| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:02 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:03 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:06 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 00:09 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 00:12 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:23 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 00:24 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 00:24 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:24 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:25 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:25 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 00:26 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 00:29 | |
| *** tomoe_ has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** tomoe_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 00:46 | |
| *** tomoe_ has quit IRC | 00:50 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 00:50 | |
| *** seizadi1 has quit IRC | 01:09 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:10 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:10 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:13 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 01:15 | |
| *** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:15 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:16 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 01:20 | |
| *** cjellick has quit IRC | 01:31 | |
| *** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 01:53 | |
| *** eguz has quit IRC | 01:53 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 01:57 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:04 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 02:06 | |
| *** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:07 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 02:09 | |
| *** clu_ has quit IRC | 02:19 | |
| *** vkmc has quit IRC | 02:46 | |
| *** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:53 | |
| *** armax has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 02:54 | |
| *** Sukhdev_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 03:04 | |
| *** Sukhdev has quit IRC | 03:07 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 03:08 | |
| *** Sukhdev_ has quit IRC | 03:08 | |
| *** pballand has quit IRC | 03:16 | |
| *** seizadi has quit IRC | 03:32 | |
| *** sankarshan_away is now known as sankarshan | 03:32 | |
| *** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away | 03:32 | |
| *** kashyap has quit IRC | 03:39 | |
| *** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 03:58 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:00 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:06 | |
| *** flaviof is now known as flaviof_zzz | 04:08 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:31 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 04:37 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:40 | |
| *** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 04:51 | |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 04:52 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 04:52 | |
| *** jgrimm has quit IRC | 05:01 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:13 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 05:15 | |
| *** cloudtoad has quit IRC | 05:15 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:15 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 05:23 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 05:28 | |
| *** tmazur has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:28 | |
| *** k4n0 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:30 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:36 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:39 | |
| *** dconde has quit IRC | 05:43 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 05:45 | |
| *** clu_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:49 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 05:50 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 05:50 | |
| *** clu_ has quit IRC | 05:56 | |
| *** Sukhdev has quit IRC | 06:01 | |
| *** stanzgy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:02 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:03 | |
| *** HenryG_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:09 | |
| *** tmazur has quit IRC | 06:11 | |
| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 06:12 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:14 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 06:20 | |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:40 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 06:44 | |
| *** flaper87|afk is now known as flaper87 | 06:44 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 06:47 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 06:48 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:04 | |
| *** seizadi has quit IRC | 07:10 | |
| *** jamiehannaford has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:27 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 07:29 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:29 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:31 | |
| *** scheuran has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:31 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 07:34 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 07:45 | |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 07:46 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:46 | |
| *** Youcef has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:48 | |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 07:51 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 07:54 | |
| *** Youcef has quit IRC | 08:00 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:09 | |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 08:10 | |
| *** tmazur has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:20 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 08:30 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:30 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 08:35 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:45 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 08:50 | |
| *** tmazur has quit IRC | 08:55 | |
| *** tmazur has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 09:07 | |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 09:15 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 09:21 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 09:30 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 09:35 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 09:38 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 09:43 | |
| *** pkoniszewski has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 09:44 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 09:52 | |
| *** jeblair has quit IRC | 10:00 | |
| *** sankarshan_away has quit IRC | 10:02 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 10:06 | |
| *** jeblair has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:07 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:07 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 10:12 | |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 10:19 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:22 | |
| *** jeblair has quit IRC | 10:23 | |
| *** bradjone has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:26 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 10:27 | |
| *** jeblair has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:30 | |
| *** flaviof_zzz is now known as flaviof | 10:35 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:37 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 10:39 | |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 10:41 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 10:42 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 10:42 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 10:43 | |
| *** stanzgy has quit IRC | 10:48 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:08 | |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:09 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 11:10 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:10 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:22 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:26 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 11:26 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:40 | |
| *** sankarshan has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:41 | |
| *** sankarshan is now known as sankarshan_away | 11:41 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 11:44 | |
| *** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 11:47 | |
| *** jamielennox is now known as jamielennox|away | 12:02 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 12:02 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 12:21 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:22 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:22 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 12:27 | |
| *** cjellick has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:32 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:32 | |
| *** flaviof is now known as flaviof_zzz | 12:40 | |
| *** david-lyle has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:40 | |
| *** bradjone has quit IRC | 12:42 | |
| *** bradjone has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:43 | |
| *** david-lyle has quit IRC | 12:45 | |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:50 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 12:52 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:53 | |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 12:53 | |
| *** scheuran has quit IRC | 12:54 | |
| *** mfer has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:02 | |
| *** salv-orlando has quit IRC | 13:02 | |
| *** peristeri has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:10 | |
| *** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:11 | |
| *** cbader has quit IRC | 13:16 | |
| *** flaviof_zzz is now known as flaviof | 13:16 | |
| *** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:21 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:22 | |
| *** lblanchard has quit IRC | 13:22 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:23 | |
| *** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:27 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 13:27 | |
| *** haleyb has quit IRC | 13:36 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 13:41 | |
| *** armax has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:44 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:55 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 13:58 | |
| *** haleyb has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:01 | |
| *** salv-orlando has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:12 | |
| *** thangp has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:13 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 14:17 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:17 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:18 | |
| *** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:19 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:22 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 14:24 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:24 | |
| *** jlibosva has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:25 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 14:28 | |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 14:29 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 14:29 | |
| *** Longgeek has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:30 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 14:36 | |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:37 | |
| *** Basil has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:42 | |
| *** Basil is now known as Guest5930 | 14:42 | |
| *** Basil_Saito has quit IRC | 14:43 | |
| *** Guest5930 is now known as Basil_Saito | 14:43 | |
| *** thangp has quit IRC | 14:44 | |
