16:00:55 <Sukhdev> #startmeeting ironic_neutron
16:00:56 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Apr  4 16:00:55 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is Sukhdev. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:57 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:01:00 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ironic_neutron'
16:01:04 <sambetts> o/ Hi all
16:01:06 <jroll> \o
16:01:16 <Sukhdev> #topic: Agenda
16:01:21 <Sukhdev> #link: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Ironic-neutron#Meeting_April_4.2C_2016
16:01:47 <Sukhdev> I kept the same agenda from last time - thought we'll adjust it as we go along
16:01:56 <Sukhdev> #topic: Announcements
16:02:09 <Sukhdev> Mitaka is this week, right?
16:02:17 <jroll> yep
16:02:21 <sambetts> Coordiated release is the 7th
16:02:38 <sambetts> Thursday :)
16:02:54 <Sukhdev> then we can get on with Neuton :-)
16:03:28 <Sukhdev> I spoke with armax about a joint session (Neutron/Ironic/nova) in Austin
16:04:15 <Sukhdev> He wanted to understand the agenda - so, I discussed about the VLAN aware servers
16:04:16 <jroll> fwiw, I also proposed that for the cross-project track: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-cross-project-sessions
16:04:26 <jroll> line 165
16:05:06 <Sukhdev> jroll : cool
16:05:08 <jroll> (but go on, sorry to interrupt)
16:06:06 <Sukhdev> there is already a neutron/nova session planned - so, he wanted to understand the specifics that we have in mind
16:06:29 <Sukhdev> see here- https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-neutron-summit-ideas
16:07:23 <jroll> yeah, this would be separate from the existing one
16:07:28 <Sukhdev> jroll : So, I did the prep work and told him to expect a ping from you regarding the joint session
16:08:11 <jroll> Sukhdev: I've talked with nova ptl about it, but not armax as of yet
16:08:27 <jroll> what do I need to ping him about, other than "this is important to us" :)
16:09:06 <Sukhdev> jroll : just to coordinate so that it is planned and property advertised
16:09:40 <jroll> sure
16:10:15 <Sukhdev> He mentioned he was tight on number of sessions, hence, wanted to priortize
16:10:24 <jroll> nod
16:10:47 <jroll> nova has a session in every time slot wednesday/thursday, so it might also be hard to pull them into a neutron session
16:10:49 <Sukhdev> and especially another nova/neutron session was planned as well
16:10:55 <jroll> so I'm hoping this ends up in the cross-project track
16:10:59 <jroll> (on tuesday)
16:11:37 <Sukhdev> jroll: that would be really cool then he won't worry about his sessions :-)
16:11:45 <jroll> Sukhdev: yeah, that's the goal :)
16:12:37 <Sukhdev> Anything else?
16:12:50 <Sukhdev> any other announcements?
16:13:02 <jroll> the multitenant network CI is green \o/
16:13:14 <jroll> huge thanks to vasyl and everyone else working on that
16:13:28 <Sukhdev> cheers :-)
16:13:32 <jroll> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/091025.html
16:14:19 <Sukhdev> I met with Jay Pipes over a beer last week -
16:14:41 <Sukhdev> he is considering proposing a third party testing lab community wide
16:15:37 <Sukhdev> this will facilitate for such testing of baremetal as well virtual deployments
16:15:45 <jroll> yeah, I've seen that on the ML
16:16:22 <Sukhdev> he is looking for volunteers and HW
16:16:54 <Sukhdev> anything else?
16:17:06 <Sukhdev> back to the agenda -
16:17:08 * jroll has nothing
16:17:44 <Sukhdev> #topic: Critical Ironic patches for early merge for N
16:18:06 <Sukhdev> I have corrected the list of 4 patches on the agenda page
16:18:41 <Sukhdev> Lets see if we can review, cleanup and get these merged so that early adopters can start to test
16:18:46 <Sukhdev> and provide the feedback
16:18:55 <jroll> +1
16:19:34 <Sukhdev> I looked them over the weekend - they look in a reasonable shape
16:19:55 <Sukhdev> and with CI green - that makes it easier
16:20:37 <Sukhdev> Do we need to discuss any specific patch here?
