easy to resolve19:08
badvelisumit, the one for theResource model/API, and DB19:08
*** julim has quit IRC19:08
SumitNaiksatamgaryduan: good19:09
SumitNaiksatambadveli: ah, yeah, we will get to that first19:09
SumitNaiksatambadveli: as a reference, please pay careful attention to the reviews that went if for the initial fwaas patches19:11
SumitNaiksatambadveli: if we avoid the issues present there, i think it will reduce the time we spend on these reviews19:11
SumitNaiksatamok moving on19:12
SumitNaiksatam#topic vendor blueprints19:12
*** openstack changes topic to "vendor blueprints (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)"19:12
badvelisumit, sure i am addressing19:12
SumitNaiksatamSridarK is not here19:12
SumitNaiksatambadveli: thanks19:12
natarajkSumitNaiksatam: i'll file the design spec for brocade plugin once kilo spec repository opens19:13
SumitNaiksatamnatarajk: and you mentioned that your stuff is targeted for K?19:13
SumitNaiksatamnatarajk: nice, keep us posted19:13
SumitNaiksatam#topic open discussion19:13
*** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)"19:13
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC19:13
SumitNaiksatamanything else we need to discuss today?19:13
natarajkSumitNaiksatam: Focusing on getting the l3 plugin approved for Juno-319:13
SumitNaiksatamnatarajk: yes sure, it was great that the spec was approved!19:14
natarajkSumitNaiksatam: Thanks for your support19:14
SumitNaiksatamnatarajk: always!19:14
*** cjellick has quit IRC19:14
SumitNaiksatamok if no more issues to be discussed today, then we get 15 mins back :-)19:14
*** jcoufal has quit IRC19:15
SumitNaiksatamok thanks all for joining19:15
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"19:15
openstackMeeting ended Wed Jul 23 19:15:24 2014 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)19:15
openstackMinutes (text):
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-319:15
*** natarajk has left #openstack-meeting-319:16
*** jcoufal has quit IRC19:16
*** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-319:17
*** pcm___ has left #openstack-meeting-319:17
*** alexpilotti has quit IRC19:19
*** rfolco has joined #openstack-meeting-319:20
*** iovadia has quit IRC19:21
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC19:31
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-319:32
*** redrobot has left #openstack-meeting-319:33
*** thangp has quit IRC19:33
*** mestery has quit IRC19:34
*** mestery has joined #openstack-meeting-319:34
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC19:36
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-319:37
*** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-319:40
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC19:44
*** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-319:44
*** lcheng has quit IRC20:00
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting-320:00
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-320:01
*** flaviof is now known as flaviof_zzz20:06
*** mwagner_lap has joined #openstack-meeting-320:08
*** julim_ has quit IRC20:24
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-320:24
*** briancurtin has quit IRC20:29
*** pballand has quit IRC20:38
*** safchain has quit IRC20:39
*** briancurtin2 has joined #openstack-meeting-320:41
*** chuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-320:41
-openstackstatus- NOTICE: nodepool is unable to build test nodes so check and gate tests are delayed20:41
*** briancurtin2 has quit IRC20:41
*** ChanServ changes topic to "nodepool is unable to build test nodes so check and gate tests are delayed"20:41
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-320:42
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-320:42
*** briancurtin has quit IRC20:42
*** jcoufal has quit IRC20:44
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-320:45
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-320:45
*** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-320:49
*** lcheng has quit IRC20:51
*** lcheng has joined #openstack-meeting-320:53
*** Longgeek_ has quit IRC20:54
*** mwagner_lap has quit IRC20:58
*** julim has quit IRC21:00
*** Youcef has quit IRC21:01
*** flaviof_zzz is now known as flaviof21:02
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting-321:11
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting-321:11
*** rfolco has quit IRC21:19
*** terryw has joined #openstack-meeting-321:22
*** otherwiseguy has quit IRC21:22
*** mfer has quit IRC21:23
*** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting-321:27
*** markmcclain has quit IRC21:28
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-321:33
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC21:34
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-321:34
*** markmcclain1 has quit IRC21:38
*** Sukhdev has quit IRC21:44
*** pballand has quit IRC21:45
*** thomasem has quit IRC21:48
*** rkukura has quit IRC21:53
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-321:54
*** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting-321:56
*** Longgeek has quit IRC21:58
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC22:00
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-322:01
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-322:04
-openstackstatus- NOTICE: zuul is working through a backlog of jobs due to an earlier problem with nodepool22:06
*** ChanServ changes topic to "zuul is working through a backlog of jobs due to an earlier problem with nodepool"22:06
*** shakamunyi has joined #openstack-meeting-322:10
*** shakamunyi has quit IRC22:15
*** yamamoto has quit IRC22:19
*** briancurtin has quit IRC22:23
*** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-322:24
*** nelsnelson has quit IRC22:25
*** banix has quit IRC22:29
*** Longgeek has quit IRC22:29
*** shakamunyi has joined #openstack-meeting-322:33
*** lcheng has quit IRC22:39
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-322:40
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-322:40
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting-322:43
*** briancurtin has quit IRC22:43
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-322:43
*** briancurtin has joined #openstack-meeting-322:43
*** briancurtin has quit IRC22:48
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-322:50
*** yamamoto has quit IRC22:54
*** rkukura has quit IRC22:57
*** pballand has quit IRC23:02
*** gduan has joined #openstack-meeting-323:04
*** Rajeev has quit IRC23:04
*** garyduan has quit IRC23:04
*** tomoe_ has quit IRC23:09
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC23:11
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting-323:12
*** rkukura has quit IRC23:13
*** david-lyle has quit IRC23:14
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-323:16
*** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-323:17
*** jamielenz is now known as jamielennox23:20
*** yamamoto has quit IRC23:21
*** samchoi has quit IRC23:29
*** eguz has quit IRC23:36
*** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-323:37
*** nati_ueno has quit IRC23:46
*** rkukura has joined #openstack-meeting-323:54
*** shakamunyi has quit IRC23:56

Generated by 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!