18:01:06 <SumitNaiksatam> #startmeeting networking_policy
18:01:06 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Apr  2 18:01:06 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:01:07 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:01:09 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy'
18:01:18 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam, hi
18:01:24 <SumitNaiksatam> #info agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/GroupBasedPolicy#April_2nd.2C_March_26th.2C_2015
18:01:47 <SumitNaiksatam> we still have the pending critical bugs from last time
18:01:59 <ivar-lazzaro> hi
18:02:07 <SumitNaiksatam> magesh-gv has made progress, and his UTs are passing on: #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1433530
18:02:08 <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)
18:02:31 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/165377
18:02:37 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: hi
18:02:48 <SumitNaiksatam> however we will need to test this with the gate job as well
18:03:15 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: on #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1432779
18:03:16 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1432779 in Group Based Policy "redirect actions don't work with external policies" [Critical,In progress] - Assigned to Ivar Lazzaro (mmaleckk)
18:03:26 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/164920/
18:03:34 <SumitNaiksatam> ah, last time magesh said he wanted to test
18:03:39 <SumitNaiksatam> so i think we are blocked on that
18:03:41 <ivar-lazzaro> yes
18:04:03 <SumitNaiksatam> okay i will follow up with him
18:04:13 <SumitNaiksatam> any other bugs we want to discuss today?
18:04:29 <ivar-lazzaro> also, there was the matter about checking whether a service could be provided by an EP or not
18:04:44 <SumitNaiksatam> i forgot to change the topic! ;-)
18:04:47 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Bugs
18:05:04 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: ah true
18:05:18 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: was there a conclusion to that discussion?
18:05:51 <ivar-lazzaro> I think we certainly have to keep in mind that some services (eg. LB) can't be instantiated when the EP is a provider
18:06:10 <ivar-lazzaro> however, we didn't reach a consensus on whether this should be validated or ignored
18:07:02 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i am in favor of validation, might not be needed in this patch (can be filed as a follow up bug)
18:07:07 <ivar-lazzaro> we should think of this also in the context of the service chain refactor (assuming there's any on Kilo)
18:07:19 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: yeah
18:07:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes that is on the cards for kilo
18:07:47 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: the extent of refactor itself can be discussed :-)
18:07:58 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: so we may want to wait for that before even fixing #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1432779
18:07:59 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1432779 in Group Based Policy "redirect actions don't work with external policies" [Critical,In progress] - Assigned to Ivar Lazzaro (mmaleckk)
18:08:36 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: hmmm, since you already have patch that is tested, i am inclined go with this fix for now
18:08:56 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: except it's not tested :)
18:09:19 <ivar-lazzaro> but assuming magesh takes the item, then we could go through with it
18:09:24 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: okay, point taken, let me rephrase, it does not break existing functionality :-)
18:09:48 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: do you recommend reducing the priority of this bug?
18:10:02 <SumitNaiksatam> we cannot sit on a critical for this long
18:10:19 <ivar-lazzaro> mmmh no it's actually super important at least as far as the "consumer" use case is cocerned
18:10:26 <SumitNaiksatam> especially since the patch is already posted
18:10:44 <ivar-lazzaro> probably I should have done two different patches
18:11:00 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yeah, i was going to say, can you remove the part which you were not able to test functionally?
18:11:36 <ivar-lazzaro> That would be patch set 1
18:11:41 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: okay
18:11:55 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: and after that you factored in igordcard_’s comment?
18:11:59 <ivar-lazzaro> I can load another patchset which is a mirror of patchset 1
18:12:06 <ivar-lazzaro> yes
18:12:48 <ivar-lazzaro> then the difference between 1 and 2 could be pushed in a separate branch for magesh to test
18:12:55 <ivar-lazzaro> how does it look?
18:13:01 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: that works for me, and then between you, magesh and igordcard_ we can figure out how to best test the case (and what constraints we need to check for)
18:13:17 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes what you said ;-)
18:13:21 <SumitNaiksatam> ok moving on
18:13:25 <ivar-lazzaro> ok
18:13:30 <SumitNaiksatam> any other bugs that we need to discuss today?
18:13:39 <igordcard_> alright :)
18:13:58 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: thanks
18:14:14 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Functional/Integration Tests
18:14:38 <SumitNaiksatam> so my merged to start running the test ingegration tests was merged over the weekend
18:14:49 <SumitNaiksatam> this is currently an experimental job
18:15:01 <SumitNaiksatam> so you have to go “check experimental"
18:15:10 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: nice!
18:15:23 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: thanks
18:15:31 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: is it running actual tests? I've seen it failing a couple of times
18:15:32 <SumitNaiksatam> but it does run a complete end to end tst
18:15:46 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yeah, i was getting to the tests
18:16:05 <SumitNaiksatam> currently the test script is in the form of a devstack exercises script
18:16:15 <SumitNaiksatam> so this is not a functional test, its an integration test
18:16:29 <SumitNaiksatam> but it does exercise all the resources
18:16:41 <SumitNaiksatam> it brings up a VM, etx
18:16:44 <SumitNaiksatam> *etc
18:17:00 <SumitNaiksatam> going forward we need to add functional tests
18:17:08 <SumitNaiksatam> and also tempest API tests
18:17:42 <SumitNaiksatam> also we will merges going forward only if the experimental job succeeds
18:18:00 <SumitNaiksatam> (we will be turning the experimental job to a voting job soon)
18:18:07 <SumitNaiksatam> *merge
18:18:15 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: What needs to happen before this becomes a voting job?
