18:02:01 #startmeeting Networking FWaaS 18:02:01 Meeting started Wed Jan 15 18:02:01 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:02:02 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:02:04 The meeting name has been set to 'networking_fwaas' 18:02:33 RajeshMohan: waiting for SridarK to join 18:02:46 he was going to be running the entire tempests suite 18:02:58 ok 18:03:22 hi there 18:03:25 if he is not around, we can have a short meeting 18:03:30 beyounn: hi 18:03:32 SumitNaiksatam: ok 18:03:45 beyounn: do you know if garyduan is going to be around? 18:03:52 let me check 18:04:04 beyounn: thanks 18:04:15 he is not in yet 18:04:37 beyounn: ok 18:04:45 #topic service_type framework 18:04:54 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/60699/ 18:04:59 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/60699/ 18:05:12 beyounn: garyduan seems to have updated his patch 18:05:31 beyounn: could you ask him to recheck, since the devstack-gate failed 18:05:40 sure 18:05:48 beyounn: thanks 18:06:11 we should all review his patch at the earliest, and push for moving forward 18:07:21 beyounn: also, will be a good idea to reach out to enikanorov_ nati_ueno and akihiro to review the patch 18:07:47 ok, I will ask Gary to send a notice to them 18:09:29 beyounn: thanks, not sure if he is going to join, lets move on 18:09:37 ok 18:09:48 #topic Service Objects 18:09:58 beyounn: since you are around, anything you wanted to discuss on this? 18:10:08 beyounn: i know we are not targeting this for I2 at least 18:10:23 I have finished the coding on the source object/service group 18:10:33 Currently, working on the unit testing 18:10:51 oh sweet 18:10:58 My current design is to make service group a top resource 18:11:05 beyounn: perhaps good idea to post the patch 18:11:10 since I think it is a common resource 18:11:37 beyounn: ok, easier to understand for everyone once they see the patch 18:11:45 Sure, I just thought it would be better to at least run through the unit test before I submit 18:12:01 beyounn: yeah, either way 18:12:16 ok, let me at least go through the basics first 18:12:20 beyounn: sure 18:13:25 Sumit: is there a doc to tell about unit testing? 18:13:34 how it works together, and how to write test case? 18:13:56 beyounn: the neutron README should have some pointers to running the tests 18:14:14 beyounn: other than that i don't know of anything from the top my head 18:14:25 sumit: ok 18:14:42 beyounn: best place is to look for existing tests 18:14:58 beyounn: i am just stating the obvious, i am sure you are doing that already 18:15:21 Sumit, right 18:16:03 beyounn: anything more? 18:16:16 that's it 18:16:25 beyounn: thanks 18:16:27 #topic Service Insertion and Firewall 18:16:40 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62599/ 18:17:15 RajeshMohan: didn't check the latest patch, did you base it off garyduan's patch? 18:17:46 SumitNaiksatam: Shoudl I make my patch dependent on his? 18:18:06 RajeshMohan: good question 18:18:09 For now, I am working on unit tests - off main branch 18:18:15 RajeshMohan: ok thats fine 18:18:21 Talked to Nachi on review 18:18:28 RajeshMohan: ok good 18:18:35 He said that he was waiting on -2 being removed 18:18:49 RajeshMohan: i just wanted to make sure that there are no surprises based on garyduan's patch 18:18:50 So, working on UT to remove -2 18:19:34 RajeshMohan: hopefully nothing in garyduan's patch conflicts with what you are doing 18:19:35 SumitNaiksatam: I agree. I should rebase to his patch at the earliest 18:19:51 RajeshMohan: i don't want you to have to do the same work twice 18:20:35 RajeshMohan: but thanks for following up until this point, lets keep at it, and hopefully there will be more reviewers available post I2 18:20:53 RajeshMohan: anything else you wanted to bring up in that context? 18:20:59 SumitNaiksatam: UT is the only blocker for -2, right? 