19:01:47 <lucasagomes> #startmeeting ironic
19:01:48 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Jul 21 19:01:47 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is lucasagomes. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
19:01:49 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
19:01:50 <GheRivero> o/
19:01:50 <rloo> o/
19:01:52 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ironic'
19:01:58 <lucasagomes> hi all
19:01:59 <jroll> \o
19:02:07 <lucasagomes> as usual, our agenda is available up here:
19:02:11 <lucasagomes> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic
19:02:12 <wanyen> wanyen
19:02:17 <lucasagomes> #topic announcements
19:02:32 <lucasagomes> so first, I'm chairing the meeting today because devananda and NobodyCam is at the TripleO sprint this week
19:02:43 <rloo> yay lucasagomes!
19:02:51 <mrda> woohoo
19:02:52 <lucasagomes> and... next week (July 28th) we will have the Ironic sprint in Beaverton \o/!!
19:02:57 <jroll> \o/
19:02:59 <lucasagomes> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints/BeavertonJunoSprint
19:03:02 <mrda> more woohoo
19:03:12 <lucasagomes> wohoo*2
19:03:18 <lucasagomes> There's a small pre-meetup pizza outing on Sunday 27th, if you're going to be there and is interested in going please put ur name here:
19:03:22 <lucasagomes> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-ironic-sprint
19:03:38 <lucasagomes> if you're coming, please also take a time to think about our goals for the midcycle and edit it on the etherpad above ^^^
19:03:54 <lucasagomes> one more thing on the announcements
19:03:56 * dtantsur is not coming ;(
19:04:04 <lucasagomes> we won't be having this meeting next week due to Ironic midcycle meetup!!
19:04:09 <lucasagomes> #info no weekly meeting on July 28, due to Ironic midcycle meetup
19:04:15 <lucasagomes> that's all the announcements, I think!
19:04:37 <lucasagomes> #topic release cycle progress report
19:04:55 <lucasagomes> specs... thanks for everybody which are reviewing them
19:05:04 <lucasagomes> we have a lot of specs proposed and we managed to merge a good part of it
19:05:14 <lucasagomes> But still I think we need more core people in the ironic-specs groups
19:05:23 <lucasagomes> if you're core reviewer in Ironic and want to help with the specs, please lemme know
19:05:27 <dtantsur> +10^10
19:05:29 <dtantsur> !!!
19:05:29 <openstack> dtantsur: Error: "!!" is not a valid command.
19:05:34 <lucasagomes> hah
19:05:35 <jroll> I could help
19:05:42 <jroll> russell also returns tomorrow
19:05:46 <dtantsur> I would be less optimistic about the current state: we're in trouble with specs :(
19:05:55 <lucasagomes> thanks guys!
19:06:01 <lucasagomes> yet on specs
19:06:10 <lucasagomes> we are now approaching our spec propsal freeze, this Thursday (July 24th) is the last day we have to propose a spec, more info see:
19:06:15 <lucasagomes> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-June/039031.html
19:06:15 <rloo> (you don't need to be a core-revewer to be a core-spec-whatever)
19:06:28 <JayF> lucasagomes: I will try to help review more specs
19:06:30 <jroll> dtantsur: OTOH, we can only land so much code this cycle, so... we can't approve everything
19:06:36 <lucasagomes> rloo, yeah, that's true russel is there
19:06:46 <dtantsur> jroll, we didn't approve everything we're going to land actually
19:06:50 <wanyen> Per suggestions from last week’s chat room discussion, we have refactored iLO virtual media deploy driver into iLO Virtual Media iSCSI Deploy Driver https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97744/  and iLO-IPA Deploy Driver https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97744/.  We would like to target these 2 specs for Juno.  Please review these specs as soon as you can.  Thanks!
19:06:52 <lucasagomes> so anyone that wants to help with the specs please do!
19:06:58 <jroll> dtantsur: such as?