| *** thangp has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:44 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:48 | |
| *** Basil_Saito has quit IRC | 14:51 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:51 | |
| *** Basil_Saito has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:51 | |
| *** flaper87 is now known as flaper87|afk | 14:54 | |
| *** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:54 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:55 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:58 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 14:59 | |
| *** jgrimm has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:00 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:01 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:07 | |
| *** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:12 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:19 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:22 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 15:27 | |
| *** seizadi has quit IRC | 15:27 | |
| *** samchoi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:27 | |
| *** dconde has quit IRC | 15:35 | |
| *** rhagarty has quit IRC | 15:36 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:36 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:37 | |
| *** dconde has quit IRC | 15:38 | |
| *** samchoi has quit IRC | 15:43 | |
| *** scheuran has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:45 | |
| *** pkoniszewski has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:55 | |
| *** rhagarty has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:57 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 15:59 | |
| *** jlibosva has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| *** k4n0 has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| *** pballand has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| *** tmazur has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| *** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:05 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:10 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 16:11 | |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 16:20 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 16:26 | |
| *** fungi has quit IRC | 16:26 | |
| *** tmazur has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:26 | |
| *** tjones has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:27 | |
| *** fungi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:27 | |
| *** mspreitz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:28 | |
| tjones | #startmeeting novabugscrub | 16:34 |
|---|---|---|
| openstack | Meeting started Wed Aug 13 16:34:16 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is tjones. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 16:34 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 16:34 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: novabugscrub)" | 16:34 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'novabugscrub' | 16:34 |
| *** cbader has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:37 | |
| *** jamiehannaford has quit IRC | 16:39 | |
| mspreitz | What's the etiquette here? I found a bug that I think is kind of important, and its importance is not marked in launchpad. | 16:40 |
| *** alexsyip has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:42 | |
| mspreitz | tjones: What's the etiquette here? I found a bug that I think is kind of important, and its importance is not marked in launchpad. | 16:44 |
| tjones | sorry - was doing something else ;-) | 16:44 |
| tjones | can you share the link - lets take a look? | 16:44 |
| mspreitz | https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1327406 | 16:44 |
| mspreitz | The initial description is long and unclear, but I think I have a short sharp statement now | 16:45 |
| mspreitz | The problem concerns Flat and FlatDHCP network managers in Nova networking | 16:45 |
| mspreitz | the list-networks operation does not return any networks, if not done by an admin | 16:45 |
| mspreitz | that is, if a non-admin user invokes it, the result is zero networks | 16:46 |
| tjones | yes it's very long ;-) | 16:46 |
| mspreitz | At first I was unsure of what to blame | 16:46 |
| mspreitz | Now I think it is clear | 16:46 |
| tjones | lets mark it high them - sounds like something a customer could easily hit | 16:46 |
| tjones | your patch was abandoned though? | 16:46 |
| mspreitz | Yes, in fact I was astonished the gate is not already hitting it | 16:46 |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:47 | |
| mspreitz | I submitted two patches, the first abandoned, the second is in play | 16:47 |
| tjones | ok good | 16:47 |
| mspreitz | Thers is also a patch adding a tempest test that exposes the bug | 16:47 |
| tjones | i've set it to high prio | 16:47 |
| mspreitz | thanks | 16:47 |
| tjones | sure | 16:47 |
| tjones | no complex etiquette here ;-) | 16:48 |
| mspreitz | great | 16:48 |
| mspreitz | With a metric ton of bugs, there easily could be a lot of process... | 16:48 |
| mspreitz | thanks for the progress on this one | 16:49 |
| *** Longgeek has quit IRC | 16:57 | |
| *** alexpilotti has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 16:57 | |
| *** chuckC has quit IRC | 17:01 | |
| tjones | sure | 17:02 |
| tjones | #endmeeting | 17:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 17:02 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Wed Aug 13 17:02:13 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 17:02 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/novabugscrub/2014/novabugscrub.2014-08-13-16.34.html | 17:02 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/novabugscrub/2014/novabugscrub.2014-08-13-16.34.txt | 17:02 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/novabugscrub/2014/novabugscrub.2014-08-13-16.34.log.html | 17:02 |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:06 | |
| *** scheuran has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 17:08 | |
| *** tmazur has quit IRC | 17:08 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:11 | |
| *** Sukhdev has quit IRC | 17:12 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 17:18 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 17:19 | |
| *** anil_rao has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:22 | |
| *** ycombinator has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:22 | |
| *** LouisF has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:24 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:26 | |
| *** vinay_yadhav has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:27 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 17:29 | |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:30 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 17:30 | |
| *** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:30 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | hi! | 17:31 |
| s3wong | hello | 17:31 |
| marios | o/ | 17:31 |
| vinay_yadhav | Hi! | 17:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | lets get started | 17:31 |
| * pcm_ lurking | 17:31 | |
| *** songole has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:31 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #startmeeting Networking Advanced Services | 17:31 |
| openstack | Meeting started Wed Aug 13 17:31:32 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:31 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 17:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:31 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_advanced_services' | 17:31 |
| *** eguz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:31 | |
| dougwig | o/ | 17:31 |
| songole | Hello | 17:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #chairs s3wong vinay_yadhav marios pcm_ dougwig songole | 17:32 |
| marios | lol :) | 17:32 |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 17:32 | |
| marios | getting ready? | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | there, just in case i disconnect ;-) | 17:32 |
| *** hemanthravi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:32 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | sorry for the fiasco last week with my connection | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i am still on the same connection though :-P | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hopefully better this time | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so like last time, lets first check if we can get the PTL to provide us some high level guidance on the priority and/or feasibility of making progress with the approved blueprints | 17:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mestery: hi, there? | 17:33 |
| *** yyywu has quit IRC | 17:34 | |
| s3wong | around 12:30 central time, imagine he is on lunch or something :-) | 17:35 |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: o | 17:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok | 17:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | yeah perhaps he is not around | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | in that case lets stick to our regular agenda | 17:36 |
| LouisF | SumitNaiksatam: are any BPs going to be moved to Kilo? | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | LouisF: thats what i wanted to check with mestery | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | LouisF: not that i am aware of or has been publicly conveyed | 17:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i guess in the absence of any such direction, we continue to on our path | 17:37 |
| songole | SumitNaiksatam: how many days do we have before feature freeze? | 17:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | songole: any patched pertaining to new features have to be pushed to gerrit by aug 21st | 17:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *patches | 17:38 |
| songole | ok. got it. | 17:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | patches will be reviewed and can be revised after that date until the end of J3 (which i believe is Sept 4th) | 17:38 |
| marios | SumitNaiksatam: that means 'in review' and not 'merged' right? - right you just answered me | 17:38 |
| *** tjones has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:38 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: right | 17:38 |
| marios | i spot a loophole ;) | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so if you have a blueprint that is approved and dont submit a patch for review by aug 21st, you are out of Juno | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: go ahead | 17:39 |
| marios | heh, no i meant 'in review' could mean anything. like a part of the blueprint | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: yeah :-) | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: but the thing is that if its partially implemented, the chances that the review for the complete implementation will finish by sept 4th are minimal | 17:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | there will be huge deluge of patches and hence review pressure for the two weeks following aug 21st | 17:40 |
| marios | right | 17:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and if something does not get reviewed and merged by step 4th, then its likely to be out of J3 | 17:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | barring exceptions | 17:41 |
| *** thomasem_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:41 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | however bug fixes can continue to be submitted | 17:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | however, even there the criteria will get stricter on the severity of bugs | 17:42 |
| *** natarajk has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:42 | |
| *** badveli has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:42 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok any more questions on the timelines? | 17:42 |
| *** thomasem has quit IRC | 17:43 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Flavors | 17:43 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Flavors (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:43 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | is enikanorov_ or markmcclain1 here? | 17:43 |
