18:00:47 <SumitNaiksatam> #startmeeting networking_policy
18:00:47 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Aug 28 18:00:47 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:00:48 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:00:50 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy'
18:00:53 <rms_13> hi
18:00:59 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: no worrries we will keep it short
18:01:06 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: thanks for joining
18:01:33 <SumitNaiksatam> #info agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy
18:01:48 <SumitNaiksatam> i thought we would keep the agenda open today
18:02:01 <SumitNaiksatam> but since we have s3wong and rms_13 here, lets get a quick update from them
18:02:05 <rms_13> Incubator update/thoughts ?
18:02:08 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic SG mapping driver
18:02:16 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: hang on, we will get to that
18:02:34 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: are you planning any updates to the patch?
18:02:51 <s3wong> yes
18:03:04 <s3wong> Ann has some comments, and I will update today or tomorrow
18:03:58 <s3wong> update the patch, that is
18:04:06 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: ok great
18:04:06 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: what about the update related changes?
18:04:23 <s3wong> before next Thursday?
18:04:25 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: the update operation on the rules/contract
18:04:56 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: and persisting the association between the SG rules and the policy rules
18:05:19 <rkukura> s3wong: I intend to review this in detail, but focusing on juno-3 patches right now
18:06:34 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: rkukura: with incubator, we are still on hook to get everything done by next Thursday
18:06:46 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: not sure about that
18:06:46 <rkukura> s3wong: ?
18:06:54 <s3wong> or actually, getting it landed by next Thurs
18:07:14 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: we are still going by the J3 time line though
18:07:16 <s3wong> rkukura: that was a question, not a statement, sorry :-)
18:08:50 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: yeah, these changes will take time. Not sure I can have them done by next Thurs
18:09:08 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: ok, lets sync up on these
18:09:33 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: so i am assuming the part that you have in right now is tested with UTs, and also functionally?
18:09:48 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: yes
18:10:00 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: ok cool
18:10:47 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: so you are able to drive an entire workflow from the creation of ep/epgs to associating with contracts containing rules?
18:11:16 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: the unit test actually does this
18:11:27 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: okay :-)
18:11:46 <SumitNaiksatam> then its a functional test, anyway, good to know though
18:11:52 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: SG association cannot happen until EPG/EP is associated
18:12:29 <SumitNaiksatam> yes, i think we should do some functional testing with the point that we are at
18:12:35 <s3wong> so it was tested as such
18:12:52 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: lets sync up, and make sure what we have all works in unison
18:13:05 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: sure
18:13:10 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: thanks for the update, while you are at the other “real” meeting :;-)
18:13:19 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Horizon update
18:13:22 <rms_13> Horizon: Basically no progress. Review is open. Nobody has picked up yet. Knocked couple of doors with no luck. That particular patch is the baseline of how we want to organize templates. Once thats approved, one can move forward with doing grunt work of supporting for remaining objects. (l2, l3 etc)
18:13:23 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: hi
18:14:09 * SumitNaiksatam gives rms_13 the prize for the quickest typed update ever! :-)
18:14:20 <rms_13> :).
18:14:35 <LouisF> rms_13: i will review
18:14:36 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: link to the review?
18:14:45 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: great, thanks
18:14:49 <rms_13> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93590/
18:14:56 <rms_13> LoiusF: Thanks
18:15:07 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/93590
18:15:10 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: thanks
18:15:23 <SumitNaiksatam> typically horizon tends to lag the other projects
18:15:46 <SumitNaiksatam> of course, if the feature had already landed in neutron we would have seen a lot more activity
18:15:49 <rms_13> I figured
18:16:13 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: thanks for persisting!
18:16:20 <rms_13> Hoping to make it one day :)
18:16:49 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: i think that is the Neutron theme - “hoping to make it one day!” :-)
18:17:22 <SumitNaiksatam> any questions for rms_13 on Horizon?
18:17:30 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: Private +2
18:17:56 <rms_13> I would like to ask few questions here once we are done with Horizon
18:18:01 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: yes
18:18:09 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Heat
18:18:13 <SumitNaiksatam> susaant: hi
18:18:38 <SumitNaiksatam> susaant: i noticed you updated the wiki
18:18:48 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/111417/
18:18:56 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/111419/
18:19:28 <susaant> SumitNaiksatam: Yes finally got around to that :)
18:20:14 <SumitNaiksatam> susaant: good, thanks again to you as well for persisting and staying on message
18:20:51 <SumitNaiksatam> any questions for susaant on the Heat patch
18:21:23 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic CLI/Client
18:21:30 <SumitNaiksatam> songole: anything to discuss here?
18:21:45 <songole> nothing much. no updates.
18:21:55 <SumitNaiksatam> songole: thanks
18:22:03 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic API intercept
18:22:16 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109901
18:22:50 <SumitNaiksatam> i reviewed some of this yesterday, and kevinbenton did a very neat job in trying to achieve this with minimal changes
18:23:03 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: would you have time to look at this?