19:07:14 <lucasagomes> wanyen, right, feel free to bring that up again at the open discussion
19:07:19 <dtantsur> jroll, IPA, discovery, something-else-proposed-by-you, not everything from iLO
19:07:40 <lucasagomes> #info spec proposal freeze on July 24!
19:08:01 <jroll> dtantsur: true. let's do that this week :)
19:08:09 <lucasagomes> dtantsur, right we will talk more about specs on the discussion topic, we have an entry for that
19:08:15 <dtantsur> jroll, would be great :)
19:08:18 <dtantsur> ack
19:08:22 <lucasagomes> about the ironic nova driver,  last week in the nova weekly meeting this topic was raised and there's still some things to iron out with the nova guys about whether the driver can be merged in nova or not
19:08:23 <rloo> lucasagomes: that date is a freeze for new proposals, or is the date where no more specs will be approved for juno?
19:08:33 <lucasagomes> rloo, for new proposal
19:08:35 <dtantsur> rloo, new ones
19:08:43 <rloo> thx :-)
19:08:52 <lucasagomes> after that date, specs will be -2'd and reopened in the K cycle (afaiui)
19:09:02 <lucasagomes> tl;dr the spec for the driver was merged but the spec to the upgrade path from nova baremetal to ironic wasn't, BUT, it has been proposed for a spec-freeze exception
19:09:10 <lucasagomes> devananda, summarized the discussion on the ML, please check it out:
19:09:13 <mrda> lucasagomes: the only thing stopping the nova ironic driver merging is reviews really, and most of that is in our court
19:09:16 <lucasagomes> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-July/040627.html
19:09:36 <lucasagomes> mrda, there was a problem with the migration path from nova bm to ironic
19:09:43 <lucasagomes> the spec for the migration didn't get merged yet
19:09:47 <rloo> mrda: please elaborate? we can only +1 those reviews?
19:10:00 <lucasagomes> but it has been proposed for a spec-freeze exception... and we hope that it's going to land on J
19:10:03 <mrda> yes, that's one of many hurdles :)
19:10:09 <lucasagomes> rloo, yup we can
19:10:14 <lucasagomes> yeah
19:10:27 <lucasagomes> check the ML link above, deva summarized it nicely
19:10:39 <rloo> lucasagomes, mrda, so you're saying we should, cuz the more +1s the more the core-reviewers will notice?
19:11:15 <lucasagomes> rloo, well... I bet it helps
19:11:19 <jroll> it's unclear why us +1'ing the nova reviews would help... since we've already landed the code, we're probably ok with the state
19:11:33 <lucasagomes> yeah that's true
19:11:42 <mrda> hang on, I can explain
19:11:49 <mrda> (can't type quick enough)
19:11:50 <lucasagomes> mrda, go for it :)
19:12:19 <mrda> So the proposed patches are https://review.openstack.org/#/c/{103164,5,7}
19:12:49 <mrda> when a nova reviewer adds comments we take them and propose a ironic reviewer with the fixes for that regview comment
19:12:56 <lucasagomes> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103164
19:13:01 <mrda> we need ironic reviewers to sign off and approve those changes
19:13:05 <lucasagomes> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103165
19:13:06 <lucasagomes> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103167
19:13:21 <mrda> and then we propose the new changes back onto the original nova reviews
19:14:03 <mrda> so https://review.openstack.org/#/c/107316/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102695/  and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/107882 all need ironic eyeballs and +2's
19:14:06 <lucasagomes> mrda, ah right, i saw some patches like that in Ironic, so we should priorize them I assume
19:14:13 <rloo> mrda: is it obvious which patches are ironic-patches-addressing-nova-comments
19:14:29 <mrda> the current state is listed on the whiteboard (https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/IronicWhiteBoard)
19:14:40 <mrda> lucasagomes: yes please
19:14:56 <mrda> so deva was doing this, I'm now doing it for him to allow him to do other things
19:15:06 <mrda> I'm the patch monkey :)
19:15:07 <lucasagomes> #info cores to prioritize the reviews to the nova driver
19:15:21 <lucasagomes> alright... ta much mrda for the info
19:15:21 <banix> anteaya: hi; at some point you were trying to unify the names used by third party testing systems; the changes you suggested have not taken place. right? just wanted to double check. thanks.
