21:59:53 #startmeeting neutron_drivers 21:59:54 Meeting started Thu May 18 21:59:53 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is kevinbenton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:59:55 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:59:57 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers' 22:00:04 o/ 22:00:06 hello! 22:00:25 armax, amotoki, ihrachys: ping 22:00:28 o/ 22:00:33 hi 22:00:43 first time we've had everyone in a long time :) 22:00:48 wow 22:01:19 first i'd like to talk about the community goals really quick 22:01:40 ihrachys: we had briefly chatted about switching at least one tempest job to python3 22:01:52 tempest? 22:02:05 because I think we also planned to switch functional/fullstack? 22:02:27 yeah 22:02:37 but one of the tempest as well i think to exercise actual VM boots and all 22:02:41 sure 22:02:42 kevinbenton: I thought taht switching tempest needs to be a concerted effort across projects 22:03:03 I think there was some experimental job somewhere that attempted to switch all things to py3 22:03:04 otherwise we risk to break because of other projects failing py3 22:03:07 ihrachys: well if we switch functional to start, does it pass right now? 22:03:13 armax: i think ihrachys had a fix for that 22:03:22 kevinbenton, I would assume no but I dunno until we check 22:03:22 kevinbenton: what’s the fix? 22:03:22 armax: so projects had to opt into python3 22:03:35 i remember that was the case for rally 22:03:57 kevinbenton, I think dhellmann and sdague were the last ones who were looking at this in devstack 22:04:05 ok 22:04:13 well lets just do functional/fullstack then 22:04:19 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/439108/ 22:04:20 shall we sacrifice the functional job? 22:04:40 it's been unusually stable :) 22:05:00 well some worked on it.. 22:05:09 + for sacrifice 22:05:27 ok, we can see where that's at after the meeting to push it forward 22:05:30 it’s stable because there’s less volume of changes come into the system 22:05:34 and maybe let's just lag on tempest until community comes up with proper nudge and solution 22:05:37 :) 22:05:41 ihrachys: sounds good 22:05:51 armax, yeah, 'magic' 22:05:54 so the other one is switching to wsgi 22:05:55 long are the days were I would wake up to 100s of review notifications in my inbox 22:06:09 ihrachys: + 22:06:16 there is a bug tracking this somewhere isn't there? 22:06:18 let’s switch to something we have full control over 22:06:45 i think i'm going to make a blueprint to track the wsgi one because there are several things that need to be done 22:06:56 I am not aware of a bug. there was a etherpad 22:07:36 https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/py3-neutron-pike 22:07:45 well it's not very helpful :p 22:07:58 I think jlibosva was supposed to come up with a plan but.. 22:08:16 but? 22:08:17 you can see there is a bug indeed https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1683301 22:08:18 Launchpad bug 1683301 in neutron "python 3.5 support" [Undecided,New] 22:08:30 sorry, not a bug for py3 22:08:30 but something happened, not sure. atm Jakub is on PTO. 22:08:33 one for wsgi 22:08:50 i just filed this to track efforst 22:08:50 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/run-in-wsgi-server 22:08:54 oh right 22:09:13 bug #1666779 22:09:14 bug 1666779 in neutron "Expose neutron API via a WSGI script" [Wishlist,In progress] https://launchpad.net/bugs/1666779 - Assigned to Ihar Hrachyshka (ihar-hrachyshka) 22:09:14 i know there was a devstack patch floating around to actually run 22:09:43 the devstack piece: https://review.openstack.org/439191 22:09:49 the author left the team 22:10:11 yeah electrocucaracha 22:11:00 ok 22:11:16 #info armax is going to be release person for cycle 22:11:30 ok, i have the devstack piece recorded in the blueprint 22:11:39 the neutron-rpc-server binary needs to be fixed so it works 22:11:48 which is what yamamoto was getting at in the review 22:12:03 yeah, there is some neutron side work 22:12:05 "some" 22:12:13 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1687896 22:12:14 Launchpad bug 1687896 in neutron "neutron-rpc-server fails to start on configuration that works under neutron-server" [Undecided,New] 22:12:24 looks like someone tried it already and opened a bug 22:12:43 ok 22:12:53 i will look into these things for that goal 22:13:13 are there any other blueprints that are now at risk due to OSIC cuts, etc? 22:13:34 the whole OVO effort, maybe? 