15:08:03 #startmeeting neutron-drivers 15:08:04 Meeting started Tue Aug 25 15:08:03 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mestery. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:08:06 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:08:08 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers' 15:08:16 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/NeutronDrivers Agenda 15:08:26 #topic vim or emacs 15:08:32 #info kevinbenton amotoki and mestery are here, though I hope armax and russellb lurk as well 15:08:51 kevinbenton: someone's feeling fiesty 15:08:51 #topic Bug Review 15:09:00 lol 15:09:02 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1486649 15:09:02 Launchpad bug 1486649 in neutron "Enhance DHCP agent and IP library for networking-calico interface driver" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Neil Jerram (neil-jerram) 15:09:07 that was a very short 15 minutes 15:09:10 neiljerram: This one is yours I believe 15:09:35 Yes, just hoping for support for this to be approved for L-3. 15:09:41 Looks like haleyb and carl_baldwin are both good with this. As L3 Lieutenants, I trust their judgement here. 15:09:41 neiljerram: you think this is non-invasive enough for l3? 15:09:48 neiljerram: You have haleyb and carl_baldwin onboard, so you're good 15:09:52 ack 15:09:55 kevinbenton: See ^^^ 15:09:57 Code is all already there and has been through many cycles. 15:09:57 if they are good, i'm fine with it 15:10:03 kevinbenton: But, please review and if you think otherwise, say so 15:10:16 kevinbenton: Yes, I believe so, I've tried to be super-careful about that. 15:10:32 neiljerram: how many works do we need to complete the rfe? 15:10:41 neiljerram: do you have a link to the code reviews handy? 15:10:47 Cedric and Oleg have been v helpful, too 15:10:53 Yes... 15:11:05 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/206077/ 15:11:20 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/206078/ 15:11:35 Note that I have some comments from Carl and Salvatore currently still pending. 15:11:35 * haleyb wonders if he got a promotion from 'core' 15:12:12 haleyb: Would "private" be acceptable? ;) 15:12:23 pfc is fine 15:12:27 lol 15:12:35 I think we can move on from this. neiljerram, you're in good hands here I think 15:12:38 But I will address those today, so they will hopefully be mer 15:13:01 oops, didn't mean that one. But thanks, mestery 15:13:05 yeah, these don't look too invasive 15:13:05 :) 15:13:11 Cool 15:13:12 NExt up 15:13:14 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1468366 15:13:14 Launchpad bug 1468366 in neutron "RFE - Logging API for security group and firewall rules" [Undecided,Confirmed] - Assigned to Yushiro FURUKAWA (y-furukawa-2) 15:13:18 looks like a little agreement on abstraction is needed 15:13:19 Logging API for SG and FWaaS rules 15:13:27 sc68cal: This one you've been involved in 15:13:40 And I believe sc68cal may have indicated this is likely a Mitaka thing 15:14:27 yep 15:14:49 sc68cal: Commented as such in the review itself 15:15:03 Mostly because the spec continued to have only one implementation - that file logging - the api itself did not have flexibility about how the storage part of the API should be pluggable 15:15:18 sc68cal: sounds like a critical piece to me 15:15:19 logging packets on the compute node/network node is not cloudy 15:15:38 so we can marked it as shipped in Liberty but we only support logging to /dev/null 15:15:49 if there's no info about how to make it seriously useful, no need to rush it 15:15:58 plus there was a lot of churn in the specs repo - at one point there were 3 specs filed for the same RFE 15:16:06 so they didn't make it easy to review. 15:16:21 #info Logging API is a Mitaka item 15:17:37 My issue with it is that a logging API should be one spec, and logging for SG/FW should be a separate one 15:17:43 #topic Open Discussion 15:17:48 Those were the only specific ones on the agenda 15:17:50 hey! 15:17:53 skipped my bug 15:17:57 #undo 15:17:58 Removing item from minutes: 15:18:02 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1486882 15:18:02 Launchpad bug 1486882 in neutron "ml2 port cross backends extension" [Undecided,Confirmed] - Assigned to Dong Liu (liudong78) 15:18:02 kevinbenton: Please, post it here1 15:18:03 sc68cal: I hope to keep the rfe bug description to catch up with the ongoing discussion. 