18:02:57 <SumitNaiksatam> #startmeeting networking_policy
18:02:58 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jun  4 18:02:57 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:02:59 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:03:01 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy'
18:03:16 <SumitNaiksatam> #info agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/GroupBasedPolicy#June_4th.2C_2015
18:03:36 <SumitNaiksatam> is ajay or amit here?
18:04:32 <SumitNaiksatam> yapeng: hi
18:04:45 <yapeng> hello, everyone
18:05:19 <SumitNaiksatam> sorry for the delay, i was looking for amit, ajay, magesh and ivar
18:05:24 <SumitNaiksatam> but none of them seem to be on
18:05:41 <SumitNaiksatam> ah ransari is here, thanks for joining rukhsana
18:05:51 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Bugs
18:05:58 <ransari> you're welcome sumit
18:06:24 <SumitNaiksatam> we did not have any critical bugs in the last week
18:06:42 <SumitNaiksatam> however a bunch of new High priority ones got added
18:07:40 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bugs?search=Search&field.importance=High&field.status=New&field.status=Incomplete&field.status=Confirmed&field.status=Triaged&field.status=In+Progress&field.status=Fix+Committed
18:08:23 <SumitNaiksatam> more specifically, we ajay (who was planning to join), is one of the first users actually writing to our API, found a bunch of stuff
18:08:33 <Ajay_> joined now
18:08:40 <Ajay_> sorry confused with UTC time
18:08:44 <SumitNaiksatam> ah, and there he is, right on cue - Ajay_: hi
18:08:56 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose: we see you too, thanks for joining
18:09:02 <SumitNaiksatam> will get to the packaging in a minute
18:09:17 <ivar-lazzaro> hello, sorry I'm late
18:09:35 <SumitNaiksatam> so as i was saying, Ajay_ is one of the first brave new users of the GBP API
18:09:46 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: np, we are just getting warmed up ;-)
18:09:53 <Ajay_> i am integrating GBP into Rally
18:10:03 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: yes thanks
18:10:06 <Ajay_> tests i mean
18:10:23 <SumitNaiksatam> so he has been looking at various different aspects as he is working through writing the Rally tests
18:10:41 <SumitNaiksatam> he has also posted a bunch of bugs, which i think are very good feedback for the team here
18:11:05 <Ajay_> so far 5 UI bugs and a 3 were non UI issues
18:11:13 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: do you feel comfortable pointing out a few of the high priority bugs and/or generall issues that you are seeing?
18:11:35 <Ajay_> ya mainly the UI issues with regards to presenting the view to users
18:12:04 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: but i think some of your observations on the service and API side are more pressing
18:12:18 <Ajay_> ya for API side
18:12:25 <Ajay_> these issues
18:12:40 <Ajay_> https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1462024
18:12:40 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1462024 in Group Based Policy "Concurrent create_policy_target_group call fails" [High,Confirmed] - Assigned to Robert Kukura (rkukura)
18:12:56 <Ajay_> where concurrent usage of policy target group was causing issues
18:13:30 <Ajay_> https://bugs.launchpad.net/group-based-policy/+bug/1460831
18:13:30 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1460831 in Group Based Policy "API for group update is not clear" [High,Confirmed] - Assigned to Sumit Naiksatam (snaiksat)
18:13:36 <Ajay_> for Group update API
18:13:51 <Ajay_> and there is one more on treatment of orphaned openstack resources
18:14:01 <Ajay_> those sumit where the ones from API
18:14:29 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: yes
18:14:36 <Ajay_> also i was faced with no documentation on python API
18:14:43 <SumitNaiksatam> right
18:14:53 <Ajay_> which makes the development cycle for app users writing applications on top of GBP longer
18:15:04 <SumitNaiksatam> so as a user, Ajay_ expected that there be a python SDK that he could have used
18:15:07 <SumitNaiksatam> and we dont have one
18:15:23 <ivar-lazzaro> Ajay_: that's great feedback!
18:15:34 <Ajay_> also i noticed a few cases where i am deviating from intenant
18:15:34 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: do other OpenStack projects have a SDK?
