18:01:41 <SumitNaiksatam> #startmeeting networking_policy
18:01:42 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Mar 26 18:01:41 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:01:43 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:01:46 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy'
18:02:04 <SumitNaiksatam> #info agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/GroupBasedPolicy#March_26th.2C_2015
18:02:24 <SumitNaiksatam> anyone want to announce anything?
18:02:41 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Bugs
18:02:43 <yamahata> hello
18:02:55 <ivar-lazzaro> Shall we list the accepted vancouver talks GBP related?
18:03:19 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: sure, lets do that in the open discussion
18:03:39 <ivar-lazzaro> ack
18:03:39 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: lets also update the wiki page (i have the proposed talks listed at the bottom)
18:03:56 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: since we are at it, please go ahead :-)
18:04:24 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i mean announce the talk that got accepted
18:04:31 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: oh ok
18:04:53 <ivar-lazzaro> GBP Lab session got accepted (let me retrieve the link)
18:04:56 <SumitNaiksatam> #undo
18:04:57 <openstack> Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x8bbd290>
18:05:18 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yeah, thats great
18:05:32 <ivar-lazzaro> #link https://openstacksummitmay2015vancouver.sched.org/event/fe712eb5f27186ffd64ed787244af4f3?iframe=yes&w=i:0;&sidebar=no&bg=no#?iframe=yes&w=i:0;&sidebar=no&bg=no
18:05:36 <SumitNaiksatam> so the hands-on lab session that ivar-lazzaro and rkukura had proposed has been accepted ^^^
18:06:13 <SumitNaiksatam> we are all on the hook for this one, i would request everyone to participate the preparation for this one
18:06:16 <ivar-lazzaro> Everyone's input/help is accepted of course! That's a great opportunity to show GBP up and running
18:06:28 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: ++
18:06:42 <SumitNaiksatam> and also please make yourself available at the time of the session, since we will need voluteers to help with conducting the session
18:06:43 <igordcard_> alright!
18:06:57 <SumitNaiksatam> and of course the team here is the expert on GBP ;-)
18:07:00 <ivar-lazzaro> Is there anything else? I don't remember all the proposals
18:07:09 <yapeng> great!
18:07:19 <SumitNaiksatam> there are at least a couple of more “user-story” kind of talks
18:07:30 <SumitNaiksatam> i dont have the information handy, but i will update the wiki page with those
18:07:30 <s3wong> ivar-lazzaro: oh well, it conflicts with my other talk...
18:07:48 <s3wong> ivar-lazzaro: nice picture, though :-)
18:07:48 <ivar-lazzaro> s3wong: darn
18:07:57 <SumitNaiksatam> if you have a GBP related talk that got accepted, please add here:
18:08:12 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/GroupBasedPolicy#Team_Activities
18:08:19 <ivar-lazzaro> s3wong: thanks :)
18:08:27 <SumitNaiksatam> we will change the “proposed” talks to “accepted” talks
18:08:41 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: lets discuss more on the hands on lab in the open discussion
18:08:42 <s3wong> SumitNaiksatam: my accepted talk is about Tacker
18:08:54 <SumitNaiksatam> s3wong: ah great, very relevant
18:09:20 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: perhaps we can have a standing item on the agenda in the lead up to the conference to discuss the hands-on-lab session
18:09:37 <SumitNaiksatam> so that we are all well prepared
18:10:13 <SumitNaiksatam> anyone else with any other announcements?
18:10:26 <SumitNaiksatam> ok moving on
18:10:32 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Bugs
18:10:47 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: how is this coming along: #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1433530
18:10:48 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1433530 in Group Based Policy "GBP Kilo release should be in sync with Neutron Kilo" [Critical,In progress] - Assigned to Magesh GV (magesh-gv)
18:11:42 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: Ran into a lot of issues on this, but most are fixed now, just a few more UTs failing still
18:11:53 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: ah okay
18:12:07 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: thanks for following up individually with the vendor driver owners on this
18:12:17 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: are any of those blocking you at this point?
18:12:24 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: this needs a thorough devstack testing as well
18:12:40 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: yes
18:12:58 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: We may also parallely need a devstack branch updated to master + gbp
18:13:30 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: yes lets discuss that offline, since i am trying to get the gate job to work
18:13:46 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: and it will be nice to have that in place to test
18:14:02 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: ok, I think the pending issues should be sorted out in a day or two
18:14:22 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: ok, anything you want to discuss with the rest of the team here on that?