15:18:08 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1486882 15:18:22 i think this will be mitaka 15:18:36 amotoki: thanks - although now they're baking rsyslog into the API for logging. :-\ 15:18:38 and am going to discuss it in the ML2 illuminati meetup in september 15:19:04 but the general idea is that we should make the tunnel endpoint a port binding property 15:19:10 kevinbenton: Please don't tell me that ML2 is having a mid-cycle of their own 15:19:40 mestery: i wouldn't call it a mid-cycle. it's much more like a 3/4ths cycle :) 15:19:54 ajo: sure 15:19:56 kevinbenton: I'd argue 99/100 given when it is 15:19:57 But ok 15:20:10 ML2 as a separate group / meetup / whatever seems odd 15:20:17 when it's a fundamental part of core neutron 15:20:18 russellb: Very odd 15:20:25 it's not really a meetup 15:20:31 er midcycle 15:20:32 *sigh* 15:20:38 sprint? 15:20:46 people in a room? 15:20:46 agree 15:20:49 I wish the ML2 team actually communicated with the neutron team more 15:20:58 I suspect we'll need to deal with that at some point 15:20:58 i don't understand why it's a team exactly 15:21:04 but ok :) 15:21:08 according to ml2 meeting logs, it seems a sprint for some specific topics. 15:21:09 Me either 15:21:54 #action mestery to encourage ML2 to use main Neutron meeting and communicate more with their overlords 15:22:03 kevinbenton: You can be my trojan horse into ML2 for now 15:22:14 ha 15:22:28 I think it's a carry-over from when it used to be all the driver maintainers in a meeting 15:23:02 HenryG: It appears to now be a vacuum, which is never good 15:23:11 Everytime this has happened, nothing good has come out of it 15:23:12 * mestery grumbles 15:23:14 Anyways 15:23:16 Lets move along 15:23:20 vikram__ has one for us here today too 15:23:23 * mestery #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1476527 15:23:23 Launchpad bug 1476527 in neutron "RFE - Add common classifier resource" [Undecided,New] - Assigned to YujiAzama (azama-yuji) 15:24:04 This one seems like a Mitaka item to me 15:24:14 totally agree 15:24:18 +1 15:24:23 amotoki: Feel free to comment in the bug please 15:24:26 sc68cal as well 15:24:44 sure 15:24:54 i have another one bug 1472076. 15:24:54 bug 1472076 in neutron "Add enable_new_agents to neutron server" [Undecided,Confirmed] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1472076 - Assigned to Hirofumi Ichihara (ichihara-hirofumi) 15:24:54 mestery: thanks for discussing this up:-) 15:25:02 vikram__: yw :) 15:25:33 the spec review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/170774/ looks good and it would be small. 15:25:41 I was just asked from the author. 15:26:16 amotoki: I agree with you here! 15:26:32 seems reasonable 15:27:13 moved to Triaged 15:27:31 amotoki: I just merged the spec 15:27:34 Lets get this into Liberty! 15:27:58 hichihara: it's yours. now accepted. ^^ 15:28:10 #topic Open Discussion 15:28:13 amotoki mestery russellb: thank you!! :) 15:28:19 I have anothor one bug 1468236, https://launchpad.net/bugs/1468236 15:28:19 Launchpad bug 1468236 in neutron "enable neutron support distributed DHCP agents" [Undecided,Confirmed] 15:28:24 i didn't do anything :) but you're welcome! 15:28:36 it is about distributed dhcp agent 15:29:31 22 comments on the spec and a couple of -1s 15:29:40 shihanzhang: Looking 15:30:02 shihanzhang: there seems many comments and more discusssion looks needed. 15:30:16 shihanzhang: I think this is Mitaka at this point 15:30:23 Early mitaka sounds good. 15:30:33 cool 15:30:35 ok 15:30:40 Anything else? 15:30:47 tags 15:30:54 link? 15:30:56 Is there some kind of knob I should twiddle, on https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1486649, to indicate approved for L 15:30:56 Launchpad bug 1486649 in neutron "Enhance DHCP agent and IP library for networking-calico interface driver" [Undecided,In progress] - Assigned to Neil Jerram (neil-jerram) 15:30:58 * mestery tags kevinbenton 15:31:03 shall we do them? 15:31:35 (sorry to bring that up _again_....) 