15:24:06 #startmeeting bgpvpn 15:24:07 Meeting started Tue Jun 6 15:24:06 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is tmorin1. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:24:08 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:24:10 hi everyone 15:24:11 The meeting name has been set to 'bgpvpn' 15:24:14 sorry for starting late 15:24:19 let's see who is here 15:24:36 matrohon ? pcarver ? doude ? 15:25:21 hi 15:25:25 hi paul 15:25:39 Totally lost track of time, but I guess I didn't miss much 15:25:49 I don't have an overwhelming amount of items that I see we should discuss today 15:25:58 we didn't even start 15:26:04 I was very late as well 15:26:14 #topic bugs/gate 15:26:18 not much to say here 15:26:31 we merged minor bugfixes 15:26:57 including a change to pin our dependency to networking-odl, which was (again) causing our functional test to break 15:26:59 this is solved 15:27:07 details at : https://review.openstack.org/#/c/471230/ 15:27:15 #topic BGPVPN port associations and static routes 15:27:41 there have been useful/positive reviews on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/467277/ 15:27:43 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/467277/ 15:27:57 my understanding is that all comments have been addressed 15:28:08 but I think that more reviews would be useful to have before we merge 15:28:20 I've asked Nuage folks to review 15:28:40 having feedback from ODL crowd would be nice as well 15:28:48 I plan to give it another look 15:28:56 pcarver: this will be welcome 15:29:34 there is one area where I think the doc is too implicit: what happens when a Port is associated to BGPVPNs and its Network is also associated to a different set of BGPVPNs... ? 15:30:03 my idea is that the Port should inherit, and hence end up being associated with all which is above it 15:30:20 and I think we could discuss generalizing this to Port/Network/Router 15:30:23 That seems like a logical approach 15:30:35 even though, until now, we have prevented doing both Network and Router associations 15:30:59 https://developer.openstack.org/api-ref/networking/v2/#association-constraints 15:31:08 I think we may want to revisit this constraint 15:31:42 I'm not sure that the restriction is actually strongly relevant, and we know that it is actually hard to ensure this constraint in backends 15:31:58 at least in some of them: https://bugs.launchpad.net/bgpvpn/+bug/1648510 15:31:59 Launchpad bug 1648510 in networking-bgpvpn "Constraint enforcment might not work for contrail driver" [Undecided,New] 15:32:07 so well, food for thought... 15:32:14 pcarver: anything else to add ? 15:32:49 tmorin1: no, not really. I know there are a few Gerrit notifications from you in my inbox that I need to get to. 15:33:13 possible, I don't have any specific one in mind though 15:33:19 I've got (non network related) constraints today, so if nothing else, I would close the meeting.... ? 15:33:21 ok for you ? 15:33:30 sounds good 15:33:59 ok, thank you 15:34:10 let's follow up next week 15:34:11 bye! 15:34:18 #endmeeting