18:02:19 <SumitNaiksatam> #startmeeting networking_policy
18:02:20 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Feb  1 18:02:19 2018 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
18:02:21 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
18:02:23 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy'
18:02:56 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Vancouver Summit prep
18:03:03 * tbachman scrambles in
18:03:09 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: annakk rkukura hi!
18:03:11 <tbachman> sorry I’m late
18:03:20 <rkukura> hi tbachman
18:03:21 <tbachman> and thanks SumitNaiksatam for the kind reminder ;)
18:03:23 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: not really, just started :-)
18:04:01 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: did you have your moment of epiphany with the talk abstract? :-P
18:04:13 <annakk> :)
18:05:10 <annakk> I don't seem to have the inspiration. I have some text, but its standard stuff..
18:05:21 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: ok np, we still have time
18:05:49 <annakk> if anyone has an idea of how to craft it so it catches attention, please share
18:05:49 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: tbachman: any further thoughts at your end on this topic?
18:05:56 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: alas no
18:06:02 <rkukura> nope
18:06:05 * tbachman just likes saying alas
18:06:26 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: lol, we can try to be positive than that
18:06:53 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: whenever you feel comfortable sharing, please do
18:07:17 <SumitNaiksatam> and we can provide our input/contribute
18:07:24 <annakk> I'll share what I have, maybe this will help it evolve
18:07:30 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: sure
18:07:37 <SumitNaiksatam> okay moving on
18:07:42 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Pending patches
18:07:52 <SumitNaiksatam> before that, just a quick update on the UI
18:08:17 <SumitNaiksatam> while testing something else, i stumbled on some critical issues with the UI
18:08:20 <SumitNaiksatam> for pike that is
18:08:44 <SumitNaiksatam> i put the fixes in two patches and they have merged (thanks rkukura and tbachman for reviewing merging)
18:08:55 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: np!
18:09:07 <SumitNaiksatam> hopefully this makes the UI usable again, need to watch out though
18:09:24 <SumitNaiksatam> on that point, annakk any luck getting your CI working?
18:09:46 <annakk> yes, the nsx driver works with pike
18:09:55 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: ok nice
18:10:04 <annakk> but i discovered that CI reports success very optimistically :) nee dto fix that
18:10:15 <annakk> nsx CI, that is
18:10:16 <SumitNaiksatam> ah okay
18:10:19 <SumitNaiksatam> but i am guessing you did not exercise the UI?
18:10:24 <annakk> no
18:10:34 <SumitNaiksatam> ok good, so i beat you to it :-)
18:10:43 <SumitNaiksatam> hopefully you will not see issues when you do
18:10:56 <SumitNaiksatam> regarding the pending patches
18:11:03 <annakk> :)
18:11:34 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: thanks for adding the UT, didnt mean to create more work for you, i was just curious
18:11:44 <SumitNaiksatam> with reference to this patch #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/539609/
18:11:46 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: no, it was a good point
18:11:56 <SumitNaiksatam> i will vote shortly
18:12:29 <SumitNaiksatam> most of these patches are apic/aim related, so annakk bear with us
18:12:32 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/532717/
18:12:39 <SumitNaiksatam> kent seems to have gotten this out of WIP
18:13:20 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: you were looking at this and Ivar’s patch #link https://review.openstack.org/519788 ?
18:13:38 <rkukura> SumitNaiksatam: I will have some issues to file on Kent’s but probably not until Monday (I’m off tomorrow)
18:14:16 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay
18:14:48 <SumitNaiksatam> ivar’s patch is still WIP, and so is yours #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/529991/
18:14:59 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: anything do discuss regarding your patch?
18:15:49 <rkukura> Mine could be merged at any point, with followon work to complete it
18:16:12 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: you have workflow -1 on your patch
18:16:18 <rkukura> but it will need some cleanup, so probably not until next week
18:16:24 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: how is this validation tool triggered?
18:16:49 <rkukura> currently, its just python code called from UTs
18:16:56 <rkukura> but there will be a basic CLI
18:17:39 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: you CLI that calls a REST API?
