16:00:28 #startmeeting containers 16:00:30 Meeting started Tue Feb 9 16:00:28 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is adrian_otto. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:32 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:34 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Containers#Agenda_for_2016-02-09_1600_UTC Our Agenda 16:00:35 The meeting name has been set to 'containers' 16:00:40 #topic Roll Call 16:00:42 Adrian Otto 16:00:55 o/ 16:00:59 o/ 16:01:02 o/ 16:01:03 o? 16:01:06 o/ 16:01:12 o/ 16:01:13 o/ 16:01:15 o/ 16:01:21 o/ 16:01:45 o/ 16:02:12 o/ 16:02:15 o/ 16:03:14 o/ 16:03:19 hello madhuri_ levi_b rods dane_leblanc coreyob eghobo hongbin strigazi muralia dimtruck suro-patz and juggler 16:03:34 o/ 16:04:35 o/ 16:05:00 hello bradjones and thomasem 16:05:04 let's begin 16:05:16 #topic Announcements 16:05:36 1) Reminder: Magnum Midcycle is Feb 18-19 in Sunnyvale, CA. 16:05:55 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Magnum/Midcycle Midcycle Details 16:06:04 any other announcements from team members? 16:06:53 Is the Google Hangout link as of this writing? 16:07:34 * adrian_otto looks for what juggler is referring to 16:08:17 juggler: We do not have remote participation sorted out yet 16:08:18 keep the meet rolling and i'll see if I remember where that reference is... 16:08:22 ah ok 16:08:29 I do have one more announcement 16:08:39 cool 16:08:50 but it's not specific to Magnum, so I will mention it during open discussion 16:09:13 #topic Review Action Items 16:09:33 adrian_otto to produce a wiki page that explains Magnum's ability to support native API access and wrapped (limited) access to that functionality through our containers resource, and pointers to points of debate. 16:09:36 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Magnum/NativeAPI 16:09:46 this is a first draft of this page 16:09:58 I'm planning to fill it in with additional rationale, but this is the main idea 16:10:30 If you have use cases for the /container API resource, please list them there. 16:10:47 questions/concerns about this? 16:10:52 reading 16:12:07 Im planning on expanding on our intent not to re-implement every feature of every COE, and keeping that resource to a minimum feature set, in accordance with our design sessions decisions in Tokyo. 16:12:38 we may also decide to make that resource pluggable (or even removable) 16:12:56 or possibly eliminate it, subject to discussion at our upcoming midcycle meetup 16:12:57 lgtm, few grammatical things I'll go fix. 16:13:04 tx, thomasem 16:13:24 once we are happy with that page, I'll link it up to the Magnum wiki. 16:13:29 cool 16:13:45 what thomasem said :) some POV changes from sentence to sentence... 16:14:13 great, let's tighten it up. 16:14:23 next up for action items: 16:14:25 2) bradjones and adrian_otto to work on a demo of the Magnum UI for publication on the Magnum project wiki page. 16:14:41 bradjones: I was unable to connect with you. 16:14:54 Let's regroup after the meeting to earmark time for this together. 16:15:10 #action bradjones and adrian_otto to work on a demo of the Magnum UI for publication on the Magnum project wiki page. 16:15:17 ok, that one is carried forward. 16:15:25 Magnum UI Subteam Update (bradjones) 16:15:27 adrian_otto: sounds good 16:15:30 #topic Magnum UI Subteam Update (bradjones) 16:15:57 don't really have anything to update on this week 16:16:01 ok 16:16:09 #topic Blueprint Review 16:16:15 Essential Blueprint Review 16:16:39 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/mitaka Mitaka Blueprints 16:17:04 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/magnum-troubleshooting-guide (Tango) 16:17:10 I think Tango may be on vacation? 16:17:21 Yes he is 16:17:26 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/user-guide (Tango) 16:17:37 ok, does anyone have remarks on these two BP's to share? 16:18:03 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/magnum-tempest (dimtruck) 16:18:24 in review. one patch is about to get merged. the other i just rebased. 16:18:29 this is in "Needs Code Review" status 16:18:46 ok, give me a heads up when all related code merges. 16:18:52 will do! 16:19:06 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/resource-quota (vilobhmm11) 16:19:12 thanks dimtruck 16:19:16 thank you :) 16:19:30 #1. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/266662/ - Spec for Resource Quota got merged last week #2. Patches out for review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/259201/ 16:19:46 will submit few more patches this week 16:19:56 thanks vilobhmm11 16:19:58 adrian_otto : ^^ 16:20:02 any concerns to address with the team? 16:20:52 Subtopic: Blueprints, Bugs, Specs, and other work items to be discussed as a team 16:21:04 adrian_otto : no I think I am good 16:21:06 #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/magnum/+spec/async-container-operations (suro-patz) 16:21:07 thanks! 