Friday, 2018-11-30

*** Liang__ has joined #openstack-meeting00:03
*** flaper87 has quit IRC00:09
*** flaper87 has joined #openstack-meeting00:14
*** hongbin has quit IRC00:31
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting00:45
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting00:48
*** slaweq has quit IRC00:49
*** tssurya has quit IRC00:55
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting01:26
*** verdurin has quit IRC01:33
*** erlon has quit IRC01:38
*** verdurin has joined #openstack-meeting01:38
*** yamamoto has quit IRC01:49
*** gyee has quit IRC01:52
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-meeting01:59
*** dklyle has quit IRC02:05
*** mriedem_afk has quit IRC02:19
*** _hemna has quit IRC02:29
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting02:35
*** liuyulong_ has joined #openstack-meeting02:35
*** psachin has joined #openstack-meeting02:39
*** mhen has quit IRC02:40
*** mhen has joined #openstack-meeting02:43
*** klindgren has joined #openstack-meeting02:54
*** _hemna has quit IRC02:56
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting02:57
*** klindgren has quit IRC03:00
*** klindgren has joined #openstack-meeting03:00
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-meeting03:02
*** Liang__ has quit IRC03:03
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-meeting03:11
*** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-meeting03:12
*** _hemna has quit IRC03:13
*** apetrich has quit IRC03:15
*** dklyle has quit IRC03:17
*** iyamahat_ has quit IRC03:23
*** yamahata has quit IRC03:23
*** jasonyan has quit IRC03:30
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting03:30
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting03:34
*** jasonyan has quit IRC03:36
*** psachin has quit IRC03:43
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting03:46
*** _hemna has quit IRC03:50
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting03:56
*** hongbin has quit IRC03:56
*** akhil_jain has joined #openstack-meeting03:59
ekcs#startmeeting congressteammeeting04:01
openstackMeeting started Fri Nov 30 04:01:25 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ekcs. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.04:01
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: congressteammeeting)"04:01
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'congressteammeeting'04:01
ekcshello! welcome back to biweekly congress team meeting.04:01
akhil_jainekcs: hello!04:02
ekcsplease add your topics to this etherpad here:
ekcshello akhil_jain !04:02
*** janki has joined #openstack-meeting04:03
ekcshow’s it been akhil_jain ?04:04
akhil_jainekcs: everything fine. just this gate issue is bugging me alot :D04:05
akhil_jainwhat about you?04:05
ekcshahaha. got it.04:06
ekcsi’ve been doing ok just been having a really stubborn cold all week =/04:06
ekcswell let’s talk about gate then.04:07
ekcs#topic gate04:07
*** openstack changes topic to "gate (Meeting topic: congressteammeeting)"04:07
ekcsthis info could be out of date. but I noticed that all the postgres jobs in congress has been failing because of an error happening in nova.04:07
ekcsa bug was filed.
openstackLaunchpad bug 1804271 in OpenStack Compute (nova) "duplicate for #1804084 nova-api is broken in postgresql jobs" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Matt Riedemann (mriedem)04:08
ekcsso hopefully it’ll be fixed soon. and we don’t need to do anything for now.04:08
ekcsit’s not affecting us too much because our postgres jobs are non voting.04:09
ekcsakhil_jain: you notice any other gate issues?04:09
akhil_jainnot yet but i am continuously looking into04:09
akhil_jainmy recent patch also timed out04:10
akhil_jaintacker driver patch
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting04:11
ekcsah yes. we’ve been seeing some time outs like that. not all the time but sometimes.04:11
ekcsi’m not completely sure of the cause.04:12
ekcson this patch:
ekcsI thought maybe it’s an intermittent rabbitmq issue on the test node.04:12
ekcsbecause I looked at one requset that timed out and in the congress engine logs it looks like the engine never received the request.04:13
ekcshaven’t looked deeply at the other ones.04:13
akhil_jaini will try to dig more into it and will share if i found something04:15
ekcswell moving on then.04:16
ekcs#topic experimental repo spec04:16
*** openstack changes topic to "experimental repo spec (Meeting topic: congressteammeeting)"04:16
ekcsI updated the spec based on discussions last meeting.