18:15:40 <SumitNaiksatam> this is an area we have to address immediately, so if there’s anyone wanting to work on this, please let me know
18:15:43 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes
18:16:12 <Ajay_> example i still need to specify quoatas in neutron still need to know neutron port to attach A VM etc
18:16:26 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CC4QFjAA&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.openstack.org%2Fwiki%2FSDK-Development%2FPythonOpenStackSDK&ei=35VwVZcIxfygBPeUgYgC&usg=AFQjCNEl4q5Yu_SQZLQFWQNQlOlp73kIDQ&sig2=KLHnZGp8bQzWCrWb77AN6Q&bvm=bv.95039771,d.cGU
18:16:37 <Ajay_> as an App API user i want to perform all operations in intent and dont want to keep track of neutron
18:16:53 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: i believe we should track that as a bug too
18:17:16 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: for the integrated projects, they were part of the SDK
18:17:28 <ransari> Sumit:Ajay: w.r.t  1460831 - does the bug translate to "Why is a key of provider/consumer required if it is already called out in the CLI via --provided-rule-set?"
18:17:29 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: however we can use that SDK as a lib, and build our own
18:17:46 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: I found this #link https://github.com/stackforge/python-openstacksdk
18:17:48 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: yes
18:17:58 <ransari> sumit: ok
18:18:00 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes, thats the one
18:18:43 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: sorry, it relates to “what is the use of the scope, and its confusing the way its structured”
18:18:45 <Ajay_> Sumit which one quota one or the neutron port knowledge to attach VM what needs a bug?
18:18:58 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: the quota one
18:18:59 <ivar-lazzaro> Ajay_: we had a wrapper in the client for VM creation with --group option
18:19:18 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: for the neutron port, we will address that as a part of the compute integration
18:19:25 <Ajay_> also even if we dont have a SDK immediatly documentation on the current python API , Like REST body to use would be useful
18:19:35 <ivar-lazzaro> not sure if it's part of the current release anymore
18:19:42 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: agree, we will try to address this one way or the other at the earliest
18:19:49 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: its probably not
18:20:04 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i mean its not, and it probably wont be
18:20:26 <Ajay_> we cant expect application developers using GBP to capture output from CLI and than put those REST body in their python scripts ....
18:20:41 <Ajay_> thats all i had on feedback
18:20:43 <Ajay_> for this week
18:20:47 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: yes, agreed, and apologies for making you do that
18:21:03 <yapeng> currently all APIs are in python language?
18:21:08 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: great, thanks much (but dont go away)
18:21:13 <SumitNaiksatam> yapeng: true
18:21:14 <Ajay_> yes wont
18:22:01 <ransari> Ajay: in terms of documentation, is the expectation something along the lines of:  http://developer.openstack.org/api-ref-networking-v2.html
18:22:05 <SumitNaiksatam> yapeng: but we still need an SDK that abstracts the client side usage
18:22:26 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: did you just volunteer to do that? :-P
18:22:38 <Ajay_> ransari: yes
18:22:38 <yapeng> SumitNaiksatam: makes sense
18:22:54 <ransari> ajay: ok
18:23:16 <ransari> sumit: will discuss with hemanth if we can help out with that
18:23:30 <SumitNaiksatam> the WADL formatting is a bit time consuming to code
18:23:36 <SumitNaiksatam> hence the delay in doing this
18:23:39 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: sure
18:24:25 <SumitNaiksatam> okay, i know we deviated a little bit from the usual meeting flow today (and perhaps we should called this topic - User Feedback), but i wanted to get Ajay_’s input while its fresh in his mind
18:25:01 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Test - Functional, Integration, Rally
18:25:16 <SumitNaiksatam> note that i added Rally here
18:25:27 <SumitNaiksatam> so like Ajay_ mentioned he has been working on writing these tests
18:25:45 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: can you give a quick summary of the scenarios that you are currently targeting?
18:26:10 <Ajay_> I am testing all the Implicit Policy APIs for functional, concurrency and scale
18:26:28 <Ajay_> to do this i am using the python client API to code these tests in Rally benchmark tool
18:26:51 <Ajay_> so far policy actions/calissifiers/rule/ruleset/target group/target are codes
18:26:53 <Ajay_> coded
18:27:00 <Ajay_> these APIs i mean
18:27:17 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: why do you say “implicity policy” APIs?
18:27:19 <Ajay_> code is in my github under username: akalambu forked rally repo
18:27:30 <Ajay_> as in i create a policy target group
18:27:35 <Ajay_> and it creates a L2 and L3 policy
18:27:40 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: ok
18:27:54 <SumitNaiksatam> you mean the implicity workflows
18:28:04 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: great!