| enikanorov_ | i'm here | 17:43 |
| enikanorov_ | hi | 17:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | enikanorov_: hi | 17:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | enikanorov_: so our obligatory question, any progress on the blueprint? :-) | 17:44 |
| enikanorov_ | no, unfortunately, other than fixing reviewers comments | 17:44 |
| enikanorov_ | (I mean in impl patch) | 17:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | enikanorov_: yeah, i was just going to ask that | 17:44 |
| *** celttechie has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:44 | |
| *** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:44 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105982 | 17:45 |
| *** marun has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:45 | |
| markmcclain1 | SumitNaiksatam: sorry the policy mess has consumed all of my available cycles | 17:45 |
| enikanorov_ | if markmcclain1 is willing to handover spec patch to me, i will gladly work on it | 17:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: i saw that coming :-) | 17:45 |
| markmcclain1 | hoping we get that resolved shortly | 17:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | enikanorov_: ok, i dont think i or anyone here is in a position to mediate | 17:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: it seems enikanorov_ has cycles | 17:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: in case you feel comfortable, he has a suggestion | 17:46 |
| markmcclain1 | yeah need to revisit only because the last time we ventured too far down a path in wrong direction don't want to repeat | 17:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | enikanorov_: any questions for enikanorov_ on the impl patch? | 17:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | or for markmcclain1 on the spec patch | 17:48 |
| enikanorov_ | markmcclain1: are you referring to providers now? | 17:49 |
| enikanorov_ | (as 'wrong direction') | 17:49 |
| enikanorov_ | I'm asking because i saw lbaass subteam discussing still using provider attribute in the new API | 17:50 |
| enikanorov_ | it's better if we could avoid that | 17:50 |
| dougwig | enikanorov_: that discussing was relevant to flavors as well. it wasn't provider specific. we can talk offline. | 17:51 |
| dougwig | /discussing/discussion/ | 17:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok anything else on flavors? | 17:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | enikanorov_: thanks | 17:53 |
| enikanorov_ | u're welcome :) | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Service base and insertion | 17:53 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Service base and insertion (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:53 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: kanzhe: there? | 17:53 |
| s3wong | Just a short update. WIP patch is up: https://review.openstack.org/113975 | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: oh ince | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *nice | 17:54 |
| s3wong | as it doesn't have DB migration script, it will fail a bunch of CIs and gate tests | 17:54 |
| marios | s3wong: great | 17:54 |
| s3wong | but I will work on that soon(ish) | 17:54 |
| *** chuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:54 | |
| marun | How on earth did this spec get approved? | 17:54 |
| marios | for the record, my wip is still at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/108049/ (vpn), but haven't worked on it this week | 17:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: sorry for being pedantic on process, can you add the link to the wiki page: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/AdvancedServices/JunoPlan | 17:54 |
| marun | I think it needs further discussion. | 17:54 |
| s3wong | it is only API and DB for service interface; so the plugin and even service base work has NOT been done | 17:55 |
| s3wong | so a lot of work ahead, still | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: yeah great, was going to check next? | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | next? -> next | 17:55 |
| *** Swami has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 17:55 | |
| marun | s3wong: So, why don't we defer to kilo since it's unlikely to be ready in the next 9 days? | 17:55 |
| s3wong | marun: I will defer that decision to the rest of the team | 17:56 |
| marios | SumitNaiksatam: so i actually wanted to bring this up - not sure if we need to defer, but I think we need some clarity (I was kinda hoping on comments to my wip that would perhaps help clarify things for me) | 17:57 |
| marios | err sorry that wasn't meant just for sumit | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: yes | 17:57 |
| marios | so a couple days ago i tried to collect the threads. we've been tlaking about this in the last 3 meetings | 17:57 |
| s3wong | if marios , kanzhe, SridharRamaswamy, and SumitNaiksatam are all in agreement with that, I have no objection | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so there are two aspects at play here | 17:57 |
| marios | i looked back over the logs and i'd say at least we need to update the spec to clarify some things | 17:57 |
| marios | SumitNaiksatam: sorry, go ahead | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | one is the direction that the project wants to take | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hence wanted to check with the PTL right at the outset | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we tried to do that at the beginning of the last meeting as well | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | currently as it stands, the bp spec was approved for J3 | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the second aspect is about the confidence of the author | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | in finishing the patch | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i believe that the requirement in that the patch should be out of WIP by aug 21st | 17:59 |
| marios | SumitNaiksatam: there's a third aspect i believe. | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: sure, please go ahead | 18:00 |
| marios | SumitNaiksatam: which is what i was trying to say above. the whole 'defer entry' with the messaging isn't described in the spec | 18:00 |
| marios | (as well as some minor details like the db migration aspecs, keeping certain fields that we said we'd nuke) | 18:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: ‘defer entry’? | 18:00 |
| marios | sec, i will copy/paste, apolgoies in advance: | 18:01 |
| marios | 17:50:39 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: have we made a decision on how the serviceInterfacePlugin will get the service instance UUID yet? | 18:01 |
| marios | 17:52:57 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: we can maintain a table in the new service insertion plugin, that will hold a reference to the uuids against their service type | 18:01 |
| marios | (from 2014-07-30-17.31.log.html) | 18:01 |
| marun | I'm having a hard time understanding why service insertion should be a part of Neutron. | 18:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marios: ah, i got a little confused by the ‘defer’ part | 18:02 |
| marios | yeah, it started off being described that way in the meeting before that | 18:02 |
| marun | All the discussion around NFV has made it clear that we don't want to focus on orchestration at that level. | 18:02 |
| marun | We need to support it out-of-band, sure. | 18:02 |
| marun | But doing it in-tree? | 18:02 |
| marun | That was agreed on at summit as being a non-starter, at least for now. | 18:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: what was agreed at the summit as being non-starter? | 18:03 |
| marun | The fact that none of the spec approvers were in the room at the summit session is pretty telling. | 18:03 |
| marun | And I think good grounds for revoking approval. | 18:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: which room? | 18:03 |
| marun | Neutron room, last session. | 18:03 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: or where you there? | 18:04 |
| marun | where -> were | 18:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: no i wasnt there, i had communitcated to the PTL that i had travel plans which could not be changed at the last minute | 18:04 |
| dougwig | i think everyone was on planes home for that meeting; i'm not sure that's indicative of anything. | 18:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: at least i was not aware of any decisions that were made during that meeting that were made public | 18:04 |
| marun | Regardless of why, I think the validity of the spec is nonetheless in question. | 18:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: was this conveyed to the mailing list or captured in any etherpad? | 18:05 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: Given that there has been continual rejection of the ideas conveyed in the spec in successive summits, I'm not sure why you would take spec approval as achievement of consensus around the issue. | 18:06 |
| marun | And I seriously doubt it comes as a surprise to you. | 18:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: reject of the idea? by who? | 18:06 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: And yes, it was captured in the summit etherpad. | 18:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *rejection | 18:06 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/servicevm | 18:07 |
| hemanthravi | marun, though i'm not a spec approver I was present in the last session and don't remember the decision reg service insertion. will take a look at the etherpad | 18:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | why isnt the spec review process being followed if you are fundamentally in disagreement with the idea? | 18:07 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I think you are confusing approval of a spec with consensus. | 18:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i am not talking about approval or consensus | 18:08 |
| emagana | SumitNaiksatam: I think this time the spec process was not mature for Neutron and we are realizing that. Hopefully, next cycle will be better. | 18:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i am just saying, if you had concerns, why werent they expressed on the blueprint spec during the review process | 18:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: the etherpad you point to is about Service VMs | 18:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: there was an entire design summit session which was on the topics that we are discussing in this meeting | 18:09 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I'm not sure about you, but there are more specs than anyone can cover. | 18:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: we are not discussing service VM related insertion in this meeting | 18:09 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: insertion is the same issue in both casese | 18:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: hence we have sub teams to scale the problem | 18:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | or rather solution to the problem | 18:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: not quite | 18:10 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: The discussion there made it clear that while we need to support the capability to allow unfiltered or trunked ports, that we did not want to be deciding how that plugging took place within neutron. | 18:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: can you explain why its the same in both cases? | 18:10 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: The subteams are still responsible to the community as whole. | 18:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: of course | 18:11 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: There is no good excuse for implementing the wrong things. | 18:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: we are not discussing anything related to trunking in this spec | 18:11 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: If we figure out later in the cycle, it sucks. Ideally we would figure it out as soon as possible. | 18:11 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I gave those only as examples of things needed to support the service vm use-cases. | 18:11 |