16:21:10 thanks vilobhmm11 16:21:37 I have been receiving thorough review on the spec 16:21:56 the spec has gone through some revisions - but mostly for phase1 16:22:17 I will request the team to review the phase0 implementation too 16:22:33 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/275003/ 16:23:00 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/267134/ 16:23:36 adrian_otto:^^ 16:24:10 thanks so much for your work on this, suro-patz. This is a really important improvement. 16:24:42 I made a note to be sure to review this today 16:24:43 adrian_otto: happy to contribute! 16:25:30 ok, any additional remarks on this one? 16:25:48 so far I have got a very good response on the review for the spec … love this community's effort to get things better! 16:26:09 super 16:26:26 ok, so thins brings us to our next item for team discussion. 16:26:33 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1543308 We must not disable selinux (Triaged, Critical) 16:26:36 Launchpad bug 1543308 in Magnum "We must not disable selinux" [Critical,In progress] - Assigned to Corey O'Brien (coreypobrien) 16:26:54 I voted -2 on a patch this week because it contained code to disable selinux 16:27:08 with respect, this is something that I simply can not allow. 16:27:36 and I'm looking for others to join me in fixing Magnum so it works properly with selinux enabled. 16:27:39 I went back in the history and it looks like it was only disabled so that cloud-init configuration would work. I turned it back on at the end of cloud-init stuff and everything seems to work locally. I put a patch up and it is going through the checks now 16:27:59 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/277883/ 16:28:00 coreyob: that's terrific 16:28:11 would you be willing to claim ownership of the bug mentioned above? 16:28:35 sure. that patch submission auto-assigned it to me anyway 16:28:52 I'm thrilled to hear that, thanks! 16:29:11 I am prepared to explain why this is such an important issue if anyone is interested 16:29:58 adrina_otto: If you have time, please explain ... 16:30:11 We do have a little time, so let's address it, suro-patz 16:30:38 coreyob : good work! thanks for working on gate problems as well last week it was a great help for the team 16:30:40 neighboring containers have less security isolation between them than neighboring vms do. 16:31:20 that's because rather than using a hardware interface (relatively simple) they are separated by the kernel's syscall interface. 16:31:35 that interface has hundreds of calls, some of which are not simple. 16:32:10 the area of attack surface is larger 16:32:24 and Madatory Access Control (the kernel feature that both selinx and apparmor use) is how containers can be more securely isolated from eachother by narrowing this attack surface 16:32:54 so if we simply disable selinux blidly, we are disabling the most suitable security feature we have 16:33:13 now, we can argue that because bays are isolated from eachother that containers don't need to be 16:33:21 because no two containers will be in the same nova node. 16:33:23 but... 16:33:41 that logic only applies when nova is delivering vm's or full bare metal machines 16:34:00 if nova is configured to deliver containers as the basis for the nova nodes, then we *really* need selinux to be working 16:34:16 because then we have a multi-tenancy security expectation to meet 16:34:19 make sense? 16:34:35 adrian_otto: thanks for the explanation! 16:35:00 wondering, why did we disable it? 16:35:03 my pleasure. If anyone else is concerned about this and does not feel comfortable asking about it now, please feel free to find me privately and I will be happy to address it. 16:35:23 suro-patz: I don't have the original commit log, so I could not identify the original contributor to ask them 16:35:36 but I think it was imported from heat-kubernetes code 16:35:45 here's the original commit: https://github.com/openstack/magnum/commit/784643e142bfaccd762e487077a34e12e4a49da3 16:35:49 so I doubt someone in the Magnum project actively made thtat choice 16:35:51 FYI. Here is the origin commit https://github.com/larsks/heat-kubernetes/commit/6a203edd7a7523f3e69a5d61514a1df8197dae96 16:35:55 "Disable selinux so that cloud-init works" 16:36:02 gasp 16:36:14 wow, that was quick [the original commits]. :) 16:36:20 ok, so let's not do that anymore 16:36:52 thanks everyone for your attention to this. I won't harp on it more today. 16:37:09 adrian_otto: in absence of 'selinux enabled' if a container gets compromised, the chance of the bay-node being compromised would also arise. right? 16:37:09 I haven't tested to be sure, but I'm guessing we do have to disable it temporarily for our cloud-init configuration scripts to work. but it seems we can turn it on again after that. 16:37:23 it did not come from a Magnum contributor originally, which is a small relief. 