ekcsnot sure if we have anything to discuss now. but if we do please go ahead.04:17
akhil_jainyes i have gone through it. I think its worth a try04:19
ekcsok thanks for going through it! feel free to leave a review if you get the chance. further comments welcome of course!04:21
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting04:21
akhil_jainya sure will do that04:22
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC04:22
ekcsok moving on for now then.04:22
ekcs#topic tacker driver04:22
*** openstack changes topic to "tacker driver (Meeting topic: congressteammeeting)"04:22
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting04:22
ekcsI see akhil_jain you updated the patch.04:22
ekcsthere is a discussion about how to handle the multiple VDUs04:23
ekcsbut ramineni not here today so maybe it’ll take place on gerrit04:23
ekcsanything you want to say about the patch akhil_jain ?04:24
akhil_jainok, will wait for review then.04:24
akhil_jainabout multiple VDU i have added different table. that way it is more convenient for making policies. thats what i thought04:25
*** vishalmanchanda has joined #openstack-meeting04:25
akhil_jainkeeping VDUs in VNF will make it very much complex to handle04:26
ekcsthat makes sense.04:27
ekcsI’m guessing ramineni was thinking if it’s always a single mgmt_url then put it in the top table.04:27
ekcsbut youre saying there are multiple.04:28
ekcsI agree that it’s hard to manage multiple urls in a single field.04:28
akhil_jainya maybe, i have responded on patch. lets wait for her review to that04:29
ekcsbtw it’s great how you’ve made the extract fn cleaner and used the declarative translator to do the work instead of the custom code!04:30
ekcsshould make it much easier for other/future contributors to understand and maintain04:30
akhil_jain:) got that idea from your review thanks!04:30
*** ramineni has joined #openstack-meeting04:32
ekcsoh haha i didn’t even think of that tho. glad you did04:32
*** markvoelker has quit IRC04:32
ekcswell seems like that’s all the topics for today.04:33
ekcs#topic open discussion04:33
*** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: congressteammeeting)"04:33
akhil_jainalso for nova driver changes, do you have any more input on that?04:34
akhil_jainramineni: Hi04:34
ramineniakhil_jain: hi04:34
ekcsnope it looks good to me!04:34
raminenisorry joined late , looks like meeting is over ;)04:35
ekcsoh hi you made it!04:35
ramineniekcs: :)04:35
ramineniakhil_jain: looks good , what is min nova api version supported?04:36
raminenifor stein release04:36
ekcsI think min version is still 2.0 (or 2.1 which is the same just microversion)04:36
ramineniekcs: oh , great , then should be fine ,04:37
akhil_jainyes both are supported and i checked both were having address field04:37
ramineniakhil_jain: +1 , +2ed your patch04:38
akhil_jaingreat, thanks for review04:38
ekcsok let’s go ahead and merge that patch then.04:39
ekcsjust workflowed.04:39
ekcsramineni: do you have any thoughts for now on the experimental repo spec?04:39
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting04:40
ramineniekcs: not as of now, ill check today and let you know if any comments04:41
ekcsgreat no rush. just asking =)04:41
ekcsok well anything else for today?04:41
ramineninothing from my side04:42
akhil_jainnone from my side04:42
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting04:42
ekcsalright then. more next time =)04:42
ekcshave a great weekend!04:43
*** _hemna has quit IRC04:43
akhil_jainok, bye. happy weekend!04:43
ekcsbye all!04:43
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"04:44
openstackMeeting ended Fri Nov 30 04:44:39 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)04:44
openstackMinutes (text):
*** ekcs has quit IRC04:45
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting04:45
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting04:57
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting05:02
*** Nel1x has quit IRC05:14
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting05:17
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting05:17
*** _hemna has quit IRC05:17
*** akhil_jain has left #openstack-meeting05:21
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting05:31
*** _hemna has quit IRC05:32
*** pcaruana has quit IRC05:35
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting05:38
*** _hemna has quit IRC05:39
*** imacdonn has quit IRC05:39
*** imacdonn has joined #openstack-meeting05:39
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting05:45
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting05:46
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting05:50
*** yamamoto has quit IRC05:51
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting05:52
*** _hemna has quit IRC05:52
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting05:59
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:05
*** _hemna has quit IRC06:06
*** diablo_rojo has quit IRC06:12
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:13
*** _hemna has quit IRC06:16
*** sridharg has joined #openstack-meeting06:21
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:21
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:29
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting06:32
*** flaper87 has quit IRC06:32
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:39
*** _hemna has quit IRC06:39
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:47
*** _hemna has quit IRC06:48
*** radeks has joined #openstack-meeting06:49
*** radeks_ has joined #openstack-meeting06:50
*** radeks has quit IRC06:53
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting06:54
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting07:01