22:13:52 ihrachys: is it basically just down to you? 22:14:01 ehm it's at risk but it's not like I bail out 22:14:13 yes it's on me basically. also manjeets helps with some bits. 22:14:27 I am not bailing out though. 22:14:37 ihrachys: not now anyway? : 22:14:40 :P 22:14:48 not today 22:14:50 ihrachys: ok, are you using that google docs spreadsheet to track which ones need to be done? 22:14:54 it’s becoming a race to who’s the last one standing 22:15:21 kevinbenton, I should make a proper assessment of work items, haven't looked this way for quite a while 22:15:31 kevinbenton, lemme come up with smth the next week. 22:15:49 one spec that is not affected by OSIC but by other changes in the team is, I believe, flow manager is going to die: https://review.openstack.org/320439 22:16:03 ihrachys: ok, if you get the blueprint whiteboard updated with a todo i might be able to take some on in my spare time 22:16:16 ihrachys: yeah 22:16:23 just talked to David, and he seems like he won't work on this, and we neither have interested parties. 22:16:24 ihrachys: i'm getting that suspicion as well 22:16:48 I am fine to kill it. it's a nice idea but won't deliver. tough life. 22:17:15 (I actually wanted to kill it in the past, but then David and Thomas asked to keep it on life support) 22:17:22 yet another victim of ovn defection 22:17:33 ihrachys: is it blocking any features on their side? 22:17:34 armax, basically yes 22:17:34 natural selection 22:17:34 who needs this spec? I think fwaas or sfc folks need it. is it worth asking them? 22:17:35 that’s good 22:17:43 armax, both resource wise and philosophically 22:18:12 well, I think we need to seriously consider the impact on people who geniunely are still interested in writing this stuff in python 22:18:16 amotoki, I am beyond the point where I will ask if they need. if they would be interested, I would see more activity on the spec. 22:18:22 because we’re not trading apples with apples here 22:19:01 right, OVN definitely isn't a replacement for a thing we can actually develop new features on 22:19:13 so we'll probably be stuck with OVS ref for quite a while 22:19:52 we should try and not to kill the spec itself though 22:19:52 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/320439/ 22:19:57 kevinbenton, well it depends on how you look at it. even for ovs, you need to lay ground work before you consume its features in neutron. it's just more stuff pushed into platform. 22:19:59 it’d be nice to park it somewhere 22:20:03 for future reference 22:20:21 armax, like devref? 22:20:26 ihrachys: if we merged it as it 22:20:28 is* 22:20:34 but not work on it 22:20:37 it’ll go in the backlog 22:20:39 and stay there 22:20:48 ihrachys: only for a limited set of things. anything 'steering traffic' using openflow has been suppored by OVS since openflow became a thing 22:20:57 and eventually archive 22:21:02 https://github.com/openstack/neutron-specs/tree/master/specs 22:21:09 which is what things like SFC and BGPVPN need 22:21:17 OVN just gives much higher level primitives 22:21:45 armax, I am fine either way. maybe just move it to backlog right away and merge? 22:21:46 which actually made me notice that there’s still an ocata backlog that hasn’t been dealt with 22:21:47 https://github.com/openstack/neutron-specs/tree/master/specs/backlog/ocata 22:21:54 with a NOTE at the top 22:22:06 ihrachys: I am fine either waty 22:22:09 armax: what does "dealt with" 22:22:11 mean? 22:22:11 way* 22:22:47 those blueprints should either be retargeted to pike 22:22:50 or moved to archive 22:22:52 mmm, thanks for the notice, I need to move the online-upgrades one, it's still relevant for Pike, and we have something to land for it. 22:23:07 ack 22:23:39 agentless-driver has a blueprint for pike 22:23:40 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/agentless-driver 22:23:43 but no patches it looks like 22:24:03 ihrachys: ack 22:24:15 kevinbenton: I thought garyk was interested in taht one 22:25:12 looking at the bug report, i found https://review.openstack.org/#/c/349921/ but there has been no progress from January 22:26:11 ok, let's look through some of the RFEs 22:26:28 i think some are as a result of the summit 22:26:30 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bugs?field.status%3Alist=Triaged&field.tag=rfe 22:26:54 kevinbenton: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1686035 22:26:56 Launchpad bug 1686035 in neutron "[RFE] More detailed reporting of available QoS rules" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq) 22:27:03 was at the top of the list earlier 22:27:19 but I re-classified at rfe and went to the bottom 22:27:28 I saw slaweq_ signing in 22:27:46 maybe he wants to discuss 22:27:51 ok 22:28:21 slaweq_: are you there? 