18:15:08 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: sure, so basically delete External segment doesnt seem to happen when run with just the implicit policy driver
18:15:09 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: You have a commenty on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165378/2/test-requirements.txt suggesting pinning to a neutronclient commit, right?
18:15:44 <magesh> The delete api request is not throwing any error, but the resource is not getting cleaned up in UTs
18:15:45 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yes, i was more asking
18:16:19 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: can you take a quick look at the issue magesh is running into?
18:16:33 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: that is the client counter-part of what magesh is doing
18:16:50 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: sure
18:16:54 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: the server side patch is: #link https://review.openstack.org/165377
18:17:03 <SumitNaiksatam> sorry should have posted that link earlier
18:17:09 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: great, thanks!
18:17:34 <magesh> rkukura, SumitNaiksatam: For both the client and server, should we pin on some commit now or wait till may be kilo rc1 is cut on Neutron
18:18:00 <magesh> ivar-lazzaro: thanks
18:18:03 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: i dont think we need to pin on commit for neutron server
18:18:03 <rkukura> I think we should track master for the server, but maybe pin the client
18:18:14 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: at least until kilo release
18:18:23 <SumitNaiksatam> yeah basically what rkukura said
18:18:31 <magesh> rkukura, SumitNaiksatam: okay
18:18:43 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: my understanding is that we are supporting 2.3.10 neutron client, right?
18:18:53 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: are is there an even later version?
18:19:01 <rkukura> magesh: Is making the IPD usable without the RMD being handled as part of this same patch?
18:19:13 <ivar-lazzaro> magesh: the Jenkins logs are weird
18:19:14 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i hope not
18:19:21 <ivar-lazzaro> magesh: 'Zero tests were run. At least one test should have been run.'
18:19:27 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: I did not check the corresponding released versions, will check
18:19:36 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: ok
18:20:22 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam, magesh: The bit about “… with just the implicit policy driver” above, plus some code I noticed in the patch, seem to indicate this might be the case
18:20:36 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yeah
18:20:46 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: rkukura’s question ^^^
18:20:58 <magesh> ivar-lazzaro: I think it might be some temporary issue, with the latest patch, when I ran UTs all tests were successfull except 5
18:21:28 <magesh> rkukura: No, that is not handled as part of this patch
18:21:44 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: rkukura: There have always been unit tests for the IPD alone
18:21:58 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: ah okay got it, magesh was referring to those
18:22:04 <ivar-lazzaro> the issue we have is that RMD doesn't work without IPD, not the way around
18:22:11 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: true
18:22:15 <magesh> right, the UTs for IPD doesnt run with RMD configured
18:22:28 <rkukura> magesh: Are the changes in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/165377/10/gbpservice/neutron/extensions/group_policy_mapping.py needed due to something that changed in neutron during kilo?
18:22:31 <ivar-lazzaro> magesh: I sure hope not ;)
18:24:06 <magesh> rkukura: I couldnt get what caused this, but I think the L4-L7 service splitting from Neutron may have something to do with this
18:24:28 <rkukura> magesh: that sounds plausible - thanks
18:24:36 <magesh> rkukura: Basically here the extensions got initialized twice and it was causing an issue
18:24:42 <ivar-lazzaro> But that operation is already done here #link https://github.com/stackforge/group-based-policy/blob/master/gbpservice/neutron/extensions/group_policy.py#L34
18:24:43 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: thats interesting, we already have that delta in the group_policy.py
18:24:52 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yeah
18:25:13 <ivar-lazzaro> and that is imported by group_policy_mapping too, so it should run
18:25:22 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: i dont think the split should have an impact
18:25:49 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: good point, please comment on the patch
18:25:55 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: OK
18:25:59 <SumitNaiksatam> so we are 25 mins into the meeting, lets move on
18:26:10 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: thanks for the update, lets work to get the loose ends tied on this
18:26:21 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: ok
18:26:33 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1432779
18:26:34 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1432779 in Group Based Policy "redirect actions don't work with external policies" [Critical,In progress] - Assigned to Ivar Lazzaro (mmaleckk)
18:26:41 <SumitNaiksatam> this in review
18:26:51 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/164920
18:27:00 <SumitNaiksatam> needs at least one more core’s attention
18:27:11 <ivar-lazzaro> As per igordcard comment on the ML, I've also enabled EP providing chains
18:27:21 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: nice!
18:27:35 <SumitNaiksatam> and i think igordcard has obliged with a +1 ;-)
18:28:03 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: anything more to discuss on that critical bug?
