04:00:04 <njohnston> #startmeeting fwaas
04:00:04 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Sep 21 04:00:04 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is njohnston. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
04:00:04 <njohnston> #chair SridarK
04:00:05 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
04:00:07 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'fwaas'
04:00:08 <openstack> Current chairs: SridarK njohnston
04:00:17 <njohnston> Hello everybody!
04:00:37 <SarathMekala> Hi all O/
04:00:46 <SridarK> Hi all, we can do a quick mtg today unless there are some issues
04:00:59 <yushiro> OK.
04:01:05 <SridarK> #topic FWaaS v2
04:01:06 <yushiro> aloha
04:01:50 <SridarK> We are on to Ocata now
04:02:21 <yushiro> Yes
04:02:37 <SridarK> There are some bugs that we are fixing and those can be targetting for stable/newton as well as njohnston did today
04:03:00 <xgerman> o/
04:03:18 <yushiro> +1
04:03:28 <SridarK> we can run thru our initial targets for Ocata
04:03:57 <SridarK> yushiro: the CLI is possibly among our first targets
04:04:04 <njohnston> indeed
04:04:09 <yushiro> SridarK: Yes.
04:04:42 <SridarK> we can close out some of the discussions and details on the email thread/etherpad
04:04:59 <SridarK> with that u should be able to close out some of the final points and push for approval
04:05:01 <yushiro> Yes.  We need to determine a 'command format' for fwaas v2.
04:05:31 <SridarK> shall we add comments/discuss on the etherpad
04:07:01 <yushiro> Yes,  I'd like to give comments about 'command format' and 'the result of list command'.
04:07:17 <yushiro> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fwaas-v2-cli
04:07:47 <yushiro> SridarK: Thanks for your attention.
04:08:05 <SridarK> possibly we could take the next 2 days to add our comments so yushiro can move forward
04:08:14 <SridarK> we can also discuss more on openstack-fwaas
04:08:28 <njohnston> +1
04:08:33 <yushiro> Sure. ++++1
04:08:38 <SarathMekala> +1
04:08:38 <SridarK> :-)
04:08:47 <SridarK> ok good lets move fwd
04:09:23 <SridarK> chandanc_: & SarathMekala: on L2 - what are things we will need to focus on
04:10:26 <SridarK> are there areas where the team can help out on
04:10:31 <chandanc_> SridarK, I worked a bit on the ip conntrack patch and test cases this week
04:10:34 <SarathMekala> we will need to get the code reviews done.. and fix the UT cases
04:10:43 <chandanc_> will be posting the update soon
04:10:55 <njohnston> chandanc_: Looking forward to it!
04:11:03 <xgerman> +1
04:11:05 <SridarK> ok good, i think u will need to push for help on the neutron patches
04:11:29 <SridarK> i think once u have some core attention that shd move fwd quickly
04:11:36 <chandanc_> As soon as i am done with the UT update will start aski9ng for reviews
04:11:42 <chandanc_> sure SridarK
04:11:44 <SarathMekala> sure
04:11:44 <SridarK> ok great
04:12:20 <SridarK> i think once we have this done, we will be in a good position to get the L2Agent and FWaaS L2 driver pieces in
04:12:50 <SridarK> anything else u would like to discuss on this area ?
04:13:08 <yushiro> Is paddu here?
04:13:12 <chandanc_> Nothing more for now
04:13:27 <SridarK> ok moving on to L2Agent
04:13:46 <SridarK> yushiro: would u like to discuss any thing at this point
04:14:20 <SridarK> padkrish said he will not be able to make the mtg today, he was trying to work thru a PoC based on last weeks discussions
04:14:57 <yushiro> SridarK: I and paddu decided to follow L3-agent mechanism. I'm trying to verify it now on my local env.
04:15:06 <SridarK> yushiro: ok
04:15:31 <SridarK> ok lets move on
04:15:39 <yushiro> SridarK: so, today is nothing to inform.  I'll contact to paddu later.
04:15:54 <yushiro> s/contact/send e-mail
04:16:09 <SridarK> yushiro: sounds good
04:16:14 <SridarK> njohnston: many thx for jumping on multiple fronts with doc changes, infra stuff and all
04:16:23 <njohnston> sure thing
04:16:27 <yushiro> njohnston; Thanks!!
04:16:31 <njohnston> trying to keep us in the stadium :-)
04:16:56 <xgerman> thanks
04:17:02 <SridarK> and u are doing an awesome job on that front many thanks
04:17:17 <njohnston> I have more docs changes and work in mind coming up soon, Ihave an ongoing conversation with Sam-I-Am about that
04:17:25 <SridarK> njohnston: pls let us know how we can help
04:17:29 <njohnston> SridarK: Thanks!
04:17:45 <SridarK> pls free to assign some piece of the doc work to me, happy to help on that
04:17:49 <yushiro> njohnston: me too. please let me know if you need some help :)
04:18:02 <njohnston> SridarK yushiro: Thanks, will do!
