16:00:16 #startmeeting networking_ml2 16:00:17 Meeting started Wed Feb 26 16:00:16 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mestery. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 16:00:21 The meeting name has been set to 'networking_ml2' 16:00:22 hi! 16:00:33 hi 16:00:33 rkukura: Good morning man! 16:00:40 HenryG: Same to you, morning! 16:00:51 hi 16:00:58 matrohon: Good afternoon :) 16:01:17 So, we have a lighter agenda today, lets see if we can plow through things! 16:01:19 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ML2 Agenda 16:01:32 I'll give folks a minute to join in here as well. 16:01:36 hi 16:01:39 hi 16:01:46 hi 16:02:00 * otherwiseguy waves from rkukura's cube 16:02:02 yamamoto pcm_ amotoki_: Hello! 16:02:07 otherwiseguy: Heh :) 16:02:12 hi 16:02:12 OK, lets get started. 16:02:18 irenab: hi! 16:02:23 #topic Action Item Review 16:02:31 First, I wanted to extend a thanks to all for reviews the past week! 16:02:42 We got all 3 of the SR-IOV patches merged! 16:02:45 * mestery claps loudly. 16:02:56 * HenryG claps louder 16:03:06 nice. thanks all 16:03:11 Great work by all reviewers and patch submitters (irenab and rkukura)! 16:03:25 So, just a note: 16:03:29 rkukura posted his port binding doc 16:03:37 #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1k8tAqfQr8Ujzx5TzpXTYEUaym-0U-pE3YL9wjrS8cDg/edit#heading=h.cpck9ip3dbdv ML2 Port Binding Document 16:03:38 Hi 16:03:45 Please review and provide feedback in the google doc 16:03:58 The 1st part of that is in review now 16:04:06 rkukura: Great, thanks! 16:04:13 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76363/ 16:04:15 One more note from last week: 16:04:17 All ML2 MechanismDrivers which bind ports should ensure they look to make sure the binding:vnic_type attribute is something they handle. 16:04:23 thanks bob 16:04:27 The new PortContext properties are in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76363/ 16:04:55 Lets focus on this review this week, this is an important one to merge. 16:05:20 #topic Migration BP 16:05:26 The 2nd part will be a bit more complicated, rearranging the transactions. 16:05:30 Looks like marun posted a patch for this already! 16:05:33 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76533/ 16:05:59 great work marun (who can't be here for the meeting unfourtanetly)! 16:06:02 Hi 16:06:09 Getting eyes on this one will also be very important. 16:06:15 So please spend some cycles reviewing and testing this out if you can! 16:06:28 Any questions on the migration? 16:07:11 do we need configuration migration? 16:07:13 the 2 patches are on the wiki 16:07:15 ? 16:07:42 shivaris: For migration? The patch is here: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/76533/ 16:07:56 amotoki_: What do you mean by configuration migration? 16:08:10 amotoki_: My thinking is migrating configuration should be handled by things like the puppet modules and higher level tools. 16:08:11 no i was slow, i meant the two above 16:08:38 shivharis: The first one is, the second one isn't yet. 16:08:52 we need some configuration change from ovs/lb to ml2. 16:09:18 can we assume that configruatoin tools cover it? 16:09:30 amotoki_: I think so, yes, like rkukura indicated above. 16:09:57 it looks okay to me too. 16:10:05 amotoki_: Cool, thanks! 16:10:13 looks like marun's script has instructions on manually migrating the config 16:10:35 there is a question in the commit message of marun patch. 16:11:14 a question on config migration. 16:11:19 Yes, I see the question amotoki_. 16:11:31 Lets reply in the review and continue the discussion there perhaps since marun isn't here? 16:12:20 OK, moving on. 16:12:28 #topic Port binding bugs affecting MDs 16:12:37 We covered one of these: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1276395 16:12:45 The second bug is this one: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1276391 16:12:56 We as a team should work to merge rkukura's patch for the first one this week. 16:13:10 The patch in review partially resolves https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1276395 16:13:27 rkukura: OK, thanks! 16:13:40 It defines the new properties, but doesn't fix making them available when a port is deleted. 16:14:09 That will be completed as part of the upcoming patch for https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1276391, which rearranges the code. 16:14:19 OK, cool, thanks for the update rkukura! 16:14:58 Any questions on these for rkukura? 16:15:05 rkukura, kmestery: this causes issues for 16:15:16 new plugins and the deadline of Mar 3 16:15:22 Please provide feedback on the google doc (or email thread) sooner rather than later! 16:15:33 shivharis: Yes, exactly. 16:15:37 plugins -> mds 16:15:39 There is a merge order here for new MDs 16:16:14 rkukura : should I wait for your patch to get mine merged : https://review.openstack.org/#/c/75037/ 16:16:32 My recommendation is, if an MD can be merged before my 2nd patch, get it in! I can update the MD with any driver API changes 16:16:42 I left a TODO in it 16:17:12 rkukura : thanks 16:17:17 Can we handle TODOs like this as bug fixes after March 3? 