18:28:11 <Ajay_> next would be explicit L2/L3 policy and external network
18:28:21 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: as regards a home for the tests
18:28:29 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: these should be in the GBP upstream repo
18:28:46 <Ajay_> i can speak to Boris and see if he is ready to accept this upstream?
18:28:51 <Ajay_> Boris is Rally PTL
18:29:05 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: ah, i was thinking this should be part of the GBP repo
18:29:12 <SumitNaiksatam> other projects do it that way
18:29:16 <Ajay_> ok
18:29:26 <Ajay_> ya we can do that too
18:30:06 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: yeah, we can have a “rally” directory here #link https://github.com/stackforge/group-based-policy/tree/master/gbpservice/tests
18:30:20 <SumitNaiksatam> or in any other location that makes sense
18:30:29 <SumitNaiksatam> what does the rest of the team think about this?
18:30:35 <Ajay_> sumit: issue is it needs rally infra to run
18:30:44 <Ajay_> which is in a different rpo
18:30:46 <Ajay_> repo
18:30:54 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: yes agreed
18:31:06 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: but we have integration tests that need devstack too
18:31:31 <igordcard_> seems okay to me, have no issue with it
18:31:36 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: so we would have a separate job that would setup the rally infra to exercise these tests
18:31:44 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: ok good
18:31:53 <Ajay_> sumit: sounds good will work on i
18:32:15 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: ok cool, we can connect offline to discuss the feasibility and mechanics of this
18:32:27 <Ajay_> sumit: sounds good
18:32:31 <SumitNaiksatam> any questions for Ajay_ on this?
18:32:35 <ivar-lazzaro> I would go with as much in-tree as possible at least as far as the tests are concerned
18:32:46 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: +1
18:32:59 <ivar-lazzaro> so that any developer can write basic tests for their new features
18:33:09 <ivar-lazzaro> who knows... Maybe even as a requirement :p
18:33:27 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: integration tests should definitely be a requirement
18:33:34 <SumitNaiksatam> unfortunately we are not there yet
18:33:53 <SumitNaiksatam> exercise script is helping in some way
18:34:09 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: thanks much for your work and update on this as well!
18:34:18 <Ajay_> sumit: welcome
18:34:20 <SumitNaiksatam> i dont have any updates on the functional and integration tests
18:34:26 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Packaging
18:35:03 <SumitNaiksatam> folks, apart from Ajay_ we have a second new member to the team as well, please welcome amitbose
18:35:18 <amitbose> Hello!
18:35:20 <ivar-lazzaro> amitbose: Welcome!
18:35:30 <igordcard_> Hello amitbose!
18:35:31 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose is currently focussing on the ubuntu packagind and has made good progress
18:35:36 <yapeng> amtibose: Hi!
18:35:50 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: last week you asked about this, i believe amitbose will be able to give an update
18:35:53 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose: over to you
18:35:58 <rkukura> great!
18:36:42 <amitbose> So far I've been looking at build packages from stable/juno branch, but it should be pretty straight forward to port them for kilo
18:36:53 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose: ok
18:37:00 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose: and we will be posting them on the ppa?
18:37:27 <amitbose> yeah, sure I can do that ... I will need the signing key though
18:37:40 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://launchpad.net/~group-based-policy-drivers/+archive/ubuntu/ppa
18:37:48 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose: ok lets discuss that offline
18:38:28 <SumitNaiksatam> amitbose: thanks for the update, looking forward to more in the coming weeks
18:38:42 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: anything at your end for the k-3 packages on fedora?
18:38:56 <rkukura> amitbose: Lets compare notes at some point regareing Red Hat vs. Ubuntu packaging
18:39:13 <ransari> Hello amitbose
18:39:26 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yes definitely, had meant to send you an email prior to this meeting on that topic
18:39:35 <rkukura> I have not yet put much effort into updating the Fedora packages to k-3, but expect to get this done in the next couple days
18:39:47 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: ok thanks
18:40:02 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: did you have a question for amitbose?
18:40:08 <rkukura> And I’d like to start looking into delorean and how that would impact us
18:40:16 <amitbose> One question: do we need packages only the latest milestone (2015.1.0.0b3) or earlier ones as well?
