14:01:01 #startmeeting fwaas 14:01:02 Meeting started Tue May 23 14:01:01 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is yushiro. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:01:03 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:01:05 The meeting name has been set to 'fwaas' 14:01:06 Hello All 14:01:06 Hi All 14:01:18 #chair SridarK_ yushiro xgerman njohnston 14:01:18 Warning: Nick not in channel: njohnston 14:01:19 Current chairs: SridarK_ njohnston xgerman yushiro 14:01:25 hi all 14:01:29 hi 14:02:04 OK, let's start weekly meeting. 14:02:15 #topic Pike 14:02:46 L2 Support 14:03:47 This week was a bit busy, mostly catching up office after summit, but i did had a loo at the mail from Yushiro 14:03:51 hi, can someone point to me link to agenda ? 14:04:12 it looks like a race condition to me 14:04:14 oops, sorry I just logged out.. 14:04:32 the port does not seem to have the vlan tag attached 14:04:57 chandanc, sorry. You're talking about driver's patch, right? 14:05:10 i think this can happen if the l2 agent have not processed the l2 port before fwaas driver call 14:05:13 yes yushiro 14:05:27 i was talking about the mail from you about the trace back 14:05:37 Aha. sounds good, chandan. 14:05:56 ya, was there any specific case when this got triggered ? 14:06:08 yo 14:06:21 my view is this is a race condition 14:06:57 chandanc, I just tested in booting VM ( in other words, in creating VM port) 14:07:13 chandanc, I'll dig more. 14:07:20 reedip__, yo-yo! 14:07:32 oh, if possible can you capture the port DB in ovs , when this happens 14:07:47 ovs-vsctl has the commands to dump port db 14:08:16 you mean the L2 agent port create was not quite processed ? 14:08:17 Sure. 14:08:22 yes 14:08:48 the vlan tag was not present on the port in OVS database 14:09:04 SridarK_, driver returns error and firewall_group is eternally 'PENDING_CREATE' 14:09:41 ok i am wondering how we can guarantee the ordering 14:09:53 is there a way to make sure that we are called after l2 processing is complete ? 14:10:07 +1 SridarK_ 14:10:43 my assumption was we are always called after the ports are processed 14:11:03 SridarK_: AFAIK neutron agent can't gurantee that. 14:11:20 FW alsways will take pre created port 14:11:24 so looks like we also listen to the port notification as a peer to L2 14:11:42 SridarK_: or check if the port is bounded to host or not 14:11:47 can we query for some state 14:11:51 vks1: yes 14:11:52 hmm i will look into it 14:12:02 chandanc, vks1 hmm, how about checking 'binding:host_id' in handle_port? 14:12:05 SridarK_: host bounding will work without fail 14:12:17 sure 14:12:18 yushiro: that's what I am suggesting 14:12:32 vks1, Ok, so we're on same page now. 14:12:50 vks1: exactly and we can skip processing but will need to come back to add our rules after L2 processing 14:13:16 SridarK_: if we prevalidate that then that will be bug free 14:14:50 vks1: can u pls clarify this more if we find that we are not ready to apply rules, how do we get back to actually adding rules at a later point 14:15:37 SridarK_: agent will not process the request. Infact I will suggest the validation to move into plugin 14:16:19 SridarK_: Plugin will not process request 14:16:50 vks1: interesting point, so we validate on the plugin and then intiate the rule application from the plugin ? 14:17:31 SridarK_: yes 14:17:38 we can listen for port events on the plugin for sure 14:18:38 vks1: good point - this can possibly help if we did this in the delete workflow as well as we had some issues there that padkrish was looking into 14:19:45 SridarK_, vks1 Sorry, I just confused about waiting an event for port. 14:19:45 We also should look into qos - they may have an identical scenario 14:20:06 ya should be 14:21:19 Should we change catching events in l2-agent extension? 