18:17:42 <SumitNaiksatam> *you mean
18:18:00 <rkukura> no, its more like db_manage - it works against the DB
18:18:10 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: okay
18:19:05 <SumitNaiksatam> so the mechanism drvier, plugin, etc modules are used as a “library” by this utility
18:19:25 <rkukura> right
18:19:43 <SumitNaiksatam> okay
18:20:07 <SumitNaiksatam> there were a couple of other small patches
18:20:09 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/537265
18:20:15 <SumitNaiksatam> “Remove SCREEN_LOGDIR from devstack”
18:20:42 <SumitNaiksatam> so if you do happen to use devstack, starting with Pike, you will notice, that by default it no longer uses screen
18:20:50 <SumitNaiksatam> it uses systemctl
18:21:09 <SumitNaiksatam> however in Pike there is still an option to use the older screen based process launching
18:21:28 <SumitNaiksatam> we can merge the above patch on the master, but not for pike
18:21:39 * tbachman noticed that when trying to run devstack on his ubuntu system
18:21:44 <tbachman> (14.04)
18:21:48 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: right
18:22:07 <SumitNaiksatam> i am more used the older model, so i was happy that an option existed to use screen
18:22:17 <rkukura> I never used screen
18:22:19 <tbachman> Ah, good
18:22:21 <SumitNaiksatam> i find it easier to just open the log file in vim
18:22:43 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: there is a setting in the local.conf, ping me if you need it
18:22:45 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: I think there’s an issue b/c of systemctl in ubuntu?
18:22:53 <SumitNaiksatam> but i guess we need to start getting used to the newer model
18:22:54 <tbachman> meaning theer isn’t one in 14.04
18:22:57 <tbachman> there
18:23:15 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: oh could be, i am  not aware, i have 16.04
18:23:16 <tbachman> so, screen will be helpful
18:23:18 <tbachman> ah
18:23:19 <tbachman> lol
18:23:29 <tbachman> in any case, I’ll get that from you at some later point
18:23:30 <tbachman> thx
18:23:30 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: that probably explains
18:23:38 <SumitNaiksatam> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/518269/
18:23:46 <SumitNaiksatam>18:23:46 <SumitNaiksatam> Add providing groups attribute of rule set in resource map”
18:23:49 <SumitNaiksatam> another small patch
18:24:11 <SumitNaiksatam> i think this is fine, i believe we are already populating providing groups in the dict
18:24:25 <SumitNaiksatam> i think that covers most of the pending patches
18:24:34 <SumitNaiksatam> #topic Open Discussion
18:24:34 <rkukura> I was concerned that this defined an attribute but did not implement it
18:24:52 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: its read only, like the other relationships
18:25:13 <annakk> rkukura: i tested it
18:25:18 <rkukura> but is the value actually returned?
18:25:25 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: i believe so
18:25:31 <rkukura> And is it covered by a UT?
18:25:32 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: great, thanks
18:25:48 <SumitNaiksatam> rkukura: agree, it can be added to the UT coverage
18:26:04 <rkukura> If its been there all along and just wasn’t defined in the extension, then this may be all that is needed
18:26:20 <SumitNaiksatam> i think i had checked, but we were not validating other such relationships in the UTs as well, so i wasnt sure if we wanted to enforce in this case
18:26:45 <rkukura> ok
18:27:07 <SumitNaiksatam> ideally we should have been testing all such relationships in the UTs (by UTs I am referring to the API level UTs)
18:27:12 <SumitNaiksatam> i had one tip to share
18:27:21 <SumitNaiksatam> perhaps you gusy already know it
18:27:55 <SumitNaiksatam> in Heat its possible to pass, what they call, a "value_spec”
18:28:32 <SumitNaiksatam> meaning, if you have extended a resource, like say in neutron, you extend the network with a custom attribute (we have apic_dn with apic)
18:29:14 <SumitNaiksatam> you dont necessarily need to redfine the resource, you can pass a value_spec, which is essentially a key-value pair for that attribute
18:29:31 <SumitNaiksatam> (thanks to ifti for discovering this)
18:30:06 <annakk> interesting
18:30:08 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: yeah, good find
18:30:17 <SumitNaiksatam> of course you cannot do attribute validation in heat for this, but this is expedient in cases when you cant update the upstream heat resource definition
18:30:34 <SumitNaiksatam> tbachman: credit goes to Ifti for finding it :-)
18:30:44 <tbachman> ack
18:31:01 <SumitNaiksatam> alrighty, anything else we want to discuss?
18:31:09 <SumitNaiksatam> else we can wrap up in 30 mins :-)
18:31:24 <annakk> not from me
18:31:31 <rkukura> me either
18:31:42 <SumitNaiksatam> annakk: rkukura tbachman: thanks much for joining!
18:31:46 <SumitNaiksatam> bye
18:31:48 <tbachman> SumitNaiksatam: thx!
18:31:48 <annakk> thanks! bye
18:31:51 <SumitNaiksatam> #endmeeting