| marios | marun: apologies if this is a silly question, but have you read the spec in question? it is quite simple in scope, just trying to introduce a single 'context' that captures where a service 'exists' (e.g. the router a vpn service is associated with) in a centralised manner | 18:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: yes, and hence it was proposed in the design summit session and discussed during the design summit | 18:12 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: But the issue at hand - whether we need to support service insertion in neutron - is the same. | 18:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: please see marios’ comment, i think you are misunderstanding the spec | 18:12 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: It should be done outside of the tree to prove its worth before we waste time experimenting in the tree. | 18:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: the team has already iterated once on this idea during the icehouse cycle | 18:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: this is enhancement of that idea | 18:13 |
| marios | marun: it _was_ more complex before but was simplified quite a bit in order to land | 18:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: and in my opinion not a new idea that is in early stage of experimentation | 18:14 |
| *** thomasem_ has quit IRC | 18:14 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i am still unable to find any where in the etherpad where this bp spec or the service insertion problem that is being attempted to be solved here is being referenced | 18:15 |
| hemanthravi | and serves to provide a common framework for insertion being impl independently by services such as fwaas, vpnaas | 18:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: besides, this is one blueprint of a big framework | 18:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: a separate blueprint was registered for defining that framework | 18:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: that was approved by the PTL as welll among other reviewers | 18:16 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I like how you always seem to fall back on procedural arguments. | 18:16 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: Rather than technical ones. | 18:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: this team hasnt gotten any direction that any of that is invalid or misguided effort until your opinion here | 18:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: what is the technical issue? | 18:17 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: If we are going to go that route, I would point out that all approvers of the spec in question work for the same company. | 18:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: which spec? | 18:17 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: Which doesn't imply to me that we are getting the core oversight that we would expect. | 18:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i am talking about the umbrella spec | 18:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92200 | 18:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | this blueprint was added per feedback from the PTL | 18:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | that the whole community needs to be aware of the general direction we are taking here | 18:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | this was also in response to the issues raised in the LBaaS discussion | 18:19 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: this spec: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93128/22 | 18:19 |
| SumitNaiksatam | that the necessary clean interfaces do not exist on the neutron side to achive integration of services | 18:19 |
| * markmcclain1 reads scrollback | 18:19 | |
| emagana | emagana: uff! | 18:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: so what is your comfort level with getting this patch out of WIP? | 18:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: and is Kanzhe back from vacation now? | 18:20 |
| markmcclain1 | Ok… so we're 9days out | 18:21 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: I will be working on this and GBP driver full time over this and next week | 18:21 |
| markmcclain1 | the majority of the neutron core team has been focused on scaling, stability, and parity | 18:21 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: I see Kanzhe online (via Google chat), but haven't heard from him yet | 18:21 |
| markmcclain1 | and it seems that we're unlikely to get this delivered for Juno | 18:22 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: i would like to see a direction from the PTL on this | 18:22 |
| markmcclain1 | also I'm not sure that the LBaaS team is even aware that this deprecates part of their API | 18:22 |
| hemanthravi | markmcclain1, could we make that decision 8/21 based on the readiness of the patch | 18:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | however it seems unfair to make this judgement even before we reach the FFP deadline | 18:23 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: I think your attempts to appeal to a higher power are in vain. | 18:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | marun: i am not trying to appeal to anyone | 18:23 |
| marun | SumitNaiksatam: We still don't have parity with Nova. | 18:23 |
| markmcclain1 | SumitNaiksatam: why do we have to have mestery weigh in on everything? the feature is still in WIP and no of the discussion here seems to indicate that it will leave that status w/o heroic effort before Tuesday | 18:24 |
| *** krotscheck has quit IRC | 18:24 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: hence checking with the author of the patch himself | 18:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: if he/they dont feel confident, then there is nothing to be argued or for against | 18:25 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: markmcclain1: so I am still committed to get it ready before next Thursday | 18:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: it is always the case more work gets done closer to the milestone | 18:25 |
| *** krotscheck has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:25 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | that said i dont have any interest in wasting anyone’s time here | 18:25 |
| markmcclain1 | I totally understand that work gets done close to deadline | 18:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hence we sought clarification last week as well, whether this is going to get blocked by a -2 down the line | 18:26 |
| markmcclain1 | but posting something that deprecates another team's api so close to milestone-3 is asking for trouble | 18:26 |
| s3wong | but if the cores consensus is this won't land anyway, please let us know now | 18:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | if that plan is already in place, then its not work pursuing this effort | 18:26 |
| *** beagles has quit IRC | 18:26 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: i am not sure i understand the part of about deprecate another team’s api | 18:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: this is certainly new information to me or the team here | 18:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: which team’s API does this deprecate? | 18:27 |
| markmcclain1 | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93128/22 | 18:27 |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 18:27 | |
| markmcclain1 | line 318 | 18:28 |
| markmcclain1 | also the lbaas team has been iterating all summer on new drivers that take none of thing into account | 18:28 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: ok | 18:28 |
| *** SridarK has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:29 | |
| *** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:29 | |
| markmcclain1 | there is clearly duplicative and confusing work occurring because of the two silos | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: my understanding was that the lbaas team is represented here, and also this team is represented on the lbaas side | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i believe dougwig is part of the lbaas representation here | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and s3wong was part of the representation of this team on the lbaas side | 18:29 |
| marios | markmcclain1: SumitNaiksatam: to markmcclain1's point, the changes for the services aren't actually going to happen (I mean for ex we already agreed that for vpn, we won't be nuking the router attribute as was stated in the spec) | 18:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i dont think any issues have been brought up in this forum about this deprecation statement | 18:30 |
| dougwig | sorry, i only attend sporadically, and have really only been paying attention to flavors. i can add some time, but i'm not currently up to speed. | 18:30 |
| markmcclain1 | obviously cramming this in a the last moment is a bad idea | 18:30 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: markmcclain1: right, and I did go to the LBaaS mid-cycle and had discussions with blogan and susanne on this | 18:30 |
| markmcclain1 | I don't want folks expending superhuman effort for something we have reconciled ahead of time | 18:31 |
| markmcclain1 | s/have/have not/ | 18:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: again, if you have already decided to -2 this, then there is not point in pursuing further, however please do not mischaracterize this as being crammed at the last minute | 18:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | not -> no | 18:31 |
| markmcclain1 | s3wong: to my knowledge none of the planned v2 specs reference this | 18:31 |
| markmcclain1 | SumitNaiksatam: I haven't decided to -2 this because the code is WIP | 18:31 |
| markmcclain1 | which is why I'm asking the hard question of whether we can resolve these issues in time | 18:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: but i think we do get the hint here | 18:32 |
| s3wong | markmcclain1: correct, due to their code being ready by J-2 (earlier schedule) while ours is at J-3 | 18:32 |
| markmcclain1 | I'd hate for devs to kill themselves implementing for use in the review period to realize we have a bunch of ill fitting parts | 18:32 |
| dougwig | markmcclain1, s3wong: correct, v2 hasn't taken this into account yet. i think we likely did talk about it, but it didn't make it to any code. | 18:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: markmcclain1 its also a chicken and egg problem | 18:33 |
| markmcclain1 | we went down this road before with provider networks and l3 routers | 18:33 |
| s3wong | dougwig: correct | 18:33 |
| markmcclain1 | delivering two incompatible features took 2+ cycles to clean up | 18:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok just a time check, we have run out of time for this meeting | 18:34 |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:34 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | can we take an action item to check between s3wong dougwig markmcclain1 if this breaks anything on lbaas? | 18:34 |
| emagana | I would love to see devs helping on the priority staff.. nova parity, migration, even docs! | 18:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and decide whether to proceed or not? | 18:34 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: yes, i'd be happy to discuss with s3wong (or anyone else) offline. | 18:35 |
| *** natarajk1 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:35 | |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: sure | 18:35 |
| s3wong | dougwig: great | 18:35 |