14:22:25 i think this is coming from DFWG and handle port, correct ? 14:23:09 chandanc, Yes, it is but especially handle_port(). 14:23:21 ok got it 14:23:59 we are trying to protect the port as soon as it is up and so the race in my openion 14:23:59 In my understanding 1.create_port -> 2.bind_port -> 3.handle_port(l2-agent) -> 4.apply_rule(driver) -> 5.update fwg's 'status'(l2-agent) 14:24:34 chandanc, Yes, I think you're talking about between "2" and "4" 14:24:49 ya correct yushiro 14:25:08 sorry got disconnected 14:25:16 it seems so 14:25:24 After bind_port("2"), ovs mechanism driver configures VLAN into br-int. 14:25:36 ya 14:25:50 But, this is not ensured whether this configuration has finished or not. 14:26:01 ya 14:27:20 So, I think following validations are necessary: 1.need to verify VLAN configration has finished or not in L2-agent layer. 2. need to wait in driver layer. 14:27:40 I think we can discuss this more in detail offline so we can validate the approach suggested by vks1 and also look at qos workflow 14:27:44 yushiro: +1 14:28:04 yes agree 14:28:05 SridarK_, +++1 OK, vks1 can you discuss more after this meeting? 14:28:41 OK, anything else for driver's patch? 14:29:01 chandanc: could u pls start an email with the FWaaS folks 14:29:12 sure will do that 14:29:16 maybe we can look at some code and then get into a discussion 14:29:36 #action chandanc sends e-mail for fwaas folks about L2 driver 14:29:38 I will look at QoS and summarize 14:29:46 perfect 14:29:59 +1 14:30:07 OK, next. 14:30:18 i also think with the agent ext - we can listen for some specific events 14:30:28 but lets discuss later in email 14:30:34 sorry yushiro go on 14:30:45 SridarK_, thanks. 14:30:59 L2-agent patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323971/ 14:31:25 First of all, so sorry for big update for 1 PatchSet.. 14:31:57 Cedric gave me great comments and I'm updating & adding UT now. 14:32:30 I'll add more docstring and explain in etherpad for overview of l2-agent 14:33:13 Currently, this is draft version.. https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fwaas-v2-l2-agent 14:35:31 the info on etherpad looks good 14:36:43 I need your help for reviewing this patch. In order to review more easy, I'll update ^^^ etherpad page more. 14:36:47 chandanc, thanks. 14:37:01 Also, I'll sync up paddu with current PatchSet. 14:37:23 great :) 14:37:55 SridarK_, Please give your opinion if my thought is different from your one :) 14:38:07 yushiro: no this looks good 14:38:32 also thanks for the etherpad, i just added it to our meeting etherpad so folks can use it to set things up 14:38:36 for testing 14:39:15 #action SridarK_ to come up with a basic test plan for L2 scenarios 14:39:37 BTW, I forgot adding FWG vs SG Matrix in etherpad!! 14:40:06 #action yushiro will draw FWG vs SG rule Matrix in etherpad. 14:40:54 ^^^ other reviewer wants to know the behavior e.g. FWG(deny) + SG(allow) = ? 14:41:20 OK, that's all for me. 14:42:32 Next: 'public' attribute behavior 14:42:50 reedip__, I think it has already finished except OSC plugin, right? 14:43:24 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/424534/ 14:43:44 oops, sorry, this is wrong link. 14:44:04 yushiro: plugin side changes is merged 14:44:21 vks1, OK, thanks 14:44:33 hmm 14:45:32 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/453204/ 14:45:39 reedip__, Thanks for your help 14:47:00 reedip__, Can we discuss with amotoki about this patch? 14:47:36 oh, 13 minutes left.. 14:48:06 yushiro: reedip__: what do you need to discuss? 14:48:12 Next: Horizon support. 