18:23:58 <rkukura> yes, I’ll make time
18:25:04 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: thanks
18:25:09 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Open Discussion
18:25:45 <SumitNaiksatam> so i had put a patch #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/109901 to test the waters on how we can decouple a feature like GBP
18:25:56 <SumitNaiksatam> so as not to have to make changes to the existing neutron “core” code when adding a new feature like GBP
18:26:19 <SumitNaiksatam> i wil be revising that patch based on feedback, hence marked it WIP
18:26:49 <SumitNaiksatam> did not mean to any major surgery of the extension loading code, just wanted to make it surgical engough
18:27:00 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: Did you give the correct link?
18:27:19 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: my bad, thanks for catching
18:27:23 <SumitNaiksatam> #link Avoid changing constants module when adding new service plugin
18:27:37 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/116996
18:27:42 <SumitNaiksatam> wrong copy buffer!
18:28:12 <SumitNaiksatam> anyway that just to lead up to your questions, rms_13
18:28:19 <SumitNaiksatam> go ahead, you wanted to ask something earlier
18:28:24 <rms_13> Yes
18:28:52 <rms_13> I want to know incubator update wrt GBP
18:29:09 <rms_13> 2. I want to know nova interatction plans for GBP
18:29:16 <rms_13> *interaction
18:29:52 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: 1. i would like to know that as well, i am told to follow the mailing list, i think there are two or three threads going on
18:30:12 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: i personally dont have an update beyond that
18:30:18 <SumitNaiksatam> if anyone else knows more, please feel free to chime in
18:30:36 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: Ok. Unbelieavable but thanks
18:31:04 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: which part is “unbelievable”?
18:31:28 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: Time it takes to reach conclusions
18:31:35 <rms_13> Anyways
18:31:53 <susaant> I am not clear how the neutron incubator will play with heat ...
18:31:55 <rms_13> How do we want to do Nova integration? Do we have one plan in place
18:32:16 <susaant> is there any clarity on that?
18:32:22 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: good questions, i think those have been raised before, but fee free to raise them on one of the on going threads
18:32:39 <SumitNaiksatam> err sorry, i meant to respond to susaant
18:33:08 <SumitNaiksatam> *but feel free to raise them again
18:33:28 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13:  on 2. in the first iteration, no changes to nova are required
18:33:29 <susaant> SumitNaiksatam: ok.
18:33:54 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: since on the nova side we will still be using the port
18:34:00 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: Ok.
18:34:17 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: past that, there are obviously thoughts on how we can integrate better
18:34:18 <rms_13> For 2nd iteration: nova boot --gbp group-id=x?
18:34:43 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: but i think for that we need the GBP code to stabilize so that we can take the discussion to the nova team as well
18:35:10 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: but duly noted that you are interested in this discussion, and we will follow up once we are past this phase
18:36:20 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: I think that effort can be made parallelized while we stabilizes GBP. Atleast we can get the discussion going with the Nova team once we have full consensus amongst us
18:36:31 <rms_13> Post 9/4 maybe?
18:37:12 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: yeah definitely post 9/4, we have to consider the right time after that
18:37:53 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: i think our priority would be the get the first iteration settled, and not distract other teams from what their focus is on in terms of Juno deliverables
18:37:54 <rms_13> I would like to read thoughts on that so far, if there are any captured.
18:38:06 <rms_13> Absolutely.
18:38:15 <rms_13> I am not proposing that at all.
18:38:33 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: yes, you will have to read our minds :-)
18:38:43 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: I just want to discuss that early as I think that will be one beast of an integration if we do it right
18:38:59 <rms_13> SumitNaiksatam: Very difficult. Will pass than :)
18:39:12 <rms_13> Anyways thank you
18:39:15 <SumitNaiksatam> rms_13: “beast” - really?
18:39:27 <LouisF> SumitNaiksatam: i had the question on order of services in a service chain used by gbp contract
18:39:35 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: yes sure
18:40:21 <LouisF> if chain={si, s2} are they applied from consumed epg to produced epg, or vice versa?
18:40:50 <LouisF> it is not stated anywhere
18:42:46 <LouisF> this is a follow on to my earlier query on the service chain bp
18:42:58 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: yes, and thanks for the follow up
18:43:46 <LouisF> regarding order of services and direction of traffic
18:44:02 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: with regards to the GBP model we are only saying consumed to produced
18:44:08 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: and i believe at that point the semantics of the service chain take over
18:44:55 <LouisF> sounds good can we add that to the gbp spec
18:46:42 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: i think the GBP spec already captures that in terms of the redirect action, but we can certainly add clarifications if required
18:46:50 <SumitNaiksatam> LouisF: good point to bring up though
18:47:29 <SumitNaiksatam> anything else for today?
18:47:49 <SumitNaiksatam> or we can get back 13 minutes to focus on J3 reviews
18:49:04 <SumitNaiksatam> alrighty, thanks everyone for attending
18:49:10 <SumitNaiksatam> bye
18:49:12 <SumitNaiksatam> #endmeeting