| *** hemanth_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:35 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: sound okay | 18:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ? | 18:35 |
| emagana | Please, use the neutron channel for those "offline" discussions | 18:35 |
| *** pcm__ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:35 | |
| dougwig | i'd prefer to use #openstack-lbaas, as it's less noisy. | 18:35 |
| dougwig | and also logged. | 18:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Open Discussion | 18:36 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 18:36 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | sorry we could not bring up any of the other agenda items | 18:36 |
| markmcclain1 | yeah just really want to make sure we're all on same page and wasting resources | 18:36 |
| emagana | dougwig: I have so many channels open that I can't keep up | 18:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | markmcclain1: absolutely | 18:36 |
| markmcclain1 | *not wasting resources* | 18:36 |
| *** julim_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:36 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | any parting thoughts anyone? | 18:36 |
| *** anil_rao has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:36 | |
| dougwig | s3wong: do you have time in about an hour? | 18:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks all for joining | 18:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #endmeeting | 18:37 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 18:37 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Wed Aug 13 18:37:19 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:37 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-08-13-17.31.html | 18:37 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-08-13-17.31.txt | 18:37 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-08-13-17.31.log.html | 18:37 |
| s3wong | dougwig: you are Pacific time, right, how about around 2pm? | 18:37 |
| *** vinay_yadhav has quit IRC | 18:37 | |
| *** songole has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:37 | |
| marios | night all | 18:37 |
| dougwig | i'm mountain, but 3pm mountain/2pm pacific works. | 18:37 |
| s3wong | dougwig: perfect | 18:38 |
| hemanth_ | fwiw, i think a common framework for service insertion is much needed and most networks will have services deployed | 18:38 |
| s3wong | dougwig: #openstack-lbaas or #openstack-neutron? | 18:38 |
| dougwig | either is fine. you'll get more lbaas input on the lbaas channel. most of them don't monitor neutron. | 18:38 |
| s3wong | dougwig: OK, let's do it on #openstack-lbaas then | 18:38 |
| s3wong | dougwig: talk to you soon | 18:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: gduan badveli natarajk: there? | 18:39 |
| SridarK | hemanth_: +1 - we should not think of this as a feature but rather as base infra to get services on | 18:39 |
| s3wong | hemanth_: if you want to, you can join there too | 18:39 |
| SridarK | Hi | 18:39 |
| badveli | hello all | 18:39 |
| natarajk1 | hi | 18:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok lets get started | 18:39 |
| dougwig | s3wong: ttyl. | 18:39 |
| hemanth_ | s3wong, when is this lost my connection for a bit | 18:39 |
| dougwig | 2pm pacific, #openstack-lbaas | 18:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #startmeeting Networking FWaaS | 18:40 |
| openstack | Meeting started Wed Aug 13 18:40:15 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:40 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:40 |
| s3wong | hemanth_: well, we can talk to the lbaas folks at 2pm if you are available | 18:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)" | 18:40 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_fwaas' | 18:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Action item review | 18:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Action item review (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)" | 18:40 | |
| hemanth_ | s3wong, will join that | 18:40 |
| s3wong | hemanth_: great, ttyl | 18:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i think webex meeting with DVR team is done, SridarK thanks for following up | 18:41 |
| *** hemanthravi has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** dconde has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** natarajk has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| *** pcm_ has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| SridarK | yes SumitNaiksatam - good mtg | 18:41 |
| *** LouisF has quit IRC | 18:41 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | is the wiki page for FWaaS support for DVR up? | 18:41 |
| SridarK | we can cover discussion on that topic | 18:41 |
| badveli | Sumit swami mentioned about the migration path | 18:41 |
| badveli | sridar and myself are looking at | 18:42 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: no sorry not yet too many balls in the air - we will get this done soon | 18:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: ok | 18:42 |
| badveli | also we get info on simulating evrryting in a single node | 18:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: hang on | 18:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #action SridarK badveli to populate wiki page for FWaaS DVR support | 18:42 |
| badveli | sumit: we will do | 18:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: thanks | 18:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we also had action item for posting patch, SridarK did that, thanks! | 18:44 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes done np | 18:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: can you update https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/FWaaS/JunoPlan | 18:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | with link to patch? | 18:45 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: will do so right away | 18:45 |
| badveli | Sumit: we will refine it based on our discussion with dvr team | 18:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: thanks, i was trying to past the link to the patch here :-) | 18:45 |
| Swami | hi | 18:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://review.openstack.org/113359 | 18:46 |
| SridarK | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113359/ | 18:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: hi | 18:46 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: :-) | 18:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok i think we are done with the action item review | 18:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | since Swami is here, lets jump to the DVR topic, and then we can circle back to the bugs | 18:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic FWaaS support for DVR | 18:47 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "FWaaS support for DVR (Meeting topic: Networking FWaaS)" | 18:47 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://review.openstack.org/113359 | 18:47 |
| *** alexsyip has quit IRC | 18:47 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: you want to summarize from yesterday’s meeting with DVR team? | 18:47 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: sure | 18:48 |
| SridarK | we discussed overall approach | 18:48 |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
| SridarK | step1: get the network node done - currently in first patch | 18:48 |
| SridarK | comments to change the demux based on the distributed flag in router info | 18:49 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: this is for the SNAT traffic? | 18:49 |
| SridarK | step 2 on Compute node changes to make sure we do not break E - W traffic | 18:49 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes N - S traffic thru the snat NS | 18:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: which step covers the floating IP? | 18:50 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: we are targeting fixed ip now as in our current model | 18:50 |
| SridarK | once we have that figured we can see if we can attack floating ip as well | 18:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: ok | 18:51 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: The North-South has two parts, one for the VM traffic that goes through the SNAT namespace and the other FIPs assigned VM traffic that goes through the FIP namespace. | 18:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ok thanks | 18:52 |
| Swami | So I think SridharK is working on the first item right now. | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: but the FIP translation happens on the compute node, right? | 18:52 |
| SridarK | Swami: yes | 18:52 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: Yes in the IR of the compute node. | 18:52 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: Swami that we target in the step 2 | 18:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: SridarK so we will attempt that as step 2 or 3? | 18:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: yeah my question | 18:53 |
| SridarK | i think we will get fixed ip working first | 18:53 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: i think we can apply rules in a way so we either get post or pre NAT | 18:54 |
| *** krotscheck has quit IRC | 18:54 | |
| SridarK | one suggestion was to bind that to the rfp- i/f which is the path to the FIP NS | 18:54 |
| *** krotscheck has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:55 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 18:55 | |
| *** eguz has quit IRC | 18:56 | |
| SridarK | Our immediate action is to use Swami 's suggestion of getting a single node install (which simulates the compute node as well) - to play with the IR and FIP NS interactions | 18:56 |
| SridarK | once we have a handle on that we can make a call on the Floating IP | 18:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: that sounds good | 18:56 |
| SridarK | over all good mtg and thanks to the DVR folks for being really supportive and helpful | 18:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: SridarK badveli are we on the same page on this? | 18:57 |
| badveli | yes | 18:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | l also wanted to check with armax since he was included on the thread by mestery | 18:58 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: We are on the same page. | 18:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: thanks for the help | 18:58 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: +1 on that | 18:58 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: sorry folks I wasn’t paying attention | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: please let us know if you are in agreement with the approach that is being taken here | 18:59 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: what can I do for you? | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: yeah sure | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: :-) | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: just wanted to make sure you are in the loop as well | 18:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: mestery included you on the thread regarding the FWaaS support for DVR | 18:59 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: oh right | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and the FWaaS team has been in discussion with the DVR team on this | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we had a call yesterday | 19:00 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: I am on the review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113359/ | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | to sync up on the progress so far and the path forward | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: yes, great | 19:00 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: is it good to review/play with | 19:00 |
| armax | ? | 19:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: ^^^ | 19:00 |
| SridarK | armax: not yet still WIP | 19:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | armax: i believe not right away | 19:01 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: we’re definitely looking at fwaas | 19:01 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: in the dvr case there are tempest failures that I haven’t looked at | 19:01 |