18:18:19 <SumitNaiksatam> does that sound reasonable to everyone
18:18:34 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i was hoping that we observed the behavior for a little more
18:18:35 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: +1
18:18:47 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: and my hope was to also have added the functional tests by now
18:18:48 <Yi> +1
18:19:01 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i spent time on it, but i made only limited progress
18:19:10 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: Yi: thanks for the confirmation
18:19:23 <yapeng> SumitNaiksatam: for every patch we manually trigger this test, right?
18:19:34 <SumitNaiksatam> yapeng: correct, and i know its painful
18:19:43 <SumitNaiksatam> so apologies in advance
18:19:44 <rkukura> Can we make it automatically trigger, but not vote yet?
18:19:48 <yapeng> no problem. +1
18:19:56 <SumitNaiksatam> but we cant make the job voting until we are confident that the job is solid
18:20:04 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yes
18:20:12 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: we can make it non-voting
18:20:40 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: then it will be another infra patch to make it voting, so i was trying to save my trouble (and the reviewers time) ;-)
18:21:12 <SumitNaiksatam> okay anything more on that?
18:21:30 <SumitNaiksatam> if you are interested in contributing to the functional/integration tests, please do let me know
18:21:33 <SumitNaiksatam> i can help you get started
18:21:52 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Packaging Update
18:21:58 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: anything at your end?
18:22:33 <rkukura> I havern’t had a chance to update the juno-based fedora packages with the stable release yet, but hope to in the next week
18:22:41 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: ok good
18:23:03 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: did we miss the end of march deadline for fedora 22?
18:23:23 <SumitNaiksatam> i had checked with magesh, and he said it would not have been possible to get his patch ready over the weekend
18:23:32 <SumitNaiksatam> so i gave up on that
18:23:36 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: I have not seen anything furtther on whethe they went with juno or kilo for f22. I need to check.
18:23:43 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay
18:23:49 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: thanks for the update
18:23:54 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Docs
18:24:03 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: quick question
18:24:07 <SumitNaiksatam> #undo
18:24:08 <openstack> Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x912f250>
18:24:11 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: go head
18:24:17 <SumitNaiksatam> *ahed
18:24:20 <SumitNaiksatam> *ahead
18:24:39 <rkukura> Are there any additional patches we should include in an additional stable release before it gets packaged?
18:26:11 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: not that i am aware of
18:26:21 <rkukura> ok, thanks
18:26:22 <SumitNaiksatam> i already tagged the new stable
18:26:28 <SumitNaiksatam> but good point
18:26:42 <rkukura> I saw that for gbp, and assume the other repos also have stable releases
18:26:42 <SumitNaiksatam> if anyone wants to backport anything more to the stable, please speak up at the earliest
18:26:48 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yes
18:27:17 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Docs
18:27:24 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: do we need to backport EP providing chains?
18:27:42 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: your call
18:28:04 <ivar-lazzaro> I think we should
18:28:06 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i am good with backporting it since, its a contained change
18:28:11 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: ok
18:28:16 <ivar-lazzaro> ad least for the consuming (I said providing before) at least
18:28:39 <SumitNaiksatam> so in that case i think we will have to wait for Ivar to post a new patch, wait for it to merge, and then do the backport
18:28:52 <SumitNaiksatam> lets plan to wrap this up in a day, since we had already reviewed the first patchset
18:29:06 <SumitNaiksatam> on the docs
18:29:23 <SumitNaiksatam> we do have readthedocs now building our docs:
18:29:24 <SumitNaiksatam> http://group-based-policy.readthedocs.org/en/latest/
18:29:37 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: (The new patch is there btw)
18:29:45 <SumitNaiksatam> its a different matter that we need to update the docs themselves (a little bit) :-)
18:30:12 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: thanks
18:30:36 <SumitNaiksatam> the docs are currently being built in readthedocs on demand
18:30:51 <SumitNaiksatam> there is an infra job to automate that too, so we can do that eventually
18:30:57 <SumitNaiksatam> moving on
18:31:03 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam, where is the source for them?
18:31:18 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: its in the tree
18:31:42 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://github.com/stackforge/group-based-policy/tree/master/doc/source
18:31:54 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam, right! thanks
18:32:02 <SumitNaiksatam> so please feel free to suggest updates and additions
18:32:23 <SumitNaiksatam> you will need to submit a new patch just like any other code patch
18:33:00 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic GBP Project Proposal
18:33:23 <SumitNaiksatam> we had removed the project proposal patch from WIP last week
18:33:31 <SumitNaiksatam> and then we put it back to WIP ;-)
18:33:41 <SumitNaiksatam> there was a discussion in the TC meeting on this proposal
18:34:58 <SumitNaiksatam> the question asked was whether GBP was circumventing neutron
18:35:47 <SumitNaiksatam> since in the current model, it seems that the TC wants to preserve the interactions to the core infrastructure pieces through the current established projects (like neutron, nova, etc)
18:36:17 <SumitNaiksatam> some of the team members engaged in the discussion and provided clarifying comments
18:36:32 <SumitNaiksatam> we do not know if the opinion has changed or now
18:36:36 <SumitNaiksatam> *not
18:36:50 <SumitNaiksatam> so currently the patch is still in WIP, and we will try to work through this
18:36:55 <SumitNaiksatam> questions/comments?