18:28:04 <ivar-lazzaro> I have one thing to say though, if one of the chain experts here could quickly test it in devstack it would be great :)
18:28:28 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: hopefully we can exercise the test suite on this
18:28:49 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: however we dont have tests for EP providing chains
18:28:50 <magesh> ivar-lazzaro: I wanted to do that a few days back, but this got lost from the TODO list, will try this out
18:28:57 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: it would be nice to do it before merging though
18:29:04 <ivar-lazzaro> magesh: thanks!
18:29:36 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i had confidence in this patch because i had seen it work (or at least part of it) in the PoC we were doing here
18:29:42 <ivar-lazzaro> magesh: I still have some concerns about having the EP providing the chains... but I've done it so that we have both versions available
18:30:09 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: this is different, especially if we enable chain providing
18:30:09 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: unless there are obvious issues with the patch, i would like to move ahead (in the interest of iterative progress)
18:30:20 <SumitNaiksatam> move ahead with the patch i mean
18:30:33 <SumitNaiksatam> okay, any other bugs we need to discuss today?
18:30:43 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: I actually wanted to discuss the providing a little bit more... For instance, what happens with the LBs?
18:30:51 <magesh> ivar-lazzaro: okay, I will go through it, I will follow up on it with you may be offline
18:30:57 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: there are no policy targets in that EP
18:30:59 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: okay sure
18:31:43 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: what happens which LBs?
18:31:48 <SumitNaiksatam> *with which
18:31:50 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: what do we expect? to create a LB without members (should be the behavior today) or to have a specific set of services that are "providable" by EPs?
18:32:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: correct me if i am wrong, but the EP does not have a policy targets, right?
18:32:42 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: exactly
18:32:57 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: therefore a LB on that side is completely useless
18:33:15 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: so my simplistic assumption would be that there is external/manual configuration
18:33:16 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: also, EPs don't have NSP associated with them
18:33:23 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: true
18:33:32 <SumitNaiksatam> perhaps LB is not a good example in this case?
18:33:47 <magesh> ivar-lazzaro, sumitNaiksatam: EP or EPG ?
18:33:52 <SumitNaiksatam> it could be a logging service like hemanthravi was mentioning last week
18:34:01 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: it is a good example to understand how to deal with unusable services
18:34:04 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: EP as in External Policy
18:34:06 <ivar-lazzaro> magesh: External Policy
18:34:29 <magesh> got confused with the acronyms ! thanks
18:34:36 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: :-)
18:34:47 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: yeah I agree with that point, what we miss though is a way to avoid bad things to happen when a PRS with a LB is provided
18:34:56 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: LB or any other unusable service
18:35:05 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i think we always make the assumption that not all service-types (or their flavors) can be used everywhere
18:35:37 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: the “integrity check” is left to the service-chain provider (at least the way it is today)
18:36:23 <SumitNaiksatam> and perhaps we are not implementing any robust integrity check either ;-)
18:36:28 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: ok, so this part is missing from my implementation
18:36:44 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: I don't think so :) but we can address that in a separate issue
18:36:47 <SumitNaiksatam> this is mostly because we are only tying into services that are provided to us by Neutron
18:37:12 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: as long as we all agree that we need to properly screen the service types that an EP can provide
18:37:12 <SumitNaiksatam> so we made many simplifying assumptions to get off the ground :-)
18:37:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: oh absolutely agree on that
18:38:08 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: thanks for bringing this up
18:38:09 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: that makes sense, then I suggest we file an issue regarding this particular problem and we can discuss that
18:38:15 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: I'll take the action
18:38:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes, great, i would prefer not to block the current patch
18:38:48 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: anything else to discuss on this?
18:39:00 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: Nope, let's wait for magesh's approval and we are set :)
18:39:11 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i put a process comment on #link https://review.openstack.org/164907
18:39:22 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: other than that patch is good
18:39:56 <SumitNaiksatam> we are running behind today
18:40:04 <ivar-lazzaro> sharing is caring!
18:40:05 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Functional/Integration Tests
18:40:11 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: ;-)
18:40:48 <SumitNaiksatam> i am still working on the fix this: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161532/
18:41:09 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Packaging update
18:41:21 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: there was a question around CentOS 6.5 support
18:41:33 <rkukura> I didn’t see that.
18:41:42 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: is this tested, and which Fedora packages can be used for this?
18:42:20 <rkukura> My understanding was that RDO does not support EL6
18:42:52 <rkukura> at least for juno and beyond
18:43:09 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay, but if someone wants to run CentOS 6.5?