*** kopecmartin|off has quit IRC07:10
*** kopecmartin has joined #openstack-meeting07:13
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting07:13
*** _hemna has quit IRC07:15
*** apetrich has joined #openstack-meeting07:16
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting07:21
*** pcaruana has joined #openstack-meeting07:22
*** radeks_ has quit IRC07:26
*** radeks_ has joined #openstack-meeting07:26
*** e0ne has quit IRC07:31
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting07:34
*** radeks__ has joined #openstack-meeting07:35
*** radeks_ has quit IRC07:35
*** Luzi has joined #openstack-meeting07:38
*** rcernin has quit IRC08:06
*** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-meeting08:17
*** aojea has joined #openstack-meeting08:18
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting08:30
*** shrasool has joined #openstack-meeting09:26
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting09:27
*** jasonyan has quit IRC09:33
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting09:34
*** takamatsu has quit IRC09:41
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting09:41
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC09:44
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting09:44
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC09:49
*** arne_wiebalck_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:02
*** a-pugachev has joined #openstack-meeting10:02
*** tssurya has joined #openstack-meeting10:03
*** erlon has joined #openstack-meeting10:04
*** jasonyan has quit IRC10:20
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting10:27
*** tpsilva has joined #openstack-meeting10:31
*** slaweq has quit IRC10:32
*** liuyulong_ has quit IRC10:38
*** electrofelix has joined #openstack-meeting10:44
*** pcaruana has quit IRC10:44
*** a-pugachev_ has joined #openstack-meeting10:46
*** a-pugachev has quit IRC10:49
*** a-pugachev_ is now known as a-pugachev10:49
*** pcaruana has joined #openstack-meeting10:50
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting10:51
*** arne_wiebalck_ has quit IRC10:51
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC10:55
*** jasonyan has quit IRC10:55
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting10:55
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC11:00
*** rfolco is now known as rfolco_doctor11:09
*** dmacpher has joined #openstack-meeting11:13
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting11:31
*** raildo has joined #openstack-meeting11:32
*** a-pugachev has quit IRC11:41
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting11:51
*** jasonyan has quit IRC11:52
*** jasonyan has joined #openstack-meeting11:53
*** Luzi has quit IRC12:00
*** pcaruana has quit IRC12:11
*** slaweq has quit IRC12:24
*** rfolco_doctor is now known as rfolco12:34
*** eharney has quit IRC12:34
*** shrasool has quit IRC12:37
*** jaypipes is now known as leakypipes12:44
*** Nel1x has joined #openstack-meeting12:46
*** WillCode has joined #openstack-meeting12:48
*** e0ne has quit IRC12:54
*** erlon has quit IRC12:56
*** yamamoto has quit IRC12:59
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting13:00
*** erlon has joined #openstack-meeting13:11
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting13:15
*** arne_wiebalck_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:19
*** arne_wiebalck has quit IRC13:23
*** arne_wiebalck_ is now known as arne_wiebalck13:23
*** arne_wiebalck_ has joined #openstack-meeting13:26
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting13:37
*** shrasool has joined #openstack-meeting13:38
*** arne_wiebalck_ has quit IRC13:40
*** shrasool has quit IRC13:41
*** njohnston has joined #openstack-meeting13:46
*** a-pugachev has joined #openstack-meeting13:48
*** whoami-rajat has quit IRC13:49
*** dmacpher has quit IRC13:51
*** mlavalle has joined #openstack-meeting13:52
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC13:54
*** takamatsu has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** vishalmanchanda has quit IRC13:55
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** shrasool has joined #openstack-meeting13:55
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting13:56
*** EmilienM is now known as EvilienM13:58
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC14:00
mlavalle#startmeeting neutron_drivers14:00
openstackMeeting started Fri Nov 30 14:00:08 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mlavalle. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.14:00
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron_drivers)"14:00
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers'14:00
mlavalleHi there14:00
mlavallegood morning klin14:00
mlavallegood earlu monring klindgren14:01
klindgrenmlavalle, Thanks.14:01
mlavallelet's give haleyb and slaweq a minute to join14:01
*** wwriverrat has joined #openstack-meeting14:01
slaweqsorry for being late14:02
njohnstonopenstackbot having issues?14:02
*** Chenjie has joined #openstack-meeting14:02
mlavalleok let's get going14:03
amotokinjohnston: is there any issue you see?14:03
*** njohnston has quit IRC14:03
mlavalle#topic RFEs14:03
*** openstack changes topic to "RFEs (Meeting topic: neutron_drivers)"14:03
mlavalleFirst one is
openstackLaunchpad bug 1764738 in neutron "routed provider networks limit to one host" [Wishlist,New]14:03
wwriverratWas Kris able to join (bug creator)? I know had planned to :)14:05
klindgrenI am here14:05
mlavalleTHis one was originally proposed back in April by an operator in Sweden. Last week, in a conversation with klindgren we discovered his employer (GoDaddy?) has the same need14:05
