15:00:32 #startmeeting manila 15:00:33 Meeting started Thu Dec 19 15:00:32 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is tbarron_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:34 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:37 The meeting name has been set to 'manila' 15:01:00 courtesy ping: xyang toabctl bswartz ganso erlon tpsilva vkmc amito jgrosso dviroel lseki carloss 15:01:04 o/ 15:01:05 o/ 15:01:06 hi :) 15:01:12 o/ 15:01:40 Note that you can edit the courtesy ping list yourselves, so pls. update if you want to be on or off of it. 15:02:10 * tbarron_ waits a couple 15:02:20 o/ 15:02:51 o/ 15:03:02 Hi all! 15:03:23 gouthamr is travelling today so I am guest chair as emeritus ptl 15:03:41 Agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/Meetings 15:03:51 #topic Announcements 15:04:03 We will not meet next week. 15:04:22 Next meeting is 2 January at this time. 15:04:33 I will send a note to openstack-discuss ... 15:04:55 I don't have other announcments today. Anyone? 15:05:48 OK, let's switch up the order a bit in case maaritamm can join us later on ... 15:06:08 #topic Policy Popup team 15:06:14 cmurphy: Hi! 15:06:18 hi o/ 15:06:43 cmurphy: I don't think all of us have full background, so please feel free to fill in ... 15:07:10 oh sure, some background: 15:07:28 #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/reference/popup-teams.html#secure-default-policies 15:08:00 we started a new popup team to get a head start on fixing the default policy rules across openstack, manila volunteered to be a part of it 15:08:30 the popup team was approved by the tc last week, so i'm going around to each team's meeting this week to kick things off before the holidays 15:08:45 mostly i'd just like to get you thinking about how you want to organize and track the work 15:08:47 cmurphy: gouthamr volunteered us but several of us were in sync with him on this :) 15:09:31 tbarron, I sneaked in already, hi :) 15:09:36 In general we're trying to get manila better integrated with the rest of OpenStack, give users consistent experience, etc. 15:10:06 maaritamm: hi, and speaking of which we'll talk about manila OSC integration as next agenda item 15:10:50 tbarron_: :) 15:11:02 cmurphy: we're starting to track our work with taiga and probably can make tasks there for policy rule work for manila 15:11:38 tbarron_: great! if you could create links under the progress section here https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Consistent_and_Secure_Default_Policies_Popup_Team that would help me a lot 15:12:27 i'm also available if you have any questions about the implementation 15:12:30 cmurphy: No problem, we can do that. 15:13:00 Let"s see if anyone in this meeting today is particularly interested in participating. 15:13:58 I think the first step will be to read the keystone design doc from the link cmurphy just posted, and see what we can crib from other projects there. 15:14:37 And we should think about whether there's anything "special" about manila that would lead to a need for new policy roles, etc. 15:14:53 * tbarron_ doesn't know of anything like that, but we should check 15:15:47 Anything else on this topic today? cmurphy? others? 15:16:51 mostly the things to think about are whether the apis are specific to a project (things that are owned by a tenant/customer) or specific to the whole system (things that an administrator would do for the whole deployment) 15:17:14 that's all i had, i can circle up with gouthamr after the holidays 15:17:24 cmurphy: Thanks for adding this to our agenda! We'll get started and may invite you back again if needed ... 15:17:41 tbarron_: great! any time 15:17:56 #topic: tracking our work 15:18:18 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/642222 15:18:41 This is the foundational review for our OSC integration work. 15:19:08 vkmc has been driving this and maaritamm is going to be adding onto her work. 15:19:44 We've had quite a bit of review of 642222 and I"d like to check if there are any objections to moving ahead and 15:19:47 merging it. 15:20:25 Not at all. I'm in the middle of reviewing it. Look good. 15:20:26 It just adds basic CRUD for shares to the OSC client, using a plugin from python-manilaclient. 15:21:01 But it provides the design pattern that we should follow as we add more manila commands to OSC. 15:21:08 dviroel: thanks 15:21:26 Anyone have concerns? Discussion points? 15:21:52 Not from my side as well, tbarron_ 15:22:51 OK, I think we have consensus. dviroel if you are reviewing anyways and expect to finish today, plese just W+1 assuming you still approve. 15:23:16 tbarron_ ok, will do 15:23:43 I want to get lots of "soak time" in U for this stuff and have enough implemented by code freeze for this to be actually useful. 