15:31:42 kevinbenton: As long as they are opaque to the backend, I'm +1.5 15:31:49 if it tries to be consistent with existing similar things (what nova did is as good as any), and is explicitly opaque to backends (at least in documented intent), then +1 from me 15:32:08 mestery: there is no realistic way to stop a backend from using them 15:32:12 right 15:32:34 correct, but we can document for major tags. 15:32:58 any backend officially a part of neutron should be due a wrist slap if they do 15:32:58 something i noticed is that nova tags don't look like key/value pairs 15:33:21 kevinbenton: true, but the API consumer could just set the tag as "key=value" 15:33:24 if that's what they wanted 15:33:35 neiljerram: Targeted it to Liberty-3 15:33:35 glance and cinder have similar cencept called "metadata". 15:33:36 it's just string blobs stored int he db and reflected back in the API 15:33:47 mestery: thx! 15:33:59 russellb: yeah, only thing that sucks about that is you can't ask the API for a specific key 15:34:36 yeah, but it'd be odd if someone had enough tags where asking for a specific one was important 15:34:55 so it will always be up to the client to parse all of the tags to find the one it's looking for 15:35:37 * russellb nods 15:35:45 have to weigh that against cross-API consistency 15:35:59 right 15:36:10 amotoki: how to glance and cinder do it? 15:36:15 amotoki: are they key/value pairs? 15:36:26 amotoki: or just a list of strings? 15:36:30 slightly different concepts though 15:36:44 kevinbenton: I haven't investigated them yet, but it seems key/valye from horizon impl. 15:36:45 image metadata are defined things 15:37:06 bits of info needed for nova to know how to interpret and consume the image 15:37:14 not opaque user-only things 15:37:29 you can use it for custom stuff too, but that's not the primary purpose 15:37:30 IIRC 15:37:44 * mestery is in two meetings and 3 conversations right now so is having trouble 15:37:51 iirc glance image metadata has hypervisor-specific information 15:37:56 right 15:38:01 ok 15:38:11 not sure about the cinder one, i don't remember that 15:38:49 one important point is that it is visible for admin 15:39:22 amotoki: That's a good point indeed 15:39:35 which? 15:40:40 russellb: these being visible to admin 15:41:09 right, isn't everything? :) 15:41:23 russellb: i think admin-only is what amotoki meant 15:41:26 yeah, true, like I said, in 2 meetings and 3 conversations, and failing at all of them 15:42:10 kevinbenton: oh, for cinder and glance? 15:42:46 amotoki: was that for cinder or glance? 15:43:37 regardless, i guess the outcome is that we are okay with tags 15:43:42 kevinbenton: yes, but i need to check 15:44:02 re tags: the temptation of using them as a way for stashing everything you want in it will be too much for many devs 15:44:31 perhaps we can add a feature that randomly deletes them 15:44:42 to show how unreliable they are for devs :) 15:44:44 we can support them and they're a good thing to have, but we just can't stop plugins from using them to push info down to backends 15:44:54 The issue for me here is that once that happens it's game over for the neutron API as an abstraction I guess 15:45:19 it's something ot watch out for for things in the neutron stadium 15:45:30 if someone is a bad actor, they should be asked to remove that 15:45:30 Agreed 15:45:35 (or be removed from neutron) 15:45:39 if they're removed, they do what they want 15:45:48 but couldn't they do the same thing with the name field right now? 15:45:52 and whatever, no sense worrying about that case 15:46:12 my opinion now is that you can't just stop that from happening 15:46:18 sure, or port binding profile for ports at least 15:46:19 port binding is a chaos field :-( 15:46:21 and on the other hand tagging are a good thing to have 15:46:25 salv-orlando: But we can force them out of the stadium 15:46:47 there are standards, man! 15:46:48 mestery: I think we've there long enough to know that doing police work is just a waste of time 15:47:04 salv-orlando: Yes, and haters gonna hate, and marketers gonna market 15:47:10 MEh 15:47:13 So, do we just allow this in? 15:47:24 with caveats in the spec and code? wfm 15:47:25 fwiw I am ok with it 15:47:30 +1 15:47:48 happy to review the impl :) 15:47:58 who knows this perhaps will stop several teams from pushing weird attribute extensions 15:48:18 yay! 15:48:40 Consensus on a good hearted and useful feature that will be used by evil people everywhere for nefarious purposes! 15:48:41 :) 15:48:52 yup 15:48:55 Shall we close this meeting now or is there other things to discuss? 15:49:33 I'll take that as a +1 from everyone then. 15:49:40 Thanks for the discussion today! 15:49:41 #endmeeting