04:19:03 <njohnston> I'm really just trying to test out the newton release as it is and file any bugs I find before release time so they can be backported
04:19:21 <njohnston> SridarK: Thanks for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/373565/ that is a good one
04:19:43 <SridarK> njohnston: yes, i will add some UT around that then it should be ready to go
04:19:58 <njohnston> SridarK: Is that a candidate for backporting?
04:20:16 <SridarK> njohnston: i think it is a simple fix and worth a shot
04:20:45 <SridarK> FW rule updates have an issue, if they are associated to a policy
04:20:52 <SridarK> will be good to get that in
04:21:09 <njohnston> SridarK: Super, so I just added the 'newton-rc-potential' tag to https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1623953 per ihrachys's instructions.
04:21:11 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1623953 in neutron "Updating firewall rule that is associated with a policy causes KeyError" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Sridar Kandaswamy (skandasw)
04:21:23 <SridarK> ok great
04:21:51 <SridarK> thx njohnston
04:22:27 <yushiro> njohnston, SridarK: Hi, could you check this bug is necessary to backport or not? https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1623102
04:22:28 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1623102 in neutron "FWaaSv2 - Error message about 'Rule association' is wrong" [Undecided,New]
04:23:32 <njohnston> If we can get a fix in quickly, then I think it is worth a try
04:23:45 <xgerman> +1 seems low risk
04:23:48 <SridarK> yushiro: i can take a look into that
04:24:00 <SridarK> unless u are looking already
04:24:08 <yushiro> xgerman: yeah :)
04:25:36 <yushiro> OK, thanks. oh, sorry.  Please go ahead :)
04:25:57 <SridarK> yushiro: ok i picked that up
04:26:22 <yushiro> SridarK: If you change 'confirmed', I'll post the patch.
04:26:26 <yushiro> Thanks
04:26:33 <SridarK> njohnston: on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/373535/
04:26:50 <SridarK> i just saw that tempest has failed
04:27:22 <njohnston> it is a timeout failure
04:27:39 <njohnston> AssertionError: False is not true : Timed out waiting for 172.24.5.8 to become reachable
04:27:44 <yushiro> yes.
04:27:54 <njohnston> looks like it is likely an infra issue to me
04:28:14 <njohnston> I thought I would give it a recheck and then, if it fails again, delve a little deeper
04:28:30 <SridarK> njohnston: yes seems so - i just went thru the logs too dont see any specific fwaas failure
04:28:36 <SridarK> yes makes sense
04:30:07 <yushiro> +1
04:30:58 <SridarK> njohnston: one other issue on the v1 and v2 tempest tests
04:31:24 <njohnston> yes?
04:31:25 <SridarK> i was thinking thru this a bit more to bifurcate the tests
04:31:41 <SridarK> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/371749/
04:32:18 <SridarK> i was initially thinking maybe we should have one set of tests, but the challenge will be in devstack deployment
04:32:33 <njohnston> yes, the deployment is exactly why I think we need to have two jobs
04:32:42 <SridarK> we will essentially need to reset the plugin and agent and restart server and agent
04:32:54 <SridarK> yes i think this is the best option to deal with that
04:33:25 <SridarK> ok have been meaning to sync quickly on that - we are on the same page
04:33:34 <njohnston> excellent :-)
04:34:27 <SridarK> xgerman: i think lbaas v1 & v2 could be deployed at the same time - so this may not have been an issue
04:35:01 <xgerman> lbaas v2 reused the v1 tables so a no-go
04:35:07 <xgerman> fawns should be fine
04:35:09 <njohnston> That change depends on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/370274/ so if everyone could review that, I think it will help us to move forward
04:35:10 <xgerman> fwaas
04:35:19 <SridarK> ok thx xgerman
04:36:00 <yushiro> njohnston: I see.
04:36:41 <njohnston> it will also help clarify devstack setup
04:36:46 <reedip> hi
04:36:59 <yushiro> reedip, hi
04:37:06 <SridarK> njohnston: we could still keep v1 as default and switch v2 to default as we get the tempest things inline
04:37:41 <xgerman> we had two jobs v1 and v2 for lbaas
04:37:47 <SridarK> njohnston:  not religious abt this - just a thought, i can see the point of stressing the future
04:37:56 <xgerman> +1
04:38:29 <SridarK> reedip: hi, hang on for a few mins pls
04:38:49 <reedip> SridarK : Yes, sure. I just joined the channel luckily :D
04:38:55 <SridarK> :-)
04:39:50 <njohnston> I don't think we should wait until we have tempest in line before we start defaulting to v2, especially while tempest is non-voting.  and by bifurcating the tempest jobs, that makes it even clearer that the (temporary) state where the tempest jobs are broken is specific to v2
04:40:23 <njohnston> I guess my position is based on the belief that we will get the tempest jobs straightened out sooner rather than later, i.e. before the summit
04:40:31 <SridarK> njohnston: ok that is fair
04:40:39 <SridarK> lets go with that
04:40:58 <SridarK> ok lets move on
04:41:01 <xgerman> +1
04:41:20 <SridarK> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/370731/
04:42:02 <reedip> It is associated with https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1623099
04:42:04 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1623099 in neutron "FWaaSv2 - 'firewall_policy_id' is missing in firewall_rule response body" [Undecided,Invalid]
04:42:22 <SridarK> reedip: i think we are on the same the page that we need to do more than PS1
04:42:44 <SridarK> i have some cleanup todo's in the extension attribute as well
04:42:53 <reedip> SridarK : yes, I do. but I wanted to know how you plan to move ahead ?