15:24:04 maaritamm: vkmc: do you want to say something about what is being impmented next? 15:24:33 implemented 15:25:24 tbarron_, currently working on share types 15:25:57 tbarron_, not much actually... just that there are some patch for review already 15:26:19 the initial implementation, which is the plugin creation and the share crud commands 15:26:23 maaritamm: good choice, cause it's a pain to have to use the manila cmd to create the share type you need before using OSC command to create the share referencing the share type :) 15:26:27 642222 15:26:43 also the share set/unset, which might require some feedback from you 15:27:03 (you === all reviewers :) 15:27:22 https://review.opendev.org/#/c/698848/ 15:28:02 in that command we are unifying the manila update and manila metadata commands into share set and share unset 15:28:07 vkmc: maaritamm We'll rely on you two to prioritize our review cycles. Assuming we merge 64222 today, which one is up next? 15:28:17 set and unset 15:28:24 then we continue with share types 15:28:34 and we also have acls and quotas coming up next 15:29:13 tbarron_, ^ 15:29:14 ok, I'm adding these into my devstack one by one and exercising them as we go along ... 15:29:29 nice, thx 15:29:45 it would be nice to get the reviews from operators 15:29:49 Let's try to get another chunk merged the first week of January or so. 15:30:05 cool 15:30:37 vkmc: yes, but failing up front reviews from operators the best thing we can do is get the commands out there early in the release cycle. 15:30:50 so we can adjust as required. 15:30:58 we're so agile :) 15:31:03 haha 15:31:09 ok, we can do that 15:31:48 OK, moving along ... 15:32:16 Any other reviews that need attention before 2020? specs? 15:32:38 Specs I think there is only the haixin's one 15:32:47 Which I currently don't know the status 15:32:55 * carloss goes to check the patch 15:33:42 we have a tbarron_ +2 and some +1s on that patch 15:33:46 #link https://review.opendev.org/#/c/692330/ 15:34:00 yeah, it has my support and there was no controversy 15:34:06 thanks tbarron_ :) 15:34:13 others please review 15:34:39 we won't hold up this one over milestone technicalities, but please review 15:35:10 We'll wait to merge it though until after gouthamr is back. 15:36:08 #topic Bugs 15:36:17 jgrosso: you here? vhari? 15:36:33 I am here having some technical difficulties 15:36:59 jgrosso: tecnical difficulties == Xmas cookies? 15:37:08 lol I wish 15:37:11 https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1850626 15:37:11 Launchpad bug 1850626 in neutron "neutron-dynamic-routing: TypeError: bind() takes 4 positional arguments but 5 were given" [Critical,Fix committed] - Assigned to Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) 15:37:17 * tbarron_ sends jgross some 15:37:29 just had a question is this done for manila 15:37:45 looks like it was merged and waiting on neutron correct? 15:38:19 I was about to set fix -released for manila 15:39:26 sorry not sure if you fot any of that info :( 15:39:50 got not fot 15:39:54 :) 15:40:24 Issue my be Pebkac :) 15:40:35 jgrosso: i think we need to check whether we have a workaround in place that we can un-do now 15:40:47 ack tbarron_ 15:40:55 last bug 15:40:56 jgrosso: and whether there is an issue in any of the stable/.. branches 15:41:05 tbarron_ ok 15:41:22 jgrosso: the lvm and cephfs IPv6 jobs may be relevant 15:41:24 https://bugs.launchpad.net/manila/+bug/1848278 15:41:24 Launchpad bug 1848278 in Manila "tempest extend/shrink tests may use wrong share export location" [Undecided,New] 15:41:38 tbarron_ ack 15:41:47 since they use bgp to propogate return routes to the tenant IPv6 networks 15:42:11 border gateway protocol? 15:42:26 been a while and I am rusty on networking :0 15:43:01 I just assigned that one to myself jgrosso, you can ping about it again in the new year if it's not getting fixed. 15:43:18 ok thanks tbarron_ 15:43:23 all I had thanks 15:43:27 The issue there is simply that when there are multiple export locations the code is selecting the first one 15:43:36 tbarron_: ack 15:43:50 which may not be appropriate if IPv6 and IPv4 are both deployed 15:44:02 so we need to loop and match 15:44:07 understood 15:44:07 address family 15:45:01 targeted to U-2 15:45:23 tbarron_: thanks for setting all of that 15:45:32 for 1848278' 15:46:43 jgrosso: w.r.t. 'border gateway protocol' yeah, that's what BGP is 15:46:52 tbarron_: ack 15:47:08 we don't need it for IPv4 tenant networks because they are NATed 15:47:42 but IPv6 tenant networks are not, so they have to be routed, i.t. everyone outside that network needs to learn how to get to it. 15:47:58 and BGP is one way to propogate that info. 15:48:07 cool 15:48:10 and it's what our CI uses. 15:48:57 jgrosso: moar bugs? 15:49:06 no I am set thanks tbarron_ 15:49:22 #topic Open Discussion 15:50:30 Looks like we can close this year's Manila meetings down now. 15:50:45 yes, tbarron_ :) 15:50:55 Thanks all! See you in #openstack-manila, and in this spot in 2020 on 2 January! 15:51:03 Thanks tbarron_ 15:51:07 Thanks tbarron_ 15:51:08 happy holidays all ! thank tbarron_ 15:51:26 #endmeeting