| armax | SumitNaiksatam: but I was hoping that SridarK’s changes might help address them | 19:01 |
| SridarK | armax: we had a mtg set up earlier - pls let me know in case i should include u in any offline calls that we may have | 19:01 |
| armax | SridarK, SumitNaiksatam: posting ‘check experimental’ on the above mentioned patch should give you a clue on the effects of your patch on DVR | 19:02 |
| armax | SridarK: that should get some pressure off from manual testing | 19:02 |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:02 | |
| armax | SridarK: feel free to keep me in the loop, I cannot guarantee I’ll be able to respond promptly…I am drowning over here :) | 19:02 |
| SridarK | armax: u were really quick to add that thanks even b4 i could mark it WIP :-) | 19:02 |
| SridarK | armax: understood will do | 19:02 |
| armax | SridarK: momentary lapse of a reason ;) | 19:03 |
| SridarK | armax: u give away ur age referring to some Pink Floyd y stuff :-) | 19:03 |
| armax | SridarK: are you saying that I am old? | 19:03 |
| armax | :) | 19:03 |
| SridarK | :-) | 19:03 |
| armax | I guess you must be too ;) | 19:04 |
| SridarK | armax: my hairline gives that away | 19:04 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: sorry back to mtg | 19:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok great, lets move on wise old men! :-P | 19:04 |
| armax | SridarK: don’t even get me started on hairline, I am not coping well with my hair loss, but yes back to business | 19:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: how is the set up coming along? | 19:05 |
| badveli | i am trying to follow sami suggestions | 19:05 |
| badveli | sorry swami suggestions | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: ok | 19:05 |
| badveli | simulating in a single node | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: sorry i cut you off earlier | 19:05 |
| badveli | no problem | 19:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: if you dont mind, can you please provide that update again? | 19:06 |
| badveli | there is another thing that swami had braught up yesterday | 19:06 |
| badveli | the migration | 19:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: ok | 19:06 |
| badveli | if user converts a router to dvr on the fly | 19:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so migration of an existing fwaas installation to one with DVR? | 19:07 |
| badveli | yes | 19:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: ok | 19:07 |
| badveli | we need some mechanism to listen to | 19:07 |
| badveli | currently we listen only to router add | 19:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: listen to what? | 19:08 |
| badveli | we do not act on the router updates | 19:08 |
| badveli | we do not have a way to know it | 19:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: yes | 19:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | however, we have not explicitly stated that we will support migration in our spec | 19:08 |
| badveli | we need a mechanism first to know about this | 19:08 |
| *** mspreitz has quit IRC | 19:09 | |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: Yes you have not stated in your spec. | 19:09 |
| Swami | The dvr team has a backlog item that we are working on for the router migration. | 19:09 |
| badveli | what is the implication now | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ok | 19:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: is taht something that is being targeted for J3? | 19:09 |
| Swami | I was wondering if you have any communication mechanism that can be utilized to clean up the rules during the migration. | 19:09 |
| Swami | Yes the migration patch is currently targeted for Juno 3 | 19:10 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: but if the dvr team needs a clean way for migration - and if fwaas is installed - we need to have consistent way of handling this | 19:10 |
| *** seizadi has quit IRC | 19:10 | |
| SridarK | Swami: with an rpc for that - we can handle that | 19:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: the agent listens to the rpc channel | 19:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: yes, like you said | 19:11 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: Yes I agree that the rpc channel would be right approach. My question is who owns that rpc? I= | 19:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: i think SridarK and badveli indicating that we need to listen to the migrate event | 19:12 |
| SridarK | Swami: can it be a plugin to L3Agent RPC that we can add hooks into | 19:12 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes | 19:12 |
| Swami | Today migrate is a regular "update". | 19:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ok, so the concern is taht fwaas would need to listen to all updates? | 19:13 |
| Swami | So if you can add a hook into the "router_update" rpc then it should work. | 19:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: yeah | 19:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we are already in the same footprint of the l3 agent | 19:13 |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 19:13 | |
| badveli | let me check that code | 19:14 |
| Swami | Right now we have a state flag defined for router update as "migration". | 19:14 |
| SridarK | Swami: that should work | 19:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: do you have the information published somewhere? | 19:14 |
| Swami | But we need to decide if we are going to send it to the agent as such or modify it before sending it to the agent. | 19:14 |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:14 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ah just asking that | 19:14 |
| Swami | We have a current patch for it upstream. | 19:14 |
| Swami | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105855/ | 19:15 |
| badveli | thanks swami | 19:15 |
| Swami | There are couple of router states that we have defined in the "neutron/common/constants.py" | 19:15 |
| Swami | For now think about this idea and let me know. | 19:16 |
| badveli | we will go through it | 19:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK badveli: can we document our approach in the wiki? | 19:17 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: sure | 19:17 |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 19:17 | |
| badveli | yes | 19:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | once we decide what to do, and perhaps get it reviewed | 19:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | by the DVR team | 19:17 |
| badveli | fine sumit, we will think about this based on the new info by swami | 19:18 |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 19:18 | |
| badveli | sumit:should we traget juno3 | 19:19 |
| badveli | ? | 19:19 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: you mean for the migration? | 19:19 |
| badveli | yes sumit | 19:19 |
| badveli | if we allow the migration, we will not be correct | 19:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: i think we should target J3 | 19:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but my understanding is that we have a dependency on the DVR team | 19:21 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: what is VPNaaS doing about this? | 19:21 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: nice question, the current proposal for VPNaaS is to check during update, if the router has an associated VPN service. If so , we will raise an exception and say DVR does not support VPNaaS | 19:22 |
| Swami | We are also planning to add a check in the VPNaaS service before associating a DVR router. | 19:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: should we do the same with FWaaS? | 19:23 |
| Swami | Is there a valid check for FWaaS with respect to a router. | 19:24 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: this was the issue for us | 19:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: not with respect to a particular router | 19:24 |
| Swami | If we have a valid check we can do the same way. | 19:24 |
| Swami | That was my concern and that is the reason I brought it up to you folks. | 19:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: the check will be if FWaaS is present for this tenant | 19:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: sorry | 19:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: i meant if a firewall is present for this router | 19:25 |
| Swami | Yes we can do that simple check. | 19:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: since the firewall is applied on all routers | 19:26 |
| Swami | And probably advice the admin to remove the FWaaS affinity towards the router and then migrate the router. | 19:26 |
| badveli | yes | 19:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: badveli do you see an issue with that? | 19:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: it wont be just for that router | 19:26 |
| SridarK | Swami: is there a case where u can have different router types in a single tenant | 19:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: the admin will have to remove the firewall | 19:26 |
| badveli | sumit: I think it should be fine | 19:26 |
| Swami | It is not tenant driven it is admin driven | 19:27 |
| SridarK | Swami: and if we do a migration for a specific router that is in legacy to distr | 19:27 |
| Swami | So an admin for force a router to be "legacy" or "distributed" and can have a mix. | 19:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: the firewall is owned by the tenant | 19:27 |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:27 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: let me back track a little | 19:28 |
| Swami | So if firewall is configured for that tenant, an admin should not move the router, until the tenant removes the FWaaS, that is one way | 19:28 |
| SridarK | Swami: SumitNaiksatam that mixed condition probab needs mor thought | 19:28 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: you said - the current proposal for VPNaaS is to check during update, if the router has an associated VPN service. If so , we will raise an exception and say DVR does not support VPNaaS | 19:28 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: yes you are right. The reason is we don't have a VPNaaS solution for DVR yet. | 19:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: did you mean to say - we will raise an exception and say *migraton to DVR* is not supported for VPNaaS? | 19:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ah ok, so VPNaaS itself is not supported | 19:29 |
| Swami | Our expection message will state the router is in use by VPNaaS. | 19:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ok | 19:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: similarly can you raise the exception that the router is in use by FWaaS? | 19:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: the tenant which owns the firewall (it may or may not be admin) can then remove the firewall in response to this exception | 19:30 |
| badveli | sumit, i think we need to think more on this, as swami pointed out | 19:31 |
| *** celttechie has quit IRC | 19:31 | |
| Swami | Yes it can be done, the only issue I had was there was no direct corrilation between a router and a firewall. | 19:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: am i missing something? what is the mixed case? | 19:31 |
| *** armax has quit IRC | 19:31 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: there is | 19:31 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: when we have some dist routers and some legacy routers in a tenant | 19:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | router:firewam is n:1 | 19:31 |
| Swami | If there is a direct correlation between a FWaaS and router, we can make use of it and raise an exception. | 19:31 |
| badveli | sumit: even if we throw exception and ask to remove the firewall | 19:31 |