04:43:18 <SridarK> reedip: let me push a PS
04:43:26 <njohnston> I am confused; reedip, you marked that bug as Invalid.
04:43:59 <SridarK> i think we can generate the list of policies and push that out
04:44:24 <SridarK> i will need to tweak the extensions part - i think it should be more clear then
04:44:36 <reedip> njohnston : Yes, I marked it. Because as per the API for FWaaS V2, we did not need policy ids. But had a discussion with SridarK, and thats when I realized, that I am also confused abit
04:45:00 <reedip> SridarK : instead of Firewall Policies being None, they should be [] when creating a firewall rule
04:45:11 <SridarK> reedip: yes we should return a list
04:45:13 <reedip> so that the list can be appended
04:45:52 <reedip> SridarK : I think I can push that ( Instead of None, make it a list )
04:46:26 <SridarK> reedip: ok sure, and i can comment or make changes
04:46:27 * njohnston understanding dawns
04:46:42 <reedip> SridarK : okay, will do so today
04:47:34 <yushiro> reedip, thanks for your help.
04:47:39 <SridarK> reedip: in all fairness, my bad - i had some context on this, and it was a known TODO but i forgot to assign the bug to myself
04:47:59 <SridarK> reedip: sounds good
04:48:06 <reedip> SridarK : no worries, I would be glad to help you guys out :)
04:48:25 <SridarK> reedip: thanks and nice to see u in the fwaas community again too
04:48:31 <njohnston> +1!
04:48:48 <reedip> SridarK , njohnston :)
04:49:19 <SridarK> ok i think those were some of the outstanding issues
04:49:38 <SridarK> other things folks would like to discuss ?
04:49:43 <SridarK> on v2
04:50:44 <SridarK> ok lets move on
04:50:52 <SridarK> #topic Open Discussion
04:51:00 <njohnston> I noticed that this issue came up for security groups, I wondered if we would need to address it as well: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/371523/
04:51:17 <njohnston> the commit message is rather lengthy
04:52:15 <njohnston> but if we need to implement a similar sanity check, I figured it bears a quick look
04:52:48 <SridarK> njohnston: one thing is that for L3 since we are in the router ns - may be we are ok
04:52:56 <SridarK> but for L2 yes
04:53:14 <SridarK> but good point and bears some investigation to look into this
04:53:37 <chandanc_> +1
04:53:46 <chandanc_> will verify this
04:53:51 <njohnston> thanks chandanc_!
04:54:22 <chandanc_> thanks njohnston for bringing this up :)
04:54:38 <yushiro> folks,  I have 1 announcement.
04:55:17 <njohnston> please go ahead, yushiro
04:55:56 <yushiro> 2 weeks later, I'll go abroad for honeymoon from Oct. 1st to Oct. 12th.
04:56:02 <yushiro> Apologize for such season.
04:56:27 <njohnston> Congratulations on getting married!
04:56:31 <SridarK> yushiro: nice and enjoy
04:56:47 <SarathMekala> Congrats yushiro :)
04:56:48 <yushiro> I'll push all of my patch within September.
04:56:57 <chandanc_> Congrats :)
04:57:12 <SridarK> Hmm, yushiro got married some time ago, i hope fwaas did not keep him from the honeymoon :-)
04:57:50 <njohnston> that would be the worst kind of firewall!
04:57:52 <yushiro> njohnston, SridarK, SarathMekala , chandanc_ : many thanks.  I'm so glad to meet this team members :-)
04:58:02 <SridarK> :-)
04:59:01 <SridarK> yushiro: we will push to get the CLI inputs in quickly so u can be done quickly
04:59:21 <SridarK> yushiro: pls dont worry abt this, have fun and we do have time
04:59:32 <yushiro> SridarK: OK, thanks for your help :)
04:59:40 <SridarK> 1 min
05:00:02 <SridarK> ok all many thx and have a great week
05:00:10 <hoangcx> Bye
05:00:12 <yushiro> Even if timezone is different and language is different, I'll focus on contributing fwaas :)
05:00:13 <SridarK> we can sync on the fwaas channel or email
05:00:14 <njohnston> thanks all!
05:00:15 <yushiro> yes, bye!
05:00:20 <SridarK> yushiro: thx
05:00:26 <njohnston> #endmeeting