*** njohnston has joined #openstack-meeting14:05
klindgrenI also made a post to the openstack-discuss mailing list - but I don't think everyone has moved over to that.14:06
amotokiin my rough understanding, this RFE request segments per provider network, while host to segment binding is global now. right?14:08
*** Chenjie has quit IRC14:09
klindgrenI believe our needs a similar but slightly different, so I wanted to call out our similar use case.  Mainly that we have a need to attach a server to multiple segments of a routed network.  The primary reason being that with our network design the L2 doesn't leave the top of rack.  But we are getting to the point where we are deploying more vm's into a rack than our networking team wants to give ip's for on a single vlan.  So they want to expos14:09
klindgrene the additional ip's on another vlan.  Which in routed networks would be another segment.14:09
*** Chenjie has joined #openstack-meeting14:10
*** hle2 has joined #openstack-meeting14:10
amotokiso my understanding seem not correct.14:10
mlavallein other words, to actually be able to achieve to exploit the benefits of routed networks (i.e. small L2 domains + scalability though L3 routing) you need more than one segment of the routed network to connect to the each compute. Is that a good summary14:11
klindgrenYes exactly14:12
klindgrenOur networking team is refusing to add more than a /22 worth IP address spacing to a vlan, due to fear of broadcast domain issues.14:13
*** arne_wiebalck_ has joined #openstack-meeting14:13
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC14:13
klindgrenBut they would happily do 10 vlans each with a /22 on the same switch.14:13
mlavallethat makes sense. one of the tenets of routed networks is to have small l2 broadcat domains14:13
slaweqok, I think I understand this rfe now, but I'm not an expert in routed networks so I have one, maybe not very good question: why it was limited originally? are there any potential technical issues with doing it?14:14
mlavalleif you start assigning big broadcat domains to the segments, we are back with the original problem14:14
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting14:15
klindgrenThe limit was original put in by carl Baldwin who did the original routed network stuff with a comment14:15
*** mpiwowarczy has quit IRC14:15
klindgrenThat basically says, we don't fully understand the use cases for multiple segments, so to simplify we are imposing an assumption that a host will be bound to only one segment14:15
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting14:15
klindgrenAnd that the restriction could be relaxed as those use cases are understood14:16
slaweqklindgren: ok, thx, and now we have such use case for it :)14:16
slaweqI see now14:16
amotokivlan is mapped to a segment and if you introduce a new vlan for a same range of your L2 network it sounds reasnable to define a new segment and assign it to an existing host.14:16
mlavalleat the moment of implementing originally routed networks, we didn't know the limits14:17
mlavalleso to simplify the implementation we made the assumption, somewhere in the IPAM, of only one segment per compute14:18
mlavalleand we expected to have operator feedback14:18
mlavallewhich is now happening14:18
klindgrenAs I am working through this locally I am running into some issues, that I am working through on fixing.  Their are seemingly 2 problems.14:19
amotokione question: if one host belongs to multiple segments of a routed network, how can we select an appropriate segment for a new VM?14:19
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-meeting14:19
mlavalleamotoki: that's part of the problem14:19
mlavalleyou got it14:20
klindgrenOne is that when you have multiple segments on a host and you try to bind a port from the second segment.  The information that is sent to the agent contains the binding information of the first bindable segment.14:20
klindgrenSo in routed networks the subnet is assigned to the segment.14:20
klindgrenSo if you know the subnet the ip came from - you should already know segment that should be bound for it.14:21
mlavalleyes, that problem seems solvable14:22
slaweqif we are talking about scheduling, should placement be involved in this somehow maybe?14:22
mlavalleslaweq: it is already involved14:22
wwriverratOne thing klindgren and I were looking at:... when you push information down to the agent, you'd include the segment_id with the port. Maybe using the segment_id (not to be confused with segmentation_id) to plug with rather than the network ID.14:23
mlavallepart of the routed networks implementation was to create an IPV4 inventory in placement14:23
klindgrenHowever, in the data that is passed around the segment_id is basically been stripped out.  Which also leads to a second problem.  If you are trying to use the vlan driver.  And you get it to give the correct binding information for the second segment.   Since the name of the bridge is done via the network_id.  Both segments are part of the same network, and have the same network id14:23
slaweqahh, ok mlavalle14:23
klindgrenSo it joins them both to the same bridge14:24
klindgrenWhen it really needs to be different bridges for each segment.14:24
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting14:24
mlavalleklindgren: is this second hurdle to avoid L2 conflicts?14:25
klindgrenI just don't see how it wouldn't spill traffic across the vlans14:26
klindgrenOr even possibly create a spanning tree loop?14:26
klindgren-bash-4.2# brctl show14:26
klindgrenbrq3188bc9c-49                                8000.9e8444c8e353       no                           br0.40114:26
klindgren                                                                                                                br0.40214:26