14:48:33 not mwe amotoki 14:48:37 yushiro 14:48:48 I have code in a good shape now.. and can be checked in.. 14:48:48 for fwaas horizon patch :) 14:49:05 I need some help related to the flow 14:49:18 reedip__: okay, i will talk with yushiro later 14:49:29 amotoki, sorry, please .. 14:49:45 as we are creating a new project for fwaas-horizon-dashboard, i need to create a project under openstack 14:49:56 openstack/horizon-dashboard 14:50:10 sorry.. openstack/fwaas-horizon-dashboard 14:50:26 SridarK_, what the process to do this 14:50:40 I am referring to https://docs.openstack.org/infra/manual/creators.html 14:50:44 I'd just stick with something like fwaas-ui 14:50:46 SarathMekala: FYI: I prepared my personal repo for neutron-fwaas-dashboard with the current FWaaS v1 panel 14:50:50 less to type :) 14:51:03 robcresswell, sure :) 14:51:17 it is now available in my github repo https://github.com/amotoki/neutron-fwaas-dashboard 14:51:33 I am okay with any project name though 14:51:45 SarathMekala: u heard ir from the experts here ^^^^ 14:51:47 robcresswell: no 'neutron-' prefix? 14:52:19 SridarK_, :) 14:52:34 the question is how do we create the project under openstack 14:52:59 I am also able to create the project under my name like amotoki but it has to get moved under openstack right? 14:53:01 SarathMekala: I can take care of creating a repo itself 14:53:19 thanks amotoki.. that will help 14:53:29 amotoki: thx 14:53:31 Well I mean you can call it what you like ofc, but I think Firewall as a service (fwaas) is self-explanatory really. 14:53:37 amotoki, SarathMekala Good. 14:53:43 can we sync up after this meeting 14:53:46 one question is a repo name 14:53:48 neturon-XXXX-dashboard ? neutron-XXXX-ui? 14:54:01 SarathMekala: Its in the docs. You have to propose a patch to create the repo or copy an existing one. 14:54:11 But its trivial, its a single patch and its all documented :) 14:54:42 we already have neutron-lbaas-dashboad.... which will be superseded by ocatavia-dashboard sooner or later though 14:54:54 amotoki: either naming work - we should have consistency across projects 14:55:01 robcresswell, thanks 14:55:07 fwaas-dashboard would probably be most consistent, then. 14:55:19 The plugin UIs are already a huge mixture; there is no consistency. 14:55:23 again no 'neutron-' prefix? 14:55:34 I dont really think its necessary 14:55:42 its not called neutron-octavia-dashboard :P 14:55:58 technically octavia is out of neutron but we are still in neutron stadium 14:56:02 no, octavia is a separate project. it is not a part of neutron 14:57:09 no, I know 14:57:09 I wonder we use XXX-dashboard where XXX is a repository name in git.openstack.org. there is no more reason than that. 14:57:38 I just think the naming is really not important; it really comes down to what is easier to say/type, since there is so little consistency 14:57:54 but this is just bikeshedding, just pick a name and roll with it :) 14:58:34 Also before we hit time - SarathMekala: Many thx for putting together the UI demo for the summit - it went well and it was set up nicely 14:58:35 I will post a mail tomorrow about creating a repo for FWaaS dashboard to -dev ML 14:58:48 robcresswell: +11 14:58:54 amotoki, lets sync up after this meeting for 10 mins 14:59:01 SarathMekala: sure 14:59:07 folks in other note: I have started working on heat plugin for fwaasv2 14:59:10 SarathMekala, it's better because 1 minute left :) 14:59:20 yushiro, :) 14:59:21 any suggestion 14:59:23 ? 14:59:25 :) 14:59:41 SridarK_, thanks 14:59:41 vks1, let's discuss after, because 1 minute left :) 14:59:44 vks1: great - i think u have some expertise in ur org as well in this area 14:59:48 continue on #-fwaas 15:00:14 sure 15:00:20 OK, it's over. Sorry for slow and cannot finish all contents. 15:00:37 bye all lets focus on L2 issues this week 15:00:39 #endmeeting