18:40:19 <Ajay_> rkurkura: will the instructions you sent for RDO work on RHEL OSP6
18:40:26 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay, but that will not impact us for kilo, right?
18:41:05 <rkukura> probably not immediately for kilo, but I think they are working to support stable branches for k foreward
18:42:11 <rkukura> Ajay_: OSP6 would be similar, except that the GBP packages are not yet in the OSP yum repo, so you’d need to add the RDO repo or some other repo, or install packages explicitly
18:42:54 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: can we capture that detail on the wiki page?
18:43:29 <Ajay_> rkukura: can we get the right repo to use...thats always the issue with RHEL
18:43:39 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: I’m not sure putting OSP details on the RDO wiki page is appropriate, but we can find somewhere
18:44:00 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay
18:44:24 <rkukura> The standard RDO repos work with RHEL, CentOS, and Fedora, but not necessarily with RHEL OSP
18:45:27 <Ajay_> rukukura/sumit: lets discuss the RHEL OSP part offline in email
18:45:55 <rkukura> Most likely the RDO RHEL packages will work on the corresponding RHEL OSP release, but there could be dependency issues, and it would be important to make sure RDO packages don’t have priority over supported OSP packages.
18:47:33 <SumitNaiksatam> Ajay_: rkukura: ok lets take this offline, we are begind schedule
18:47:37 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: thanks for the update on this!
18:47:44 <rkukura> ok
18:48:05 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Kilo features
18:48:14 <SumitNaiksatam> floating ip support: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/167174
18:48:34 <SumitNaiksatam> the exercise script is validating that this is working per the current design
18:48:54 <SumitNaiksatam> please review and comment if you have objections with this patch going forward
18:48:58 <SumitNaiksatam> else we need to close on this soon
18:49:26 <SumitNaiksatam> Service chain driver refactoring: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:stackforge/group-based-policy+branch:master+topic:bp/node-centric-chain-plugin,n,z
18:49:46 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro has been deligently pluggin away on this and updating the patches
18:49:56 <SumitNaiksatam> and it has shaped up really nicely
18:50:18 <SumitNaiksatam> so lets provide the review support for this as well
18:50:30 <SumitNaiksatam> and try to close on this at the earliest
18:50:33 <igordcard_> I haven't yet had a chance to calmly review all the latest patches on that but will do it throughout today and this weekend
18:50:41 <ivar-lazzaro> Hopefully I'll be able to provide a driver for testing it soon
18:50:52 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: yes being calm is important, its a lot of stuff :-)
18:51:07 <ivar-lazzaro> igordcard_: thanks!
18:51:21 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: my assumption is that we will at least have a heat-based driver to test the basic integration with the neutron services like before?
18:51:36 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: so that our exercise scripts can be used to validate that
18:51:58 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: I thought magesh is working in something heat based
18:52:08 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: okay
18:52:08 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: so I thought I would do the Nova driver instead
18:52:34 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: which will also make proper use of the plumber and should nicely integrate with igordcard_ work
18:52:37 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: songole: so magesh is working on porting the appliance driver for the neutron services?
18:52:48 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: okay
18:52:59 <igordcard_> yep
18:53:03 <igordcard_> what is the current date for the final kilo-gbp? https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-gbp-plan seems to be outdated
18:53:08 <songole> SumitNaiksatam: not sure. will find out.
18:53:17 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: you need to rebase your patch?
18:53:34 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: we are looking at Kilo release for the end of this month latest
18:53:45 <songole> SumitNaiksatam: started reviewing the patches. Hope to complete over the weekend.
18:53:53 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam: probably, I had already rebased it once, but it should be no problem in its current state
18:53:58 <SumitNaiksatam> so we will try to get into the RC phase in about 10 days time frame
18:54:09 <SumitNaiksatam> songole: okay
18:54:19 <igordcard_> SumitNaiksatam: okay, thanks, will write that down on calendar
18:54:44 <SumitNaiksatam> which means that we need all this reviewed at the earliest
18:55:26 <SumitNaiksatam> any thoughts/comments/objections on either of the above features being discussed?
18:56:04 <ransari> <sumit> Magesh will start work on porting appliance to service-node model sometime next week
18:56:05 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: thanks for the update and the fantastic work so far!
18:56:15 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: next week???