| SridarK | and if FWaaS is configured after | 19:31 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: and then we trigger migration | 19:32 |
| badveli | if remove the firewall and then configure dvr | 19:32 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: i am not sure if this is a valid use case | 19:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: the same logic will apply, right? | 19:32 |
| badveli | and then if firewall is configured | 19:32 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: i was just saying we should go thru the use cases to be sure we don't miss | 19:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: because we are still left with only one firewall per tenant | 19:32 |
| Swami | Something is better than not breaking anything while we migrate. | 19:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: in the absence of service insertion | 19:33 |
| badveli | do we need to handle the reverse case? | 19:33 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: but the tenant has different types of routers | 19:33 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: i am not sure that there is an issue | 19:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: ok, but its still one firewall, right? | 19:33 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: just more investigation to make sure | 19:33 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes | 19:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: i am not sure that is an issue with migration | 19:33 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: for vpnaas - it is also one specific router that they track | 19:33 |
| badveli | swami: as you had mentioned the reverse case | 19:33 |
| Swami | SridarK: SumitNaiksatam:badveli: Please give it a thought and we can discuss this through email exchange what would be the right option. | 19:34 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: where we are different | 19:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: its an issue about supporting both modes at the same time | 19:34 |
| SridharRamaswamy | Swami: quick question on VPNaaS + DVR, will we raise a similar exception if the router is in dvr mode and tenant tries to create a vpn connection ? | 19:34 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes | 19:34 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: and if that is even valid | 19:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok we are running short of time | 19:34 |
| Swami | Yes we are planning to prevent it from happening. I have raised a bug for it. | 19:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so a suggestion | 19:35 |
| badveli | swami> the reverse case is a valid one? | 19:35 |
| badveli | from dvr to legacy | 19:35 |
| badveli | we allowed to go to dvr | 19:35 |
| Swami | #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1356467 | 19:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: the router on a single node is considered as a legacy or still a DVR? | 19:35 |
| badveli | and then user configured firewall | 19:35 |
| *** pcm__ has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:36 | |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: The router on a single node will still be considered 'dvr' if the agent is running in a dvr mode. | 19:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ok good | 19:36 |
| SridharRamaswamy | Swami: thanks! | 19:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so my suggestion | 19:36 |
| badveli | sumit: my worry is we need to consider the check in both directions | 19:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | how about we only support either the legacy router, or the DVR | 19:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | at any given time | 19:37 |
| SumitNaiksatam | not a combination | 19:37 |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: ok so it is a tenant wide attribute for the router type | 19:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | also migration for legacy router to DVR will not be supported, if firewall is associated with tenant | 19:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: only when using FWaaS | 19:38 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes interesting thought | 19:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i am proposing that we constrain the scenarios we support | 19:39 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: and we can probab check that as new routers are added | 19:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: yeah | 19:39 |
| badveli | sumit: should we consider the same from moving dvr to legacy | 19:40 |
| Swami | badveli: Right now converting a dvr to centralized router is not targeted and is of low importance. | 19:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: yes | 19:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: yeah | 19:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so to summarize | 19:40 |
| *** marun has quit IRC | 19:41 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | 1. An exception is raised when attempting to migrate a legacy router to DVR if a FWaaS firewall is associated with it | 19:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the remediation would be to delete the firewall for that tenant | 19:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and then attempt the migration again | 19:42 |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 19:42 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | 2. FWaaS firewall can be applied only when all the routers for a tenant are of the same type (either DVR or legacy) | 19:42 |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:42 | |
| Swami | +1 on option 1 | 19:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | 3. An exception is raised when attempting to migrate DVR to legacy router if a FWaaS firewall is associated with the DVR | 19:43 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: (2) can be done quite easily | 19:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: thats nice | 19:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: badveli: your opinion on 2 and 3? | 19:44 |
| *** eghobo has quit IRC | 19:45 | |
| badveli | i think 2 is a good | 19:45 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: i think u have covered all cases | 19:45 |
| badveli | looks to me but as swami pointed out the reverse one is not a important one | 19:45 |
| badveli | 3 is also good | 19:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ? | 19:45 |
| Swami | Do you guys want to check each and every router before a FWaaS is assigned to make sure if they are all of the same type. | 19:45 |
| SridarK | badveli: i can point u to code for (2) if u want to dig more on this | 19:45 |
| badveli | thanks Sridark | 19:46 |
| badveli | I will sync up with you | 19:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: we already have to apply the firewall on all routers | 19:46 |
| SridarK | badveli: sounds good | 19:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: and these are routers per tenant | 19:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: not the global space | 19:46 |
| Swami | Yes, but as routers are created, how will you keep track of all routers. | 19:47 |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:47 | |
| SridarK | Swami: we plug into router creation | 19:47 |
| Swami | In terms of tenant's routers they are always going to be the same. | 19:47 |
| SridarK | as that is when we add FWaaS rules to new routers as they are created | 19:47 |
| Swami | Unless an admin modifys the tenant's router. | 19:47 |
| Swami | So summit are you guys planning to do all three options: 1, 2 and 3. | 19:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: i am asking | 19:49 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: so 1 and 3 are complementary | 19:49 |
| Swami | Option 2: The tenants will always get the same type of routers and they don't get a choice to change the mode. | 19:49 |
| Swami | So your existing code should work on Option 2. | 19:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: sorrry i did not understand | 19:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: i thought you said you are supporting a mixed mode | 19:50 |
| Swami | Option 1: and Option 3: are for both direction migration | 19:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: wherein a given tenant could have both DVR and legacy routers at the same time | 19:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: is that not the case? | 19:51 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: I mentioned that we support mixed mode even on a single node. But only for "admin". A tenant may only create a single type of router that is been defined by the "cloud admin". | 19:51 |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 19:51 | |
| *** celttechie has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:51 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: ok | 19:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: so then the option 2 still applies, since there is at least some way to have routers in a mixed mode | 19:52 |
| Swami | Yes I agree. | 19:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: and in that case i am saying, that if one wants to apply FWaaS firewall, then the mixed mode will not be supported | 19:53 |
| *** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:53 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:54 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: so in other words, lets say we have a DVR | 19:54 |
| *** natarajk1 has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 19:54 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: and a FWaaS firewall applied to that | 19:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: and then the admin tries to create a legacy router | 19:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: we can check for that tenant, and disallow the legacy router creation | 19:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: similarly, if a DVR and legacy router exists, and now the FWaaS firewall is attempted to be created for that tenant | 19:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: we will not allow the firewall creation | 19:56 |
| Swami | You mean you will prevent the migration based on the tenant and the firewall | 19:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: migration is cases 1 and 3 | 19:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: we are talking about case 2 | 19:57 |
| Swami | In case when you say you are going to disallow the legacy router creation. Will the firewall block the router creation. | 19:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: not migration, either bein able to create routers in the mixed mode (when FwaaS firewall is present) or being able to create Fwaas firewall when routers in mixed mode are present | 19:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: that is something we need to decide | 19:58 |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: I think we need some phone line discussion for this topic. I am missing something. | 19:58 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: FWaaS creation failure on a tenant with DVR and legacy - can be done for sure | 19:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: i think the check is similar to the check for migration | 19:58 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: but as u suggest the first case in (2) depends on DVR as we usually pick up the router creation event | 19:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: can we perform all the checks in the firewall code? | 20:00 |
| Swami | Yes, DVR should basically allow router creation either way based on the "global default" flag or the admin overriden flag. | 20:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: as opposed to DVR having to throw any of these exceptions? | 20:00 |
| SridarK | We can perform the checks for both cases in 2 | 20:00 |
| SridarK | we can act on 2b - fail fw creation | 20:00 |
| badveli | if we have the router update events | 20:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK Swami: so essentially all three cases are covered by router create and update events | 20:01 |