16:37:25 does not feel like harping. this is a matter of importance 16:38:32 suro-patz: yes, the security of Bay nodes is important. It's just as important as the security of a compute node would be. 16:39:40 we will be covering this in the Midcycle 16:39:50 oh, I did not mention that I assembled a schedule 16:39:52 here: 16:40:08 adrian_otto : its an important point to discuss in midcycle IMHO 16:40:15 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/magnum-mitaka-midcycle-topics 16:40:41 this was based on your input, and can be adjusted still if we see anything important that was overlooked 16:41:24 ok, we are currently in task item review 16:41:45 schedule looks good..thanks adrian_otto ! 16:41:50 next is all about Gate status 16:42:02 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1541964 k8s gate job 16:42:04 Launchpad bug 1541964 in Magnum "K8s bay creation intermittently timing out" [High,Confirmed] 16:42:45 I think that k8s intermittent failure is the only regularly occurring gate issue that needs to be addressed 16:43:13 the memory issue that is next is in the gate now I think 16:43:56 ok, let's paste that one in... 16:44:06 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/276958/ memory consumption 16:44:38 does anyone have any insight on the k8s failure? 16:45:01 coreyob: no idea, until we get the logs when it failed 16:45:04 I am upgrading the k8s bug to critical 16:45:56 so maybe this bug needs to be prioritized? https://bugs.launchpad.net/magnum/+bug/1542390 too? 16:45:57 Launchpad bug 1542390 in Magnum "Copy logs on test failure" [High,New] 16:46:16 +1 16:47:20 I upgraded that one to critical as well, as it could clear the critical path to resolution 16:47:21 fyi - i'm doig a similar change in my certs patch to copy nova logs on error based on eghobo's suggestion. 16:47:33 (since we could have similar issues for functional-api) 16:48:19 i think there are enough pieces laying around that we just need to make sure they're enabled for any failure on any job and cover all the logs we need 16:48:33 +1 16:49:02 i'll assign this bug to myself since i'm kind of down this road already if nobody minds 16:49:10 thanks dimtruck 16:49:34 ok, do we have enoguh muscle lined up to succeed on these gate issues? 16:49:37 cheers dimtruck 16:49:54 please let me know where I can help 16:49:54 I think so yep 16:49:59 ok, good. 16:50:11 that concludes the prepared agenda for work items 16:50:30 adrian_otto: regarding https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/magnum-mitaka-midcycle-topics, two occurrences of 'Heat Tempalte Versioning' is by design I guess 16:50:38 does anyone have other work items (blueprints, bugs, reviews) that need ream discusison before we proceed to open discussion 16:50:57 suro-patz: I am having a look at that 16:51:01 day1: 11am, day2: 13hrs 16:51:21 good catch 16:51:30 I am going to drop the day 2 one and expand the parking lot 16:51:38 cool! 16:51:39 we can address it there if needed 16:53:11 #topic Open Discussion 16:53:22 adrian_otto : if possible, would be nice to have a seperate session for production readiness for magnum right now seems to be part of parking lot discussion 16:53:31 Does anyone know the status of using smaller images in upstream testing (e.g. ubuntu?) 16:53:35 adrian_otto: back to the wiki page you mentioned earlier (https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Magnum/NativeAPI), I think it would be better to put it in a etherpad, so that we can work on the use cases together 16:53:58 hongbin : +1 16:55:08 adrian_otto: if you agreed, you can assign an AI to me for creating the etherpad 16:55:08 hongbin: good suggestion 16:55:45 vilobhmm11: I expected we would touch on production readiness during the Magnum Use Cases and Adoption 16:55:53 I'm trying to use Fedora Atomic in baremetal environment, but its size in raw format (roughly 9 GB) is a pain. 16:56:02 do we have a full 45 minutes or 60 minutes of discussion for that topic? 16:56:43 #action hongbin to create an etherpad for collaborative development of our NativeAPI wiki page 16:56:48 thanks hongbin 16:56:56 my pleasure 16:57:15 #link http://containerevent.com/container-day-meetup/ Open Container Night 16:57:30 adrian_otto : that also works..thanks! 16:57:43 covering as part of Magnum Use Cases and Adoption 16:57:44 I agreed to deliver the keynote for this. I had though we'd have a team dinner on that evening (day before Midcycle) but this will contend for that time 16:58:02 dane_leblanc: I think coreyob is upgrading to Atomic23, which should be smaller than right now 16:58:12 so instead I'd like us to get together as a team between 5pm and 7pm on the 18th 16:58:26 for drinks 16:58:40 hongbin: Thanks. 16:58:58 if you want to attend Open Container Night, it is free, and you need to register. See link above. 16:59:02 dane_leblanc here's the atomic 23 change https://review.openstack.org/#/c/276232/ 16:59:13 We are approaching the end of our scheduled time. 16:59:31 coreyob: Great, thanks! 16:59:59 our next team meeting will be on Tuesday 2016-02-16 at 1600 UTC here on IRC. See you then! 17:00:08 thanks everyone for attending today. 17:00:14 thanks all 17:00:20 #endmeeting