amotokithe second problem seems that we need to decide vlan ID for a port based on a combo of (network ID and segment ID), right?14:26
klindgren                                                                                                                tap1789c805-1c14:26
klindgren                                                                                                                tap770e7357-be14:26
mlavalleyes, that's what I meant, potential spaning tree loop14:27
klindgrenThe vlan id comes from the segment and is populated into the device_info from information from the segment14:27
mlavalleok, based on this, here's what I propose:14:27
mlavalle1) The use case / need is pretty clear. It was even predicted in the original routed networks implementation. So my proposal is to approve this RFE14:28
mlavalle2) Frequently, when we approve a RFE, we request a spec. But I don't think that applies here. We know the what well. Where we seem to be struggling is the how14:29
mlavalleI think klindgren and wwriverrat have made a good job identifyin the "hot spots" in the code14:30
*** janki has quit IRC14:30
mlavalleI propose to push a patch with PoC code14:30
mlavallethat will help us, as a team, cooperate in solving the technical issues14:31
mlavalleThe code you are experimenting with is a good starting point14:31
slaweq+1, it will be easier to see in PoC how those problems are solved14:31
yamamotoisn't a spec for the how?14:31
mlavalleyamamoto: mhhhh.... let's not get bogged down in terminology. some what and shome how14:33
mlavallein this case, given where we are, I think a PoC would be more enlightening14:34
yamamotoi'm not against poc as far as we will have devref or spec in the end14:34
amotokiI think RFE is to discuss what is needed and a spec is to discuss how it can be achieved. (the how includes what should be changed)14:34
amotokibasically +1 for the proposal. PoC should work in this case.14:34
klindgrenOk - I can push some PoC code here hopefully early next week, with what we did to get it working for our use case.  I fully expect some parts need to be complexly re-worked.14:35
amotokione question: can this effort be done only inside neutron? is there no change in the placement side? If we need a chnage in placemment we need a pace to write down the whole picture of the chagne.14:36
*** lbragstad is now known as elbragstad14:36
mlavalleklindgren: hang on, let's make sure we have consensus14:36
mlavalleI think yamamoto and amotoki pojnt about the spec is also justified14:37
mlavalleI might have used wrong phrasing14:38
mlavallelet's use the PoC to uncover the challenges14:38
*** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-meeting14:38
mlavalleand we re-group in a few weeks and see where we are are on possible impacts to Nova14:38
mlavalleas far as I can tell now, there shouldn't be impact14:39
klindgrenI honestly am not sure on the placement side.  Right now I have just been trying to boot the second vm with a port that I already created on the second network.  That part *does* seem to work.  But I also wanted to confirm this works organically, as well.14:39
mlavallebecause we already hva the IPv4 inventories in placement14:39
mlavallebut the PoC work might help uncover potential issues14:39
mlavalleand at that point we can take the learning and write up a spec14:40
mlavalledoes that work?14:40
amotokimlavalle: the above makes sense to me14:40
mlavalledoes that work for you klindgren and wwriverrat?14:41
klindgrenYes it does14:41
wwriverrat+1 from me :)14:41
mlavallehaleyb: any thoughts?14:42
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting14:42
mlavallelet's assume he is ok14:43
njohnstonI'm just spectating, but having worked in enterprises where the typical VLAN IP allocation size was /27 it makes total sense to me.14:43
haleybsorry, was looking at something else14:44
haleybi'm ok with what you decide14:44
mlavallenjohnston: absolutely. I think we are at a point where the routed networks original implemantation is meeting the reality and we need to incorporate the feedback of that reality to make this feature reach its potential14:45
*** arne_wiebalck has quit IRC14:45
*** arne_wiebalck_ is now known as arne_wiebalck14:45
mlavalleklindgren, wwriverrat: thanks for your feedback. I personally struggled a bit with the original form of that RFE, and your feedback was very valuable14:46
klindgrenNo problem, thank you guys for your time.14:47
mlavalleI'll capture the decision in the RFE and will mark it as approved14:47
*** takamatsu has quit IRC14:48
mlavalleklindgren, wwriverrat: I'll leave also a pointer in the RFE to the message in the ML as a reference14:49
mlavalleNext one to discuss in the list is
openstackLaunchpad bug 1793653 in neutron "[RFE] Enable other subprojects to extend l2pop fdb information" [Wishlist,In progress] - Assigned to ChenjieXu (midone)14:51
*** brault has quit IRC14:51
mlavallewe might not have time to finish the discussion, but at least we can set it up for next week14:52
slaweqIIRC it was already discussed few weeks ago14:53
slaweqyamamoto: did You get any feedback from ODL team?14:53
mlavalleyes, and Chenjie provided feedback in the RFE that now we have to digest14:53
yamamotoslaweq: no14:54
slaweqyamamoto: ok, I just remember that we talked about it, right?14:54
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC14:54
mlavalleyamamoto: yamahata and manjeets are closer to my time zone than yours. I can take that action time14:55
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting14:55
yamamotoslaweq: i pinged yamahata and he said he would talk with relevant folks. i haven't heard anything since then.14:56
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC14:56