18:21:16 SumitNaiksatam: After some basic UT, we can possibly move to -1 18:21:19 RajeshMohan: thats the basic blocker 18:21:33 RajeshMohan: i have not seen the latest patch, my apologies 18:22:18 RajeshMohan: we have to coordinate with SridarK on the CLI as well 18:22:29 SumitNaiksatam: Yes 18:22:41 I will ping Sridar over email today 18:22:51 RajeshMohan: thanks 18:23:12 #action RajeshMohan to sync up with SridarK on service insertion CLI 18:23:17 I think Sridar can start on the CLI with the patch that is currently posted 18:23:24 RajeshMohan: ok 18:23:38 RajeshMohan: at some point we have to start discussing the horizon changes as well 18:23:58 SumitNaiksatam: Can I rebase to garyduan's patch and use the same review? 18:24:01 beyounn: you or garyduan interested in the horizon discussion :-) 18:24:14 RajeshMohan: i think so 18:24:17 SumitNaiksatam: Or will I be required to create a new review? 18:24:29 Sumit I think so, at least to know how it works 18:24:56 beyounn: once you know how it works, you will need to get it work as well :-) 18:25:26 :-) 18:25:35 beyounn: we will all need to chip in, this might be helpful for the service objects work later as well 18:26:14 right 18:26:26 RajeshMohan: anything more on the service insertion to discuss right now? 18:26:43 SumitNaiksatam: Horizon? 18:27:08 RajeshMohan: yeah, i guess we will need to meet for that, right? 18:27:39 SumitNaiksatam: Yes. Maybe after we have initial CLI patch. 18:28:07 SumitNaiksatam: Top of the head, do you know how much time we have before merge? 18:28:59 RajeshMohan: thats true, we need client side code before we can do horizon 18:29:17 RajeshMohan: we should target first couple of weeks into I3 18:29:32 RajeshMohan: garyduan's patch seems to be a gating issue right now 18:30:17 SumitNaiksatam: Second week of Feb? 18:30:28 SumitNaiksatam: I2 is Jan 23rd 18:31:04 RajeshMohan: yes and yes 18:31:30 SumitNaiksatam: Thanks for the info 18:31:41 RajeshMohan: we can speed things up reviewing on garyduan's patch 18:31:55 beyounn: have you looked at RajeshMohan's patch for service insertion 18:32:18 no, I did not get time to do it yet, sorry 18:33:30 beyounn: whenever you get a chance, between RajeshMohan and myself we have gone through several iterations on this 18:33:53 sure 18:34:14 #topic temptest testing 18:34:38 SridarK was running the tests with FWaaS and VPNaaS enabled 18:34:58 he is in another meeting, so will follow up with him 18:35:24 #action SridarK to provide update on FWaaS + VPNaaS tempest runs 18:36:07 Sumit, if fwaas temptest is not going to be enabled in I2 18:36:13 based on his findings we will recommend that FWaaS be enabled on the gate 18:36:22 Sumit, how should be deal with vendor tests? 18:36:52 beyounn: thats a good point 18:37:11 beyounn: i believe you are asking in the context of the varmour driver? 18:37:16 right 18:37:49 beyounn: interesting situation, unfortunately this did not come up before in the discussions 18:38:34 beyounn: but for the third party tests you need to enable fwaas in your setup 18:38:44 beyounn: does not have to be in the upstream gate 18:39:30 sumit: do you mean that we don't need to get our temptest ready before I2? 18:40:25 beyounn: i meant that you need to get your infra setup for running tempest test which would have fwaas enabled 18:40:36 ok 18:40:53 beyounn: but it does not need to be enabled for the tempest tests which are running in the upstream gate 18:41:05 beyounn: makes sense, or do you still see an issue? 18:41:41 ok 18:41:46 got it 18:42:15 beyounn: are you working towards your CI setup? 18:42:31 Gary is working on it 18:43:50 beyounn: okay 18:44:07 beyounn RajeshMohan: anything more on tempests tests? 18:44:37 nop 18:44:44 SumitNaiksatam:Same here 18:44:52 ok great 18:44:58 #topic open discussion 18:45:11 anything else that we need to discuss, or we can wrap up early 18:46:50 alright, great, thanks beyounn and RajeshMohan for joining! 18:47:09 #endmeeting