16:20:51 <Sukhdev> or are we good with the list?
16:21:12 <Sukhdev> I did not include nova patch in the list
16:21:31 <jroll> I think I'm good with it
16:22:04 * sambetts is good with the list
16:22:06 <Sukhdev> cool - thanks
16:22:29 <Sukhdev> #topic: VLAN aware BMs
16:22:55 <Sukhdev> I discussed this in the Neutron core meeting as well as over beer with neutron cores
16:23:30 <sambetts> So I've been doing a lot more research into the vlan aware vms, and the model they've drawn up is a difficult one for both BM and SRIOV
16:23:36 <Sukhdev> I took the liberty of sharing Sam's patches with them -
16:23:52 <sambetts> Sukhdev: thanks :)
16:24:30 <Sukhdev> sambetts : yup, I had a fairly detailed level discussion to see how can we align the work so that we do not end up doubling the effort
16:25:16 <Sukhdev> the initial feedback I got was that we can significantly simplify the work in Ironic
16:25:23 <jroll> I'd love to see a novel written about that discussion on the ML :)
16:26:00 <Sukhdev> jroll : other than neutron spec, there is nothing specific -
16:26:18 <Sukhdev> because the work got pushed to N from M, owners may change as well
16:26:47 <sambetts> My concern when I looked further into the vm aware spec is that they're model relies on a service in the compute host doing vlan to vlan translation
16:26:55 <Sukhdev> My intent of this discussion in the neutron team is to find right people so that we can pull them all into this joint session in Austin
16:27:11 <Sukhdev> and work through the details and then march forward with the implementation
16:27:23 <Sukhdev> kind of similar approach that we took in Vancouver
16:27:54 <sambetts> that would be good :)
16:28:27 <Sukhdev> sambetts : the idea is to understand the requirements from both VMs and BMs
16:28:58 <Sukhdev> armax even suggested that we should change the title from VLAN aware VMs to VLAN aware servers
16:29:08 <jroll> ++
16:29:08 <Sukhdev> so that it works for all
16:29:24 <sambetts> +++
16:29:28 <jroll> Sukhdev: I was thinking we need a "vlan aware instances" session in the neutron summit, that focuses on VM+BM
16:29:58 <sambetts> yeah, I thought thats what the nova+neutron+ironic session would end up being
16:30:03 <jroll> and save the neutron/nova/ironic joint session for "okay, how do we actually decouple physical infra from neutron networking"
16:30:09 <jroll> which is the real thing we want to solve
16:30:32 <jroll> vlan-aware instances gets us most of the way there, I think, there's a few other things to deal with
16:30:56 * sambetts likes being on the bleeding edge
16:31:20 <Sukhdev> jroll : the one I proposed on neutron track essentially is for VLAN aware servers - as armax pinned me with the specifics of what we want to cover
16:31:57 <jroll> Sukhdev: okay, cool, let's not call it baremetal then, but rather call out that it should solve for both bare metal and VM
16:32:23 <sambetts> Yeah, and not just ovs VMs either
16:32:31 <Sukhdev> OK - I will reword it
16:32:36 * jroll adds to that
16:33:49 <Sukhdev> jroll : only issue I see is that he is tight on number of sessions
16:34:06 <Sukhdev> jroll : if need be, can we do this session on Ironic track?
16:34:16 <jroll> Sukhdev: well, the larger session is proposed as cross-project session
16:34:28 <jroll> unless you mean the "vlan aware servers" thing
16:34:42 <Sukhdev> jroll : In case we need one specific for this -
16:34:46 <jroll> in which case... maybe? that's totally a neutron topic, but if we have room...
16:35:08 <jroll> here's what I think we need:
16:35:14 <jroll> 1) neutron session on vlan aware things
16:35:31 <jroll> 2) nova/neutron/ironic session on decoupling physical infra from neutron networks
16:36:04 <jroll> (1) only really makes sense in the neutron track, (2) we have proposed to cross-project, will likely take it in an ironic session if needed
16:36:17 <jroll> does that make sense?