19:15:26 <lucasagomes> let's move on?
19:15:36 <mrda> does anyone have questions on this?  you can ping me in channel
19:15:43 <lucasagomes> ^
19:15:49 <lucasagomes> #topic subteam status reports
19:16:05 <lucasagomes> adam_g, hi! care to summarize the tempest work from last week?
19:16:19 <lucasagomes> Shrews, ^ (I know ur at the tripleO midcycle)
19:16:20 <banix> (sorry for asking my question at the wrong place)
19:17:23 <lucasagomes> alright they might be afk... let's move on
19:17:35 <lucasagomes> dtantsur, hi there! anything regarding bug status and fedora support?
19:17:52 <dtantsur> lucasagomes, nothing on Fedora, to the bugs:
19:18:01 <dtantsur> Open: 124. 9 new, 41 in progress, 0 critical, 16 high and 8 incomplete
19:18:10 <dtantsur> (stats are generated using my new script, so not diff this time)
19:18:28 <lucasagomes> #info Bug stats: 124 Open, 9 new, 41 in progress, 0 critical, 16 high and 8 incomplete
19:18:55 <dtantsur> 9 new bugs - I have problems triaging some of them, they require deeper knowledge of Nova
19:18:59 <lucasagomes> dtantsur, thanks! the script is hosted on ur github account? u wanna share it so ppl can take a look?
19:19:00 <dtantsur> will be glad for any help
19:19:07 <dtantsur> moment, trying to find :)
19:19:21 <dtantsur> https://github.com/Divius/ironic-bug-dashboard
19:19:32 <dtantsur> can output stats and new bugs :)
19:19:34 <lucasagomes> #link https://github.com/Divius/ironic-bug-dashboard
19:19:39 <dtantsur> more features may come on request
19:19:44 <lucasagomes> dtantsur, ta much!
19:19:47 <dtantsur> actually it may even turn into web dashboard
19:20:00 <lucasagomes> that will be great
19:20:01 <dtantsur> that's all for me, will appreciate help with triaging
19:20:19 <lucasagomes> jroll, JayF hi there! any updates on IPA?
19:20:29 <jroll> h!
19:20:31 <jroll> hi!
19:21:11 <jroll> so as always, our todo list is here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ipa-todos
19:21:22 <lucasagomes> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ipa-todos
19:21:40 <jroll> we have one +2 on the spec, would love one more https://review.openstack.org/#/c/98506/
19:21:54 <lucasagomes> o/
19:22:17 <jroll> JoshNang's swift temp url patch landed... new swift client should be released very soon
19:22:30 <jroll> which unblocks https://review.openstack.org/#/c/81391
19:22:40 <jroll> which is the last dep for the main agent patch, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/101020
19:22:52 <lucasagomes> nice
19:23:12 <jroll> I also put up a WIP patch for devstack... it's not ready and not working 100%, but I'm close. I think it's a config issue https://review.openstack.org/#/c/108457/
19:23:19 <JoshNang> i'm told a new client should be out shortly, then i'll put in a patch to bump the global reqs file
19:23:28 <notmyname> jroll: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/73920/ is what we're waiting on for a swiftclient release. up to jenkins now
19:23:33 <jroll> and to go with that, WIP etherpad for testing IPA with devstack https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/ipa-devstack
19:23:36 <jroll> notmyname: yep :)
19:23:39 <lucasagomes> I will try to review the spec very very soon, part of the midcycle will be focused on trying to land IPA, I'd like to try it out as well
19:23:46 <lucasagomes> ah great! devstack will be handy for that
19:23:51 <jroll> indeed :)
19:24:11 <jroll> I plan to get that working this week :)
19:24:29 <lucasagomes> +100000
19:24:45 <jroll> I think that's it from me... one thing that was brought up this morning though
19:24:46 <romcheg1> Sounds like a good plan ;)
19:24:53 <lucasagomes> good stuff!