yamamotomlavalle: sure, i guess it works better14:56
slaweqsure, no problem :) I just wanted to ask if You have anything14:56
mlavalleyamamoto: cool14:57
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting14:57
slaweqIIRC this was our biggest concern, if we should provide some abstraction for such stadium projects, right?14:57
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC14:58
mlavalleChenjie: thanks for the feedback provided in the RFE. There is a lot to digest there14:58
yamamotoslaweq: yes. i still struggle to understand how it can work but i guess it's just me.14:58
mlavallewe will start the meeting with this RFE next week14:58
slaweqfine for me14:59
Chenjiemlavalle: thank you so much!14:59
Chenjieeveryone, thank you for your time!14:59
mlavalleyamamoto: your concerns are always important in this team14:59
*** awaugama has joined #openstack-meeting15:00
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"15:00
openstackMeeting ended Fri Nov 30 15:00:08 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)15:00
openstackMinutes (text):
yamamotogood night15:00
*** hle2 has quit IRC15:00
Chenjieyamammoto: it hleps me to make the RFE clear.15:00
Chenjieyamamoto: thank you for your comment!15:01
Chenjiegood night!15:01
smcginnis#startmeeting releaseteam15:02
openstackMeeting started Fri Nov 30 15:02:28 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is smcginnis. Information about MeetBot at
openstackUseful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.15:02
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: releaseteam)"15:02
openstackThe meeting name has been set to 'releaseteam'15:02
*** wwriverrat has left #openstack-meeting15:02
smcginnis#link Agenda15:02
*** hongbin has joined #openstack-meeting15:03
smcginnisAround line 16215:03
smcginnisNo actual meeting agenda, at least so far.15:04
smcginnisBut good to check in.15:04
smcginnis#topic Release failure15:04
*** openstack changes topic to "Release failure (Meeting topic: releaseteam)"15:04
fungimight just be a short meeting then ;)15:04
smcginnisShould probably at least mention that we had some failures earlier in the week.15:04
smcginnisThese were related to pypi mirroring if I understood correctly fungi?15:04
funginot really15:05
fungiwednesday it was ipv6 connectivity problems causing rackspace's dfw region to be unable to reach's fastly cdn endpoint15:05
*** Chenjie has quit IRC15:06
fungithursday it was an openstackansible bug causing the neutron ovs agent not to restart on a host in vexxhost's sjc1 region15:06
ttxsmcginnis: what? I did put something on the agenda!15:06
smcginnisOh, OK. All appears to be resolved now.15:06
fungiboth had the effect of causing connectivity issues/disruptions to or from the mirror servers, but that was merely a symptom of a much larger problem in both cases15:06
smcginnisttx: I see that now, sorry.15:07
smcginnisAnyway, they all appear to be resolved and we've done a few. The failed ones were reenqueued and everything worked as expected.15:07
smcginnis#topic Release type tracking15:07
*** openstack changes topic to "Release type tracking (Meeting topic: releaseteam)"15:07
smcginnisttx: OK, all yours.15:08
ttxI'm slowly going down all those corner cases15:08
ttxForces us to look into things we happily kept in the shadows before15:08
ttxI had one question15:09
smcginnisIgnorance is bliss? :)15:09
ttxBasically there is a gap between governance addition and release addition15:09
ttxand once we cover all the corner cases, that's what will be left15:09
ttxhow do we want to handle those15:09
ttxare we happy to let them go release-less forever ?15:10
ttxshould we aggressively seek to add deliverable files to cover them ?15:10
smcginnisProjects just added to governance?15:10
ttx(which means choosing a release model really)15:10
ttxsmcginnis: new deliverables15:10
ttx(from new or existing projects)15:11
ttxexample: tenks. Was added recently, so showed up in my report. Ironic team hopes to make a release soon, but it's unclear when that will happen15:11
smcginnisWe could add that as one of the required things for deliverables added to projects.yaml in the governance repo, but that doesn't feel like the right place for that kind of thing.15:12
ttxshould we have some kind of a pre milestone-2 review to parse the list of new deliverables?15:12
*** njohnston has left #openstack-meeting15:12
ttxsmcginnis: I fear it might be too early15:12
smcginnisThat may be a good idea. We could add to our process doc that we need to perform an audit for those things every milestone 2.15:13
dhellmannyou have a tool to show the list of things in governance but not in the releases repo?15:13
ttxyes, check once per cycle.15:13
ttxdhellmann: I have a tool I used to create my gap list yes15:13
fungiit's certain there are teams who add deliverables that take a year or more to actually get off the ground, so while there's probably no harm in forcing them into some sort of release cadence during their formation i expect a lot of teams won't see the benefit in that15:13
dhellmannyeah, then it seems like a periodic manual review would work15:13
smcginnisAnd it may be that they still don't know by m-2, but at least it would be a point to remind them it will need to be done and help us catch things from slipping between the cracks.15:13
ttxonce we fix all the corner cases and historical oddities, it should be pretty reliable to catch new things15:13
ttxand if something is not "ready" by stein m-2 we can wait... and if it's still not ready by train-2 we'd question whether it needs to stay or not15:14
smcginnisAt least we would know.15:14
ttxOK, I can document that15:15
smcginnisttx: Want to add something to process.rst for this?15:15
smcginnisHah, good.15:15