| SridarK | but on 2a - preventing a router of specific type from getting created - that is a bit tricky | 20:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | badveli: yes we dont act on them yet (if i recall correctly) | 20:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: dont we just have to check if any existing router is of a different type? | 20:02 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes we can do that for sure | 20:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: as soon as we encounter the first one, we raise an exception | 20:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: if not we continue checking | 20:02 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: aah ok we just raise the exception | 20:02 |
| badveli | Sumit: We can start thinking about the three cases | 20:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: of course the first check is that a firewall is present for this tenant | 20:02 |
| badveli | in firewall | 20:03 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: we cannot control the router creation of a diff type | 20:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: why? | 20:03 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: once we get the router added - the router is already there | 20:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK: ah becuase, we inherit from the l3 agent | 20:03 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes | 20:03 |
| *** lblanchard has quit IRC | 20:03 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | so i take back all that i said then | 20:04 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: so we can say that this is a problem | 20:04 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: but we cannot stop the router creation as it is already there | 20:04 |
| *** armax has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:04 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: then those exceptions have to come from DVR | 20:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: so we can stop the firewall creation | 20:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: not the router creation | 20:04 |
| *** mspreitz has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:04 | |
| Swami | SumitNaiksatam: where do you want the firewall creation to be stopped. | 20:05 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: trying to create a fw on a tenant with diff router types - we can handle for sure | 20:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: we can control the firewall creation in the firewall code | 20:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: you need not have to worry about that | 20:05 |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:05 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: as SridarK said | 20:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: its the router creation that you would need to control | 20:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami SridarK even for that, can we define some kind of a pre-commit hook in the DVR? | 20:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | that fwaas can implement | 20:06 |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 20:06 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | so prior to router creation, DVR can just call that hook | 20:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | if fwaas is configured | 20:07 |
| Swami | guys I think we are complicating things here. | 20:07 |
| *** alexsyip has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:07 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | then the fwaas can decide whether to throw an exception | 20:07 |
| Swami | The minimum requirement here is option 1: for migration. | 20:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | that way none of the fwaas specific logic leaks into the DVR | 20:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: even for that option, rather than the DVR code doing a check for firewall, it can just make a call on the fwaas hook | 20:08 |
| Swami | Yes, that would be nice. | 20:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | Swami: that way you dont even have to do the processing for raising the exception | 20:10 |
| *** marun has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:10 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok we are way over the meeting time | 20:11 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: we have set a record :-) | 20:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK badveli: do you want to summarize this and add ot the wiki? | 20:11 |
| badveli | we will discuss and will do | 20:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and perhaps Swami and the rest of the DVR team can review it once there | 20:11 |
| badveli | thanks for the inputs swami and sumit | 20:11 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: sure - we can may be also have an email thread | 20:11 |
| badveli | sridar and myslef will sync up | 20:11 |
| badveli | and write down | 20:11 |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:12 | |
| Swami | thanks guys | 20:12 |
| Swami | bye | 20:12 |
| SridarK | bye | 20:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #action SridarK badveli to update FWaaS/DVR wiki and add migration and mixed mode operation semantics in presence of fwaas firewall | 20:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks all for attending | 20:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #endmeeting | 20:12 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 20:12 | |
| badveli | thanks all | 20:12 |
| SridarK | thanks | 20:12 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Wed Aug 13 20:12:32 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 20:12 |
| SridarK | bye | 20:12 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_fwaas/2014/networking_fwaas.2014-08-13-18.40.html | 20:12 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_fwaas/2014/networking_fwaas.2014-08-13-18.40.txt | 20:12 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_fwaas/2014/networking_fwaas.2014-08-13-18.40.log.html | 20:12 |
| *** SridarK has quit IRC | 20:12 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:13 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:24 | |
| *** Swami has quit IRC | 20:25 | |
| *** thangp has quit IRC | 20:27 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 20:27 | |
| *** julim_ has quit IRC | 20:28 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 20:29 | |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:34 | |
| *** celttechie has quit IRC | 20:38 | |
| *** cbader has quit IRC | 20:46 | |
| *** dconde has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| *** asahlin has quit IRC | 20:49 | |
| *** asahlin has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:49 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 20:52 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:52 | |
| *** dconde has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:56 | |
| *** marun has quit IRC | 20:56 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 20:59 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 21:02 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:02 | |
| *** eghobo has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:02 | |
| *** ruhe has left #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:02 | |
| *** mspreitz has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
| *** peristeri has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| *** bradjone has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| *** cjellick_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:06 | |
| *** celttechie has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:07 | |
| *** cjellick has quit IRC | 21:09 | |
| *** seizadi has quit IRC | 21:10 | |
| *** seizadi has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:10 | |
| *** cjellick_ has quit IRC | 21:11 | |
| *** zz_johnthetubagu has quit IRC | 21:12 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:13 | |
| *** zz_johnthetubagu has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:15 | |
| *** zz_johnthetubagu is now known as johnthetubaguy | 21:15 | |
| *** jtomasek_ has quit IRC | 21:15 | |
| *** mfer has quit IRC | 21:16 | |
| *** marun has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:17 | |
| *** yamamoto has quit IRC | 21:18 | |
| *** SridharR_ has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:24 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 21:27 | |
| *** SridharR_ has quit IRC | 21:29 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:32 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 21:34 | |
| *** MaxV has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:34 | |
| *** thomasem has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:43 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 21:43 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:44 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 21:52 | |
| *** jaypipes has quit IRC | 21:53 | |
| *** HenryG_ is now known as HenryG | 21:57 | |
| *** flaviof is now known as flaviof_zzz | 21:59 | |
| *** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:02 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 22:03 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:03 | |
| *** hemanth_ has quit IRC | 22:07 | |
| *** jpomero has quit IRC | 22:16 | |
| *** jpomero has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:17 | |
| *** jpomero has quit IRC | 22:17 | |
| *** jpomero has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:18 | |
| *** jaypipes has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:22 | |
| *** seizadi1 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:23 | |
| *** seizadi has quit IRC | 22:23 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:28 | |
| *** MaxV has quit IRC | 22:32 | |
| *** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:37 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 22:38 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:38 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 22:43 | |
| *** jgrimm has quit IRC | 22:44 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has quit IRC | 22:52 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:52 | |
| *** thomasem has quit IRC | 22:53 | |
| *** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:55 | |
| *** thomasem has quit IRC | 22:55 | |
| *** chuckC has quit IRC | 22:58 | |
| *** chuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 22:58 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 22:59 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has quit IRC | 23:01 | |
| *** chuckC has quit IRC | 23:01 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:02 | |
| *** krotscheck has quit IRC | 23:03 | |
| *** krotscheck has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:03 | |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:08 | |
| *** carl_baldwin has quit IRC | 23:10 | |
| *** armax has quit IRC | 23:23 | |
| *** otherwiseguy has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:23 | |
| *** dconde has quit IRC | 23:29 | |
| *** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:34 | |
| *** thomasem has quit IRC | 23:34 | |
| *** chuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:37 | |
| *** rudrarugge has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:39 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 23:40 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 23:44 | |
| *** emagana has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:45 | |
| *** Sukhdev has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:45 | |
| *** thomasem has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:46 | |
| *** thomasem has quit IRC | 23:46 | |
| *** emagana has quit IRC | 23:49 | |
| *** jamielennox|away is now known as jamielennox | 23:51 | |
| *** markmcclain1 has joined #openstack-meeting-3 | 23:56 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 23:56 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!