19:25:05 <lucasagomes> jroll, JoshNang notmyname thank u
19:25:12 <jroll> auth for IPA - touchy subject :|
19:25:28 <lucasagomes> yup... I know u guys don't wanna pass tokens around
19:25:29 <jroll> we're of the opinion that keystone admin tokens should not be passed to the agent
19:25:38 <jroll> and instead operators should secure the network
19:25:54 <jroll> idk if we should talk about this now or maybe just next week
19:26:08 <lucasagomes> well let's bring it to the open discussion ?
19:26:15 <jroll> sounds good
19:26:15 <lucasagomes> people may throw some nice ideas
19:26:17 <lucasagomes> ack
19:26:29 <lucasagomes> romcheg: howdy! any updates on the nova bm db > ironic db migration?
19:26:43 <romcheg1> lucasagomes: there are some news as usual :)
19:27:03 <romcheg1> But this time it's bad news
19:27:08 <lucasagomes> :(
19:27:21 <romcheg1> Nova team blocked my patch because the spec is not yet ready
19:27:45 <mrda> romcheg1: link?
19:27:49 <romcheg1> They suggested to ask for for a SFE
19:27:52 <lucasagomes> yeah, but it has been proposed for a spec-freeze exception, right?
19:27:58 <lucasagomes> right
19:28:32 <romcheg1> But it's complicated with Grenade testing
19:28:41 <lucasagomes> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/95025/
19:28:45 <lucasagomes> mrda, ^ link for the spec
19:28:53 <romcheg1> Thanks lucasagomes
19:29:02 <romcheg1> #info I still need some volunteers for helping me with Grenade testing
19:29:08 <mrda> romcheg1: and for the blocked review too please?
19:29:14 <lucasagomes> romcheg1, yeah I heard grenade is not well documented and not that robust yet
19:29:20 <JayF> I thought, from reading the list, grenade testing was impossible due to bm not working in devstack?
19:29:23 * mrda will follow up with some Nova people
19:29:29 <romcheg1> lucasagomes: s/not well/not/g
19:29:34 <jroll> heh
19:29:47 <lucasagomes> JayF, yea... I think it's been discussed in the ML right now
19:29:53 <lucasagomes> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-July/040627.html
19:29:59 <romcheg1> mrda: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/91165/
19:30:00 <lucasagomes> romcheg1, lol ok
19:30:09 <romcheg1> mrda: wrong!
19:30:38 <romcheg1> mrda: wrong link. Lucas gave you the right one
19:30:45 <mrda> ta
19:30:55 <lucasagomes> romcheg1, anything else from u?
19:31:27 <romcheg1> lucasagomes: I wrote some scripts to Grenade that run my migration scripts to turn Ironic to Nova BM
19:31:32 <romcheg1> No
19:31:44 <romcheg1> The opposite, sorry :)
19:31:50 <romcheg1> Nova BM to Ironic
19:31:56 <lucasagomes> nice... yeah nova bm to ironic
19:32:01 <lucasagomes> are the scripts available somewhere?