18:56:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: lets discuss offline
18:56:47 <ivar-lazzaro> There was one more feature I wanted to discuss, but I guess I'll send out an email instead
18:56:53 <SumitNaiksatam> we need to be able to validate that all this works end-to-end, and without a driver how do we do that?
18:57:04 <ransari> sumit: once service refactor  review is cmpletd and merge to kilo is done
18:57:06 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: ok, you can summarize here
18:57:40 <ransari> sumit: we can discuss offline
18:57:53 <ivar-lazzaro> Given how many operations we issue in the backend (postcommit), I believe it's critical for usability to move our project towards a promise theory approach
18:57:58 <SumitNaiksatam> ransari: i would have preferred to see the driver in place in parallel, since the service refactor work does include the refactored reference driver
18:58:12 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: okay
18:58:14 <ivar-lazzaro> But even before doing that, having an asynchronous backend is critical
18:58:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes, okay so thats a longer discussion ;-)
18:58:38 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: it is :)
18:58:45 <rkukura> ivar-lazzaro: Do you feel TaskFlow is up to the job for this?
18:58:56 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: thanks for bringing it up
18:59:01 <ivar-lazzaro> rkukura: definetively, but I think we need a solution for Kilo
18:59:06 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i would assume we use it to realize the async
18:59:29 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: hmmm, kilo might be challenging, but perhaps you have thought through this
18:59:49 <SumitNaiksatam> lets discuss offline until next meeting
18:59:49 <ivar-lazzaro> rkukura: otherwise usability will not be great (or even fair)
18:59:59 <ivar-lazzaro> ok
19:00:02 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Liberty features
19:00:28 <SumitNaiksatam> i trust the other folks - yapeng, yi are working in parallel on the kilo features
19:00:51 <SumitNaiksatam> we will get spending more time on those once the kilo backlog is cleared
19:01:12 <SumitNaiksatam> okay so we are out of time for today
19:01:16 <SumitNaiksatam> any parting thoughts?
19:01:37 <rkukura> ivar-lazzaro: Lets discuss async/TaskFlow tomorrow if possible.
19:01:39 <igordcard_> liberty features: probably that drag-and-drop SC UI, but for kilo most likely not
19:01:45 <ivar-lazzaro> rkukura: yes!
19:02:07 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: yes, the renaming!
19:02:15 <ivar-lazzaro> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/gbp-rename-proposals
19:02:18 <SumitNaiksatam> igordcard_: yes that for kilo
19:02:28 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: yes, thanks for the reminder
19:02:36 <ivar-lazzaro> here are a bunch of proposals
19:02:45 <ivar-lazzaro> I'm very sad about "Meta" and
19:02:49 <ivar-lazzaro> "Regi'a
19:02:54 <ivar-lazzaro> being unusable
19:03:11 <igordcard_> I still like intento
19:03:11 <ivar-lazzaro> I'll start a poll today
19:03:15 <igordcard_> ivar-lazzaro: cool
19:03:31 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: lets hold on the poll
19:03:35 <ivar-lazzaro> hopefully we'll have a decision by next week (or before Kilo closes)
19:03:42 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: why is that?
19:04:19 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: give people some time to thing
19:04:21 <SumitNaiksatam> think
19:04:29 <rkukura> Why not rename in liberty at the time we become a standalone server?
19:04:33 <ivar-lazzaro> (by the way I wonder who proposed "Membrane"... It reminds me of something :) )
19:04:34 <SumitNaiksatam> i would prefer to get people focussed on getting kilo done first
19:04:45 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: fair enough
19:04:50 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i proposed membrain
19:04:58 <SumitNaiksatam> note, its not membrane ;-)
19:05:11 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: lol :D! was the Embrane reference intended?
19:05:12 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: yeah
19:05:25 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: it might seem like, but no :-P
19:05:41 <SumitNaiksatam> alright, lets wrap it up for today
19:05:42 <ivar-lazzaro> SumitNaiksatam: the company name actually derives from membrane... But we digress
19:05:53 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar-lazzaro: i would image :-)
19:05:55 <SumitNaiksatam> thanks all!
19:05:58 <SumitNaiksatam> bye
19:06:00 <songole> bye
19:06:03 <ivar-lazzaro> adieuuu
19:06:05 <igordcard_> bye all
19:06:08 <SumitNaiksatam> #endmeeting