18:43:28 <rkukura> what openstack distro are they using?
18:43:48 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: good question, i dont know :-)
18:44:14 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay i will follow up offline with you
18:44:50 <SumitNaiksatam> moving on
18:44:52 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic GBP Project Proposal
18:44:58 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/161902/
18:45:10 <SumitNaiksatam> this has been added to next week’s TC agenda
18:45:27 <SumitNaiksatam> i believe the meeting is on IRC at 22.00 UTC, March 31st
18:45:40 <SumitNaiksatam> sorry, 20.00 UTC
18:45:56 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/TechnicalCommittee
18:46:17 <SumitNaiksatam> our favorite topic
18:46:22 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Re-factor Group Based Policy with Neutron RESTful APIs
18:46:40 <SumitNaiksatam> so last week #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/159725 was merged
18:46:49 <SumitNaiksatam> thanks yapeng and Yi
18:47:10 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156776 is ready to go?
18:47:38 <Yi> SumitNaiksatam: yes
18:48:15 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: okay nice
18:48:18 <Yi> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156856/ needs some extra work, but is very close to be done
18:48:21 <SumitNaiksatam> requesting the cores to take a look
18:48:29 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: good, about to ask you that
18:48:45 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: yapeng: any blockers?
18:48:54 <Yi> everything seems fine
18:49:13 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: I have a question about the mock_neutron.meta_mock decorator
18:49:20 <Yi> Ivar helped us a lot, and the patched UT seems fine
18:49:30 <SumitNaiksatam> yapeng: Yi: as with the discussion with magesh on testing, this needs to be tested thoroughly with devstack
18:49:37 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: If I understand correctly, that is needed in all the UTs, is that correct?
18:49:38 <Yi> ivar-lazzaro: go ahead
18:50:01 <Yi> ivar-lazzaro: pretty much yes
18:50:20 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: isn't there any way to do it in the setUp method then?
18:50:57 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: I say that because I'm pretty sure people are going to forget/not know to use it
18:51:16 <Yi> ivar-lazzaro: how to do it with setUp to patch those methods?
18:52:14 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: I have to look at it, but I think you can just do the same thing you to on meta_mock in the setUp
18:52:28 <ivar-lazzaro> well, my using the patch method instead of the decorator ofc
18:52:33 <ivar-lazzaro> s/my/by
18:53:09 <ivar-lazzaro> let me find I link for an example
18:53:23 <Yi> ivar-lazzaro: that would be great
18:54:08 <ivar-lazzaro> https://github.com/stackforge/group-based-policy/blob/master/gbpservice/neutron/tests/unit/services/grouppolicy/test_resource_mapping.py#L70-L71
18:54:08 <SumitNaiksatam> i would prefer if this can be done in the setup as well
18:54:18 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: would something like this work?
18:54:40 <Yi> ivar-lazzaro: let me take a look
18:55:02 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: yapeng: thanks for the update
18:55:14 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Floating IP support
18:55:14 <Yi> I will ping you offline if I have any issues.:-)
18:55:18 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/157298
18:55:30 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: ok :) I'll be flying for a couple of days though
18:55:35 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: i know you have been busy with the pre-requisite step for this
18:56:39 <magesh> SumitNaiksatam: yes, but comments are welcome on this patch, this needs some more work
18:56:40 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: any update that you want to provide?
18:56:56 <magesh> Right now, the implementation is like this
18:57:14 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: i believe you will get more comments once you post a response to the current comments, and perhpas post a new patch set
18:57:23 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/157298
18:58:00 <magesh> ah, my bad the spec isnt updated
18:58:07 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: np
18:58:27 <magesh> #link https://review.openstack.org/167174
18:58:58 <magesh> I have a WIP patch , may be all of you can take a look at this and see which way we want to head
18:59:11 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: ah okay, did not show up on my radar
18:59:18 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: have added reviewers now
18:59:25 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh: thanks for the update there
18:59:33 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Open Discussion
18:59:37 <SumitNaiksatam> we have a minute
18:59:43 <SumitNaiksatam> anything we missed?
19:00:20 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: stable/juno plans?
19:00:37 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yes, not tagged it, i will try to do that EoD
19:00:43 <SumitNaiksatam> thanks for bringing that up
19:00:45 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: thanks
19:01:01 <SumitNaiksatam> alrighty thanks everyone for your time today!
19:01:02 <SumitNaiksatam> bye
19:01:11 <SumitNaiksatam> #endmeeting