dhellmannand check that tool into the releases repo?15:15
fungiwhat's the downside to letting new official deliverables just be release:independent by default until they pick something else?15:15
ttxBut we first need to clean the list so that it only contains new stuff :)15:15
smcginnis#action ttx to document new deliverable review process for milestone 2.15:15
ttxfungi: the change from independent to cycle-tied is a bit dirty15:16
ttxit leaves things around15:16
ttxI mean behind15:16
ttxLike you end up with entries on both sides without clearly knowing which one applies15:16
smcginnisWe could add something like an _undeclared group, but I think that would be overkill.15:17
fungiso better that they skip participating in releases and then jump straight to cycle-oriented release models once they're ready to start making releases?15:17
fungigot it15:17
ttxit's also consistent with our "release membership" deadline15:17
ttxand for independent things, it's a one-in-a-cycle health check15:17
smcginnisPer cycle manual checks work for me. Seems like a low impact way to handle this.15:18
ttxThanks, will do15:20
smcginnisOK, I think we have consensus. Let's go with that.15:20
smcginnis#topic Open discussion15:20
*** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: releaseteam)"15:20
smcginnisThat's all on the agenda.15:20
smcginnisI should point out I'm travelling next week.15:21
ttxdid we need to make further progress on the release process changes ?15:21
smcginnisI believe I should be around for the meeting though.15:21
smcginnisWhich changes?15:21
smcginnisOh, the work from the PTG>15:21
ttxI seem to remember we had several steps to sell15:21
smcginnisI had started a script to identify cycle-with-intermediary deliverables to release at milestones.15:21
smcginnisI need to give that a little more attention and push that up.15:22
smcginnisWe changed -with-milestones to -with-rc, so that part I think is mostly good.15:22
ttxdid we do ""announce the "choose your model" moment at milestone-2 for intermediary things that haven't released yet""15:23
smcginnisNo, I don't believe so.15:24
ttxThat's a big one15:24
smcginnisI need to look back over everything we had planned to do.15:24
smcginnisThat would be for the non-library intemediary things, right?15:24
ttxbasically we were planning to tell every cycle-intermediary thing that has not released anything by milestone-2 that they need to release now or switch to cycle-with-rc15:24
smcginnisI'll add that to the next countdown email draft.15:25
smcginnisWe have some time, so I'll mention now, then we can bring up again at m-2.15:25
ttxI feel like we need a specific thread to communicate that15:25
ttxsicne it's a big change...15:25
dhellmannwe may want to do that as a separate email, too15:25
smcginnisOK, you're probably right.15:25
fungiis that a reversal from the discussion at the ptg where they were going to end up with a release forced for them at milestone 2 instead?15:25
ttxThe original plan was to start communicating that doing a single release while on cycle-intermediary is not OK. We did not do that really15:26
ttx lines ~4715:26
smcginnisWe didn't directly state that, but with the announcement of changing intermediary library releases to be automatically proposed for releases at the milestones it did kind of say that.15:26
ttxyeah, i feel like we did enough prep work, we can drop the hammer in one go15:27
ttxbut I'd drop it soon15:27
fungioh, got it. specifically it was change the release model at milestone 2 if you're a service deliverable, get a release forced for you if you're a library15:27
fungiat first it sounded like you meant all cycle-with-intermediary (or do libraries now get their own separate release model name?)15:28
ttxbasically cycle-with-intermediary is not meant to do a single release per cycle (if you do that, you should really be using RCs)15:28
ttx(for services)15:28
smcginnisWrote down an action for me to draft something to the ML.15:29
*** takamatsu has joined #openstack-meeting15:29
ttxso you get to pick between one-per-cycle (with RCs to prep) and 'at least twice-per-cycle'15:29
ttxthat removes the whole uncertainty at the end of the cycle15:29
ttx(we can fall back on last RC or last intermediary, if nobody shows up15:30
ttxsmcginnis: ISTR we had email drafts on an etherpad... but maybe not for this one15:30
smcginnisYeah, I don't think we did for this one.15:31
smcginnisWell that's good, content is basically ready to go.15:32
smcginnisEmail 3 can probably just be merged into email 4 at this point?15:33
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:33
smcginnisOK, I'll work on that.15:34
ttxprobably needs some polish before sending :)15:34
ttxok that is all I had15:34
smcginnisThink I should wait until early next week to send it so it doesn't get lost over the weekend?15:34
*** bnemec is now known as beekneemech15:34
ttxsure, early next week would be ideal15:35
smcginnisOK, I'll make a note to send it before I have to head to the airport.15:35
smcginnisOK, anything else for this week?15:36
*** eharney has quit IRC15:36
fungias of next week there won't be an openstack-dev list any longer, so no need to worry about cross-posting announcements like that either15:37
smcginnisOK, thanks everyone. Have a good weekend.15:37
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings ||"15:38
openstackMeeting ended Fri Nov 30 15:38:04 2018 UTC.  Information about MeetBot at . (v 0.1.4)15:38
openstackMinutes (text):
*** dansmith is now known as SteelyDan15:43
*** shrasool has quit IRC15:45
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:46
*** yamamoto has quit IRC15:48
*** mlavalle has left #openstack-meeting15:49
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC15:49