22:29:23 mhhh, maybe not 22:29:25 ok 22:29:31 let's go from top down then for now 22:29:35 yeap 22:29:49 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1505627 22:29:50 Launchpad bug 1505627 in neutron "[RFE] QoS Explicit Congestion Notification (ECN) Support" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Reedip (reedip-banerjee) 22:29:58 ihrachys: who is this qos team you speak of? :) 22:30:05 ihrachys: what are their feelings on it 22:30:25 well there is Rodolfo and Slawek at least 22:30:37 ihrachys: shall we wait for them to reply? 22:30:49 and slawek also shows up to their bi-weekly meeting on Tuesdays 22:31:09 I dunno what their feelings are, but I see a lot of stuff they seem to care, and I wonder if that other thing is on their radar for Pike. I am not sure. 22:31:17 we should can this one 22:31:32 it’s been sitting in the pipe dream stage for too long 22:31:39 armax: that's not a reason 22:31:53 OK, then approve all the things 22:31:53 let's wait for feedback from them 22:32:08 kevinbenton: I attend their meeting regularly. I can bring it up next time 22:32:12 mlavalle: thx 22:32:14 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1558812 22:32:16 Launchpad bug 1558812 in neutron "[RFE] Enable adoption of an existing subnet into a subnetpool" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Reedip (reedip-banerjee) 22:32:16 the thread on the report goes back and forth for months and months 22:32:21 this is an old one as well 22:32:35 with a good summary from Carl 22:32:36 kevinbenton: what confidence do you have this will suddenly becomes high priority? 22:32:44 anyhoo 22:32:46 let’s wait 22:33:52 I think we should be able to adopt subnets now if each adoption bumps the revision of the subnet pool 22:34:01 that will protect us from the race condtion that plagued this before 22:34:32 or bumps the revision of the address scope 22:35:40 what do we think about just putting this to approved and then decide based on teh complexity of the patch 22:35:49 the latest patch I can recall was https://review.openstack.org/#/c/348080/ 22:35:49 it looks relatively short and isolated as it is 22:36:17 there is also this one https://review.openstack.org/#/c/407697/2 22:36:30 that was was a clone of ryan's 22:36:40 and I blocked it to avoid losing the history of the initial patch 22:37:02 if we do have someone willing to work on the patch 22:37:09 we should just restore the blueprint and RFE 22:37:15 it was approved at one point 22:37:43 ok, reedip said he was interested 22:37:46 we can provisionally put it back on the radar and see what thappens 22:37:48 happens 22:37:51 that's why i brought it back from postponed 22:38:09 armax: ok, set to rfe-approved and lets see what happens 22:38:12 ++ 22:38:46 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1561824 22:38:47 Launchpad bug 1561824 in neutron "[RFE] Enhance BGP Dynamic Routing driver with Quagga suppport" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Steve Ruan (ruansx) 22:38:55 this one seems like it should maybe be rfe-postponed for now 22:39:35 nobody restored the spec 22:40:21 Steve used to show up to the L3 subteam regularly 22:40:39 mlavalle: ok, if he shows up again just have him restore the spec 22:40:44 But he hasn't shown up since maybe october - novemeber 22:40:51 will do 22:40:54 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1596611 22:40:55 Launchpad bug 1596611 in neutron "[RFE] Create L3 IPs with qos (rate limit)" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to LIU Yulong (dragon889) 22:41:02 ihrachys: this one needs buy-in from qos folks as well? 22:41:41 I would imagine they may have some input, yes 22:41:46 the use case seems interesting 22:41:52 and the WIP patches seem promising 22:42:07 I reviewed the spec, needs some refinement 22:42:45 kevinbenton: again, I can bring it up in their next meeting 22:43:02 ihrachys: LIU has been a pretty good contributor in the past, shall we just move to rfe-approved and see if we can get agreement on the spec from everyone? 