19:32:25 <romcheg1> No, they are not, because I did not figure out all the dependencies
19:32:48 <romcheg1> Probably I will just patch the scripts to cherry-pick migration scripts until they are merged
19:33:10 <romcheg1> Cross-project dependencies make thinks harder
19:33:29 <lucasagomes> indeed it is
19:33:46 <mrda> romcheg1: even getting them up on your personal github would be good
19:33:57 <lucasagomes> right, there's also that mailist that I pointed before, you may want to put there ur findings
19:34:01 <romcheg1> mrda: posting is not a problem
19:34:37 <romcheg1> the problem is that those scripts rely on the other scripts that are not merged yet to another project
19:34:45 <mrda> ok
19:35:00 <romcheg1> I will figure out smth fast I think
19:35:10 <lucasagomes> ack, or even an etherpad with instructions
19:35:11 <jroll> romcheg1: just wip it until the dependency is merged
19:35:18 <jroll> etherpad++
19:35:36 <lucasagomes> so people willing to help you can get up to speed
19:35:45 <romcheg1> lucasagomes, jroll, I will update the etherpad
19:35:52 <lucasagomes> romcheg1, ta much!
19:36:07 <romcheg1> my pleasure :)
19:36:13 <lucasagomes> alright, anything else on grenade? upgrade path?
19:36:25 <romcheg1> no, that's all
19:36:32 <lucasagomes> ok
19:36:36 <lucasagomes> thanks
19:36:50 <lucasagomes> GheRivero, hi there! any updates on Oslo?
19:37:36 <lucasagomes> ok GheRivero is at the TripleO mid-cycle and might be afk
19:37:55 <lucasagomes> so let's go for the discussion topics
19:38:00 <lucasagomes> # topic Spec reviews bottleneck
19:38:08 <lucasagomes> dtantsur, you added that one... wanna start?
19:38:17 <lucasagomes> #topic Spec reviews bottleneck
19:38:32 <dtantsur> my point was mostly stated: we have to little eyes on specs
19:38:45 <dtantsur> that's especially bad with specs raised by one of us
19:39:02 <lucasagomes> yeah :(
19:39:12 <dtantsur> currently there is ~3 active specs core :)
19:39:24 <jroll> russell is back from two weeks off tomorrow
19:39:33 <dtantsur> jroll, great news!
19:39:39 <lucasagomes> \o/
19:39:42 <dtantsur> should be extremely helpful
19:39:54 <dtantsur> I'd still have at least 7 cores
19:39:58 <jroll> but I agree, more spec cores ftw
19:40:03 <lucasagomes> right, so the current spec-core team is
19:40:05 <lucasagomes> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/admin/groups/352,members
19:40:18 <dtantsur> we're under pressure with a lot of prioritized specs under review and just as many non-prioritized
19:40:19 <lucasagomes> if you wanna be part of it, let us know :)
19:40:28 <jroll> do we follow the same process for adding them, or just do it?
19:40:34 * jroll nominates JayF
19:40:54 * JayF hears the rumble of a bus coming
19:40:57 <dtantsur> stats here: http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/ironic-specs/30
19:41:01 <lucasagomes> jroll, well I wouldn't mind adding a active member of the community... I think devananda can answer that better tho
19:41:08 <jroll> lucasagomes: right
19:41:22 <dtantsur> so yeah, I'm +1 to JayF
19:41:27 <rloo> lucasagomes: is that something you can discuss at midcycle next week?
19:41:35 <dtantsur> we can ask devananda, when he's available
19:41:41 <lucasagomes> rloo, definitely ! we should
19:41:47 <dtantsur> rloo, I would say we need it earlier...
19:42:24 <rloo> dtantsur: like yesterday? :-) Chris has done a lot of reviews -- someone twist his arm.
19:42:29 <lucasagomes> rloo, mind adding the topic to https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-ironic-sprint ?
19:42:43 <jroll> right, the spec cutoff is thursday
19:43:01 <lucasagomes> yeah :/ but still we will have to continue reviewing the specs that are in the queue
19:43:11 <dtantsur> judging by stats and my experience, I would nominate NobodyCam, JayF and rloo ;)
19:43:15 <JayF> I'll make a point to review specs one way or the other
19:43:27 <dtantsur> Cool, thanks!
19:43:29 <rloo> lucasagomes: done.
19:43:34 <lucasagomes> rloo, thanks
19:43:57 <lucasagomes> alright anything else on the specs? or should we move to the open discussion?
