15:05:40 #startmeeting bgpvpn 15:05:41 Meeting started Tue Sep 8 15:05:40 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is matrohon. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:05:42 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:05:44 The meeting name has been set to 'bgpvpn' 15:06:12 hi everyone 15:06:14 #topic announcement 15:06:33 no big announce for me, anyone? 15:06:49 nothing big 15:07:13 tmorin and I have revived the technical discussion around static routes 15:07:28 yes 15:07:44 we'll pursue the discussion and update the etherpad 15:07:53 I would like to invite all interested parties to subscribe to the blueprint and watch the wiki 15:07:54 janscheurich, great, I didn't take the time to read those discussions carefully 15:08:09 hopefully we could provide the conclusion we reached during another IRC meeting 15:08:11 *etherpad 15:08:15 +1 15:08:49 ok let's move on 15:08:55 we can also give an update on gerrit changes in progress, but I don't know if this is an announcement :) 15:09:05 #topic bugs and bps 15:09:25 tmorin, this is the dedicated topic 15:09:27 :) 15:09:35 :) 15:09:59 the new association API implementation by Mathieu is mostly ready 15:10:15 blueprint : https://blueprints.launchpad.net/bgpvpn/+spec/split-association-api 15:10:21 I'm working on the neutronclient change in //, and hope to finish it soon 15:10:34 review : https://review.openstack.org/#/c/207371/ 15:11:14 this is quite hard to review, since it is a big change : I merge the db patch with the API patch 15:11:45 but it reflects what is in the psec 15:11:54 s/psec/spec 15:12:02 neutronclient change: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/219688 15:13:56 ok this is the main work in progress currently, hope it can get merged soon 15:14:09 +1 15:14:19 I've also contributed a change to avoid requiring an ML2 mech driver for the bagpipe driver 15:14:31 to use neutron registry callbacks instead 15:14:41 #topic : drivers 15:14:56 and I plan to implement an ovs agent extension to also have the agent cleaner, as suggested by Mathieu 15:15:15 ah yes, sorry, that belongs to a driver topic 15:15:22 np 15:15:24 :) 15:16:36 so bagpipe : as tmorin mentioned, thanks to latest neutron improvments, bagpipe should integrate neutron smoothly with liberty 15:16:48 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/bgpvpn/+spec/bagpipe-use-neutron-registry 15:17:08 https://bugs.launchpad.net/bgpvpn/+bug/1492021 15:17:09 Launchpad bug 1492021 in bgpvpn "bagpipe : do not overload the ovs agent" [High,New] 15:17:35 those two links provide the way we should refactor the bagpipe driver 15:18:36 doude is not around so I don't think we can speak about the contrail driver 15:18:52 janscheurich, any update from the ODL team? 15:19:03 indeed, and there was no update on doude'd contrail driver last week 15:19:14 No news from my side :-( I haven't been able to talk to them last week 15:19:36 ok, np 15:19:57 #topic : tokyo summit 15:20:24 pcarver : is there any update from the neutron team and the schedule of the design session? 15:20:45 I haven't seen the scheduling Etherpad come out yet 15:21:53 pcarver, ok thanks 15:22:39 #topic API 15:22:50 we have a pending question raised by doude 15:22:55 last comment at #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/177740/ 15:23:27 we'll have a 'networks' attribute in API replies 15:23:46 for a BGPVPN 15:24:02 but currently we don't have a 'networks' attribute in the API resource specification 15:24:29 the reason is that this is a /particular/ attribute, because it is derived from the associate/disassociate actions 15:24:43 question is should we or shouldn't we keep it in the API spec 15:24:53 kind of a philosophical question in fact 15:25:10 totally *not* impacting what we end up implementing 15:25:58 if we keep it in the API resource, that breaks (but only a little bit) the idea of a BGPVPN object independent to how it is associated to Networks/Routers or soon Ports 15:26:06 if we add it to the API, we need to mark it as read-only, or? 15:26:16 yes, that would be what I'd do 15:27:05 I would vote for including it if it is returned in GET 15:27:13 a a read-only attr, this wouldn't change the code, only the spec! 15:27:51 we should add routers too 15:28:05 +1 15:28:14 and later for ports 15:28:22 ok, let's do that 15:28:41 the last pieces of work on the API spec is this update, and adding diagrams 15:29:13 any #help would be appreciated if someone has the time to do nice diagrams and know the tools 15:29:58 next topic ? 15:30:16 tmorin, none :) 15:30:23 #topic work items to fully implement the new API 15:30:31 short topic :) 15:30:41 there are a few new things in the new API 15:30:51 not all of them are of high importance 15:31:16 but if people feel they are important, contributions will be welcome 15:31:31 implementing support for RDs in the bagpipe driver 15:31:43 implementing support for specifying VNID 15:31:53 implementing router association 15:32:04 implementing admin_status 15:32:17 possibly other things that I do not have in mind 15:32:24 #topic testing 15:32:30 just a short announce 15:32:56 we've started to see with matrohon what kind of things we can add to improve ou unit and functional test coverage 15:33:19 possibly we'll have things to propose or announce next week 15:33:37 and now I don't have a next topic to propose :) 15:34:15 I started to improve the UT framework in 207371 15:34:51 #topic open discussion 15:35:31 nobody? 15:35:39 Stupid question 15:35:47 from my side :-) 15:35:53 go ahead we love them 15:36:19 +1 for the unit test improvements! 15:36:35 Will the patches you have made (excluding the bagpipe driver) work on Kilo baseline or only on Neutron master? 15:37:08 it's not a stupid question! 15:37:43 Is there a simple answer? 15:37:59 Liberty only 15:38:02 is the answer 15:38:10 we don't have a Kilo branch 15:38:39 But Liberty is not released yet. Is there a Liberty branch already? 15:38:53 I already though about it, and the only thing I see in the neutron side that is incompatible with previous releases is the way the service plugin is loaded 15:39:00 this change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/208527/ 15:39:04 many things could be backported to Kilo, lost of small things, so a significant work 15:39:07 reflect the move from neutron 15:39:20 Didn't want to suggest backporting! 15:39:52 Just curious how to build a working prototype 15:39:59 tmorin : not sure it would be so significant, the API/DB layer from neutron dind't move a lot since kilo 15:40:19 no, but many small things need an update, that's tedious work 15:40:35 What would be the appropriate OpenStack/Neutron baseline to check out? 15:40:54 liberty is the tagerted baseline 15:40:55 jan: there is no liberty branch, the liberty branch is the master until mitaka forks if I understand correctly 15:41:19 So you are working/testing against master? 15:41:31 yes 15:41:32 and we plan to announce the compatibility with liberty, which makes sense 15:41:39 +1 15:41:41 yes 15:42:18 on my dev platform, I sometimes pin nova, keystone or such components to their Kilo release, to workaround bugs 15:42:31 but we definitly follow neutron master 15:42:43 ok. thanks! 15:43:12 any other question? 15:43:35 nope 15:43:46 ok, let's end the meeting 15:43:49 thanks all 15:43:54 thanks! 15:43:57 #endmeeting