22:43:03 just keep in mind it is bi-weekly and they had it this week 22:43:17 kevinbenton, I am fine, he seems active 22:43:48 my main concern about the other qos rfe was that it's not clear who's going to support it. here, I see how it's useful and hence can help. 22:44:01 ack 22:44:04 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1639566 22:44:04 Launchpad bug 1639566 in neutron "[RFE] Add support for local SNAT" [Wishlist,Triaged] 22:44:48 this is distributed SNAT where different colored lipstick 22:44:54 lol 22:45:24 wearing* 22:45:50 based on the meeting at the summit it sounds like we won't have review bandwidth to make that change this cycle 22:46:21 and even the person that filed the RFE said they won't be able to write the code 22:46:31 so i think rfe-postponed is appropriate for this one 22:46:42 agreement? 22:46:53 yeap 22:47:17 sounds fair 22:48:02 I thought the feedback fromt he summit was to let users have a go at dragonflow 22:48:28 yeah, that's the same thing as not doing it in DVR :) 22:48:31 and see if l3 flavor enhancements were required in case users wanted to use dragonflow in conjunction with other L3 options 22:48:52 yeah, we can definitely make changes to L3 flavors to help if needed to test DVR 22:49:02 i already mentioned that in the neutron meeting on monday 22:49:37 so rather than postpone we should possibly close the RFE altogehter? 22:49:42 no 22:49:50 in the future someone may actually want to change DVR 22:49:56 OK 22:49:56 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1658682 22:49:57 Launchpad bug 1658682 in neutron "port-security can't be disabled if security groups are not enabled" [Wishlist,Triaged] 22:50:13 this now just sounds like a regular bug to me 22:50:32 we are requiring security groups to be enabled to touch an API value that is unrelated 22:51:35 agree. in some summit forum session, someone complained the same thing. 22:51:48 amotoki: I think it was the same person 22:52:16 perhaps 22:53:23 OK, I can fix it 22:53:38 I think we need to clarify what we expect with port security enabled and SG disabled. 22:53:50 amotoki: just spoofing rules applied 22:53:51 my understanding is that anti-spoofing is enabled but no filtering like SG 22:53:53 as kevin said 22:54:01 yes 22:54:15 thanks. move on 22:54:21 I’ll give it a stub tonight 22:54:22 if I can 22:54:35 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1662650 22:54:36 Launchpad bug 1662650 in neutron "[RFE] Advance configuration of SR-IOV ports- api extension" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Trevor McCasland (twm2016) 22:54:59 trevormc: hey, you were going to break this into smaller RFEs, has that been done yet? 22:55:08 This is what we discussed with Trevor and team on Thursday 22:55:17 yes I have 22:55:21 three are on the way 22:55:25 I already saw a couple of them in the ML 22:55:26 two are currently available 22:55:32 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1690937 22:55:33 Launchpad bug 1690937 in neutron "[RFE] Support allowed address pairs without ip address" [Wishlist,Triaged] 22:55:38 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1690921 22:55:39 Launchpad bug 1690921 in neutron "[RFE] Manage Broadcast, Unicast, and Multicast traffic" [Wishlist,Triaged] 22:55:49 ok, we'll probably get to those next session 22:55:57 i'll move to triaged state after reading through 22:56:00 I have a meeting with the research team next week. 22:56:06 oh i see 22:56:10 4 minutes 22:56:10 already triaged 22:56:20 trevormc: so can we dump https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1662650 ? 22:56:21 Launchpad bug 1662650 in neutron "[RFE] Advance configuration of SR-IOV ports- api extension" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Trevor McCasland (twm2016) 22:56:32 yes 22:56:39 trevormc: will you be ready by Thursday of next week? 22:56:54 mlavalle: I hope so, you will see the new RFEs if so 22:57:01 ++ :-) 22:57:38 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1671634 22:57:39 Launchpad bug 1671634 in neutron "[RFE] Allow to set MTU for networks" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Ihar Hrachyshka (ihar-hrachyshka) 22:57:39 I thought this was already solved: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1682775 22:57:41 Launchpad bug 1682775 in neutron "[RFE] Tag mechanism supports all