16:17:34 matrohon: Your patch looks simple enough to merge prior to rkukura's. 16:17:45 rkukura: please let mark be aware of the that point 16:18:15 mestery : hope so, and it will be easy to backport for havana 16:18:26 matrohon: Agreed. I just gave +2 in fact. :P 16:18:38 OK, any more questions on the port binding bugs by anyone? 16:19:44 #topic Open Discussion 16:19:51 * mestery wasn't kidding when he said this meeting would be short. :) 16:19:59 Anything else anyone wants to discuss in the context of ML2? 16:20:14 I wanted to ask for review for proposed MD: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/72854/ 16:20:20 Could you take a look at https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1282925 ? 16:20:44 i found it while debugging nec plugin but it affects all plugins including ML2. 16:21:14 irenab: Yes, thanks for bringing that up! 16:21:26 Can someon eyeball this BP i filed: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/ml2-type-driver-refactor 16:21:31 amotoki_: Good call! 16:21:43 amotoki_: I'll look at whether the transaction changes I'm planning will address that bug. 16:21:51 mestery: rkukura: can you please give few cycles to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/73482/ 16:22:02 asomya: I just made myself approver for that, but it will have to be targeted at Juno, is that ok? 16:22:18 @mestery: thanks, yeah I'm targeting it for J-1 16:22:19 asomya: is that for juno? 16:22:27 @shivharis: yes 16:22:28 asomya: Cool! 16:22:48 asomya: relief, could affect mds 16:22:49 Sukhdev: Will look at that one as well. 16:23:06 Sukhdev, irenab, mestery: I definitely have some reviews to catch up on! 16:23:06 It woudl be good for folks to spend lots of cycles reviewing all of this code this week. 16:23:10 Regarding Third party testing, I posted this wiki yesterday - you may want to check out https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Arista-third-party-testing 16:23:36 shivharis: It could potentially affect MD's, I'm trying my best not to touch the context objects supplies to the MD's 16:23:51 Sukhdev: Thanks. The support for recheck very helpful 16:24:00 Most of the work is just Type manager and Type drivers 16:24:00 sukhdev: liked it 16:24:01 zzelle: Do you think https://review.openstack.org/#/c/71904/ is ready for i-3? 16:24:08 hi everyone 16:24:27 irenab: shivharis: Thanks 16:24:31 good question, i think so but i need your feed backs :) 16:24:54 Re third party testing, i wrote the blog post about how to migrate to zuul. http://ritchey98.blogspot.jp/2014/02/openstack-third-party-testing-how-to.html 16:25:10 amotoki_: Cool, thanks for sharing! 16:26:09 rkukura, there is also the review https://review.openstack.org/74055 which provides the same feature for tunnels (quite the same implementation) 16:26:21 amotoki_: good information 16:26:51 zzelle: right - I think both of these are pretty close to ready 16:27:48 kmestery, rkukura: please add https://review.openstack.org/#/c/60129/ to your review cycles 16:27:50 rkukura: So, shoudl we focus on getting those in? Will they require a FFE? 16:28:00 shivharis: Dually noted ;) 16:28:12 shivharis: Will do. 16:28:17 I'd like to confirm the approval criteria of new MDs. In my understanding, we need to confirm thrid party testing works before approving the patch. right? 16:28:40 amotoki_: Yes 16:28:41 that's correct 16:28:43 mestery: I think zzelle's patches are on track - they had code in review before the feature proposal deadline I think 16:28:45 We can't approve them until that happens. 16:29:00 rkukura: OK, good to know, so then we can focus on iterating on reviews and merge when ready I think. 16:29:14 rkukura, mestery, the BP was proposed before the freeze 16:29:27 As a review, I wonder whether I can give +2 or +1 when the code is ready. 16:29:50 amotoki_: I think +2 with a comment about not approving until 3rd party testing is ready is appropriate. 16:30:20 what should third party testing for unmerged md test? master + locally applied md? 16:30:30 mestery: yeah. sounds good. we should have same policy to give +2. thanks for clarifying. 16:30:46 amotoki_: Yes, agreed. 16:31:02 yamamoto: till merged, we check the MD patch only 16:31:26 yamamoto: your MD patch against the master branch sounds good. 16:31:56 I think that's all it can test until it merges yamamoto. 16:32:03 OK, anything else for this week? 16:32:12 If not, lets focus on reviews for the rest of this week! 16:32:43 it's midnight in japan. shorter meeting is really nice :-) 16:32:48 :) 16:32:57 OK, thanks for all your reviews, lets keep them coming! 16:33:04 amotoki_: wow!! Good Night 16:33:06 Communicate in-channel or on the ML with questions. 16:33:09 Thanks all! 16:33:10 #endmeeting