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting15:49
*** mriedem has quit IRC15:50
*** munimeha1 has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting15:51
*** takamatsu has quit IRC15:53
*** armstrong has joined #openstack-meeting15:53
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC16:06
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting16:07
*** artom is now known as temka16:08
*** erlon has quit IRC16:15
*** mriedem has joined #openstack-meeting16:21
*** armstrong has quit IRC16:24
*** tssurya has quit IRC16:25
*** pcaruana has joined #openstack-meeting16:26
*** gyee has joined #openstack-meeting16:27
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC16:29
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting16:30
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting16:37
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting16:38
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC16:38
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC16:39
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting16:40
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting16:42
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC16:44
*** _hemna has quit IRC16:47
*** _pewp_ has quit IRC16:47
*** whoami-rajat has quit IRC16:48
*** yamamoto has quit IRC16:48
*** _pewp_ has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** whoami-rajat has joined #openstack-meeting16:55
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting16:57
*** eharney has quit IRC16:59
*** pcaruana has quit IRC17:04
*** aojea has quit IRC17:06
*** a-pugachev has quit IRC17:07
*** mriedem is now known as mriedem_lunch17:11
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting17:14
*** iyamahat has joined #openstack-meeting17:15
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC17:18
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting17:19
*** eharney has quit IRC17:22
*** erlon has joined #openstack-meeting17:23
*** kopecmartin is now known as kopecmartin|off17:26
*** efried is now known as fried_rolls17:27
*** weshay is now known as he_hates_me17:35
*** he_hates_me is now known as weshay17:36
*** _hemna has quit IRC17:36
*** _hemna has joined #openstack-meeting17:38
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC17:39
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting17:40
*** e0ne has quit IRC17:45
*** munimeha1 has quit IRC18:02
*** sridharg has quit IRC18:04
*** yamahata has quit IRC18:07
*** iyamahat has quit IRC18:07
*** Swami has joined #openstack-meeting18:09
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC18:15
*** iyamahat has joined #openstack-meeting18:21
*** EmLOveAnh has joined #openstack-meeting18:23
*** iyamahat_ has joined #openstack-meeting18:28
*** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-meeting18:29
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting18:31
*** iyamahat has quit IRC18:31
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting18:31
*** ralonsoh has quit IRC18:41
*** shrasool has joined #openstack-meeting18:58
*** electrofelix has quit IRC18:59
*** erlon has quit IRC19:02
*** munimeha1 has joined #openstack-meeting19:02
*** mriedem_lunch is now known as mriedem19:13
*** shrasool has quit IRC19:16
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:20
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting19:21
*** shrasool has joined #openstack-meeting19:22
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:28
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting19:28
*** jamesmcarthur_ has joined #openstack-meeting19:29
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC19:29
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting19:33
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC19:33
*** shrasool has quit IRC19:39
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC19:50
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting19:51
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC19:53
*** cloudrancher has joined #openstack-meeting19:54
*** eharney has joined #openstack-meeting20:07
*** whoami-rajat has quit IRC20:08
*** jamesmcarthur_ has quit IRC20:14
*** radeks__ has quit IRC20:14
*** jamesmcarthur has joined #openstack-meeting20:15
*** nguyenhai has quit IRC20:19
*** jamesmcarthur has quit IRC20:20
*** radeks has joined #openstack-meeting20:32
*** slaweq has quit IRC20:34
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting20:46
*** yamamoto has quit IRC20:50
*** fried_rolls is now known as fried_rice20:51
*** takamatsu has joined #openstack-meeting20:53
*** EmLOveAnh has quit IRC20:55
*** raildo has quit IRC21:05
*** radeks has quit IRC21:21
*** awaugama has quit IRC21:29
*** munimeha1 has quit IRC21:47
*** tpsilva has quit IRC21:51
*** iyamahat_ has quit IRC22:06
*** yamahata has quit IRC22:07
*** a-pugachev has joined #openstack-meeting22:20
*** iyamahat has joined #openstack-meeting22:24
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting22:36
*** slaweq has quit IRC22:43
*** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting22:43
*** apetrich has quit IRC22:47
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting22:50
*** cloudrancher has quit IRC22:52
*** slaweq has quit IRC22:52
*** mriedem has quit IRC22:54
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting22:54
*** Nel1x has quit IRC23:01
*** apetrich has joined #openstack-meeting23:02
*** slaweq has quit IRC23:22
*** Swami has quit IRC23:27
*** a-pugachev has quit IRC23:30
*** a-pugachev has joined #openstack-meeting23:30
*** a-pugachev has quit IRC23:31
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting23:54

Generated by 2.15.3 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!