19:43:58 <rloo> dtantsur: I'll think about it.
19:44:15 <dtantsur> moment
19:44:30 <dtantsur> I would ask people knowing about iLO to follow iLO-related specs
19:44:42 <dtantsur> it's no good, if lucasagomes and I will be approving them :)
19:44:50 <jroll> lol
19:44:50 <dtantsur> that's it from me
19:44:52 <lucasagomes> hah indeed
19:45:40 <wanyen> for ilO specs, we can still get input form your folks about overall design.
19:45:48 <wanyen> s/form/from
19:45:53 <jroll> ^^
19:46:09 <dtantsur> wanyen, sure, we will provide it
19:46:21 <lucasagomes> yeah, we can help with that :)
19:46:30 <wanyen> we need reviewers for UEFI boot.  We uplaoded a new rev to address Deva's comment but siince then we haven't got new review.
19:46:36 <dtantsur> but it's always helpful to get feedback from somebody knowing a thing or two about iLO :)
19:47:01 <dtantsur> wanyen, that's why I say, we have problems with specs
19:47:16 <wanyen> there are so few reviewers knows iLO so it will be review bottleneck
19:47:51 <BadCub> Nobodycam is in Raleigh this week. I can relay anything you need relayed
19:47:52 <dtantsur> wanyen, there's only 3 active specs core now. I'm gonna schedule more reviews tomorrow
19:47:59 <lucasagomes> well we don't need to try everything, we can look at it, see if the code is good and vote based on it
19:48:37 <wanyen> Per suggestions from last week’s chat room discussion, we have refactored iLO virtual media deploy driver into iLO Virtual Media iSCSI Deploy Driver https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97744/  and iLO-IPA Deploy Driver https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97744/.  We would like to target these 2 specs for Juno.  Please review these specs as soon as you can.  Thanks!
19:49:10 <lucasagomes> wanyen, +1, thanks!
19:49:23 <lucasagomes> ok 10 min beep... let's go for the open discussion or we won't have much time
19:49:28 <lucasagomes> #topic open discussion
19:49:32 <wanyen> we got +2 from Deva for our original iLO deploy driver spec but lifeless suggested that we refactored it so please review them
19:49:49 <jroll> so... auth for IPA. we think passing tokens around is bad, and deployers should secure the network. client certs are a thing, could help (aweeks has been poking at this). thoughts?
19:49:51 <lucasagomes> so jroll, about the authentication... is keystone trusts something that we should have in Ironic to help with that?
19:50:08 <jroll> I don't know what keystone trusts are... but I'm betting they require v3 api?
19:50:16 <dtantsur> we don't have manpower to land keystone trusts, as to me...
19:50:20 <lucasagomes> yeah afaiui it does require v3
19:50:24 <JayF> lucasagomes: I have a different, possibly more radical suggestion
19:50:31 <jroll> yeah, that's a non-starter for us right now :|
19:50:34 <JayF> lucasagomes: why does Ironic need to remain a fully-open admin api?
19:50:54 <dtantsur> what do you mean by "fully-open"?
19:50:57 <JayF> If we setup users with proper roles in keystone, and Ironic honored it, we could pass a token to the Agent that enabled it to do *only what it needed to do*
19:51:08 <JayF> whereas right now if Ironic validates a token at all, it's pretty close to wide-open
19:51:12 <jroll> JayF: I don't think it does. we just need to do some work on policies
19:51:29 <jroll> JayF: https://github.com/openstack/oslo-incubator/blob/master/openstack/common/policy.py is a thing and used today in ironic
19:51:29 <JayF> So lets make a user that by-policy and only do what IPA needs to do
19:51:30 <lucasagomes> yeah, it was a design decision at the beggining but now I start to see that we def need some policies implemented
19:51:47 <jroll> JayF: in conjunction with https://github.com/openstack/ironic/blob/master/etc/ironic/policy.json
19:51:47 <dtantsur> do we have time for it in J?
19:51:48 <JayF> and you reduce risk massively vs shipping a 'full admin' token
19:52:02 <jroll> dtantsur: maybe? doubtful
19:52:06 <dtantsur> just a reminder: 3 days before specs deadline
19:52:11 <lucasagomes> dtantsur, hmm that's hard to say really
19:52:15 <JayF> I'd suggest this: we land agent spec as-is without auth
19:52:25 <JayF> and that we look at ways to implement auth as an addon afterwards
19:52:26 <jroll> without auth *on the heartbeat urls*
19:52:31 <JayF> yes
19:52:33 <dtantsur> JayF ++
19:52:41 <lucasagomes> jroll, JayF +1
19:52:44 <lucasagomes> yeah baby steps
19:52:48 <lucasagomes> the auth is a broad problem
19:52:50 <jroll> see also https://review.openstack.org/#/c/101020/10/ironic/api/config.py
19:52:52 <jroll> :)
19:52:53 <lucasagomes> the PXE approach is far from perfect
19:53:03 <JayF> I mean, I have hundreds of machines running IPA, just authenticated by the network being secret
19:54:15 <jroll> I like this plan
19:54:19 <jroll> thanks y'all
19:54:25 <dtantsur> Before time ran out, wanted to ask: are there folks here, who also want any kind of (in-band) hardware discovery landed in J?
19:54:35 <dtantsur> just figuring out, who can help us
19:55:20 <dtantsur> because we're trying to ship at least simple PoC discovery, that works
19:55:34 <jroll> I think it's a great feature to have, but I think that there are higher priorities
19:55:41 <lucasagomes> #link https://review.openstack.org/107344
19:55:51 <lucasagomes> this is the spec that dtantsur is working on ^
19:56:12 <jroll> right now, I can online an entire rack with one bash script
19:56:23 <jroll> which also can do multiple racks
19:56:37 <jroll> so it honestly wouldn't save *me* much time... but that's just me
19:56:51 <dtantsur> that's a priority for us, so I'll be anyway busy with it...
19:57:03 <jroll> right
19:57:07 <Nisha> lucasagomes: what the priority for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/100951 Discover at node-create ad node-update
19:57:12 <jroll> I just think there are more important features to land
19:57:14 <lucasagomes> yeah I think this is the feature number #1 that the tuskar folks wants implemented in Ironic
19:57:15 <jroll> uefi etc
19:57:42 <lucasagomes> but yeah the priority is different for each of us
19:58:22 <lucasagomes> Nisha, thanks! yeah that's another way to do it
19:58:35 <dtantsur> Nisha, I would like to see it landed, though it's not a high priority for me
19:58:36 <lucasagomes> and we want to have something similar for the drac driver
19:58:43 <jroll> I think Nisha's spec is meant to be on top of dtantsur's
19:58:50 <dtantsur> jroll, no longer
19:58:53 <jroll> ohhh
19:58:56 <lucasagomes> it was before, now it's changed
19:59:02 * jroll shuts up :)
19:59:03 <dtantsur> things have changed a lot due to our previous talk
19:59:19 <dtantsur> that's my problem with the spec procedure: we have real talk mostly on IRC
19:59:27 <lucasagomes> heh
19:59:29 <dtantsur> still more-or-less silent in comments :)
19:59:33 <rloo> one minute or so left.
19:59:42 <jroll> 20 seconds :P
19:59:43 <lucasagomes> alright folks, I don't think we have more time
19:59:47 <lucasagomes> so
19:59:48 <jroll> to the channel!
19:59:49 <dtantsur> thanks
19:59:50 <lucasagomes> thanks everyone, great meeting
19:59:55 <lucasagomes> as usual
19:59:56 <jroll> thanks for running it lucasagomes :)
19:59:59 <lucasagomes> and I hope to see some of you guys next week!!
20:00:06 <jroll> don't forget to #endmeeting :P
20:00:08 <lucasagomes> #endmeeting