18:37:09 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: Is it still on the agenda for the next TC meeting?
18:37:34 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i do see it on the agenda, but i think it made it there by default (i did not request it)
18:38:02 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: we have to decide if we need more time, and accordingly we can request ttx to remove it from the agenda
18:38:35 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: do we plan on addressing their concerns in a separate session / code walkthrough?
18:38:40 <rkukura> I’m thinking we need more time to really understand the objections and what we need to do about them.
18:38:52 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i am very much agreement
18:39:02 <ivar-lazzaro> rkukura: +1
18:39:22 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i do not believe there is a process for that, but i think its a great idea if they have the time and inclination
18:40:03 <ivar-lazzaro> I think mainly there are some still seeing GBP as it was 1 year ago. It changed quite a bit but obviously we need to make a greater effort sending the message through
18:40:36 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: sure
18:40:48 <SumitNaiksatam> so everyone in this team is empowered to send that message
18:41:16 <hemanthravi> ivar +1, need to reiterate GBP is a app oriented API that uses neutron to realize the networking required
18:41:44 <SumitNaiksatam> we do need to coordinate a little bit, but beyond that, please feel free to suggest options and follow up
18:42:25 <SumitNaiksatam> hemanthravi: do you have a forum in mind that you think we need to send that message to (and we havent already)?
18:43:16 <hemanthravi> SumitNaiksatam:this was done at the tc meeting, not sure of any other forum
18:43:24 <SumitNaiksatam> hemanthravi: yes
18:43:44 <SumitNaiksatam> okay if there are no more comments on this, we need to get to the remaining items
18:43:51 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Re-factor Group Based Policy with Neutron RESTful APIs
18:44:04 <SumitNaiksatam> so #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156776 merged
18:44:20 <SumitNaiksatam> and we are waiting on: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156856
18:44:35 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: yapeng over to you
18:44:49 <Yi> I was syncning with Ivar on a couple of his concerns
18:45:18 <Yi> but otherwise, should have new update very soon
18:45:28 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: thats great!
18:46:11 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: yapeng: was there anything more you wanted to discuss?
18:46:18 <ivar-lazzaro> Yi: it's been an awesome job! ping me if you have questions on my comments
18:46:41 <yapeng> SumitNaiksatam, no issue right now.
18:46:53 <Yi> SumitNaiksatam: no -- but if other members have concerns, please make your comments now
18:47:08 <Yi> ivar-lazzaro: I will ping you right after this meeting
18:47:19 <SumitNaiksatam> Yi: yapeng thanks
18:47:39 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: it will help if you can take a look at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/156856 as well
18:47:55 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: I will
18:48:03 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: great
18:48:22 <SumitNaiksatam> i was expecting a longer discussion on this, hence try to hurry up earlier :-)
18:48:43 <SumitNaiksatam> oh regarding the floating IP support
18:49:19 <SumitNaiksatam> i think magesh is doing that on the background but needs the Kilo-parity to work before he can get the floating IPs going
18:49:32 <SumitNaiksatam> klio-parity with Neutron that is
18:49:44 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Open Discussion
18:50:25 <SumitNaiksatam> did we miss anything today, or anyone want to circle back to the earlier topics?
18:50:37 <SumitNaiksatam> or get 10 mins of our time back? ;-)
18:51:18 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: anything you wanted to discuss on the hands on lab?
18:51:39 <SumitNaiksatam> for vancouver summit
18:51:42 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam, I dropped a comment at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/149798/ a few days ago
18:52:04 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: I'd like to set up a discussion for when I'm back from Italy
18:52:28 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: sorry did not respond, i will get back to you, the issue is reproducible
18:52:29 <ivar-lazzaro> just to make sure we are well organized and understand how we want to drive the session
18:52:34 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: sure
18:53:09 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: that bug is in the context of shared resources
18:53:10 <ivar-lazzaro> obviously we want to show the awesome power of rainbow intents, but I'd like to sink up with the core team on the actual set of demonstrations we want to show
18:53:23 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes
18:53:37 <s3wong> ivar-lazzaro: great
18:54:22 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam, okay... will reproduce it with shared resources then
18:54:29 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: sorry i stand corrected
18:54:40 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: i need to go back and check
18:54:46 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: i will follow up
18:55:06 <SumitNaiksatam> alright, thanks everyone
18:55:08 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam, thanks
18:55:17 <SumitNaiksatam> bye!
18:55:20 <igordcard_> bye all
18:55:22 <Yi> later
18:55:26 <ivar-lazzaro> bye
18:55:31 <SumitNaiksatam> #endmeeting