16:37:00 <Sukhdev> jroll : yes, it does - I will have to fight to generate enough interest in neutron side to get session for 1)
16:37:32 <jroll> right, and I think if we include VMs in it (especially non-ovs!), it will get traction
16:37:51 <sambetts> definatly
16:38:06 <Sukhdev> yes - let me re-word the session title.
16:38:21 <jroll> I think it's fine as-is
16:38:39 * jroll adds a note to clarify
16:39:12 <Sukhdev> jroll : I just looked (had forgotten what I wrote :-)) - yes, it looks fine
16:39:29 <jroll> :)
16:41:18 <Sukhdev> I will continue to push to get this scheduled
16:41:29 <sambetts> Where are these sessions defined?
16:41:38 <jroll> sambetts: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-neutron-summit-ideas
16:41:45 <jroll> and item 12 on https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-cross-project-sessions
16:42:00 <sambetts> thanks jroll :)
16:42:06 <jroll> yep
16:42:15 <sambetts> and thanks Sukhdev for pushing this
16:43:11 <Sukhdev> BTW, I am proposing another one Manila-Neutron integration (see item 1)
16:45:06 <Sukhdev> Anything else?
16:45:15 <sambetts> can I vote on the neutron summit ideas like the cross project one?
16:45:57 <Sukhdev> sambetts: yes - please add your name - like jroll did on the neutron one
16:46:08 <jroll> sambetts: you shouldn't vote on the c-p session, I think that's for TC only
16:46:18 <sambetts> oh :/
16:46:24 <jroll> oh maybe not
16:46:26 <jroll> idk
16:46:34 <jroll> I see prometheanfire in there
16:46:48 * jroll will ask
16:47:16 <Sukhdev> I did not mean a formal vote - just add a line on the etherpad
16:48:01 <sambetts> man there should be a standard for these etherpads :-P
16:48:32 <Sukhdev> sambetts : ha ha - welcome to open source development :-):-)
16:48:40 <sambetts> :D
16:49:27 <Sukhdev> sambetts : in all seriousness - there is no way to find out what and where do these exist - unless somebody tells, you have no clue :-):-0
16:50:05 <sambetts> yeah, its a shame we're not using gerrit for the session voting
16:50:14 <Sukhdev> jroll : is there a deadline as to when will these sessions be selected?
16:50:31 <sambetts> the cross project etherpad says 6th
16:51:09 <jroll> Sukhdev: april 17th is the last day to put things on the official schedule
16:51:21 <jroll> but teams may have their own deadlines and such
16:52:06 <Sukhdev> jroll : oh I see - I have had couple of beer sessions, need to have one more before 17th :-):-)
16:52:16 <jroll> heh
16:52:37 * sambetts wishes he could have beer sessions with other devs
16:52:41 <Sukhdev> any local guys in the bay area here?
16:52:58 <Sukhdev> sambetts: if you are local here, feel free to join us
16:53:35 <sambetts> no, i'm in the UK so not even close :P
16:53:42 <jroll> Sukhdev: semi local, I'm deep east bay
16:53:46 <jroll> so south bay is too far
16:54:07 <jroll> also I'm moving out of the area on wednesday so... :P
16:54:20 <Sukhdev> jroll: we usually meet in Mountain View - bierhous - If you want I can send you invite next time
16:54:50 <jroll> Sukhdev: nah, I'll be long gone by then, and that's a 1.5-2 hour drive
16:55:13 <Sukhdev> jroll : your loss :-):-)
16:55:13 <jroll> I do love bierhous though, my favorite place to beer in mt view :)
16:56:06 <Sukhdev> jroll : when ever you in bay area, ping me, we can schedule one - this is how it works
16:56:16 <jroll> sure :)
16:56:17 <Sukhdev> last week Jay Pipes was in town, hence, we arranged one
16:56:48 <Sukhdev> #topic: Open Discussion
16:56:55 <Sukhdev> we are down to 4 mins
16:57:02 <jroll> I have nothing
16:57:06 <Sukhdev> anybody has anything to cover?
16:57:09 <sambetts> nothing from me
16:57:35 <Sukhdev> cool - I guess, we are done
16:57:37 <jroll> thanks all :)
16:57:40 <Sukhdev> thanks for attending
16:57:45 <Sukhdev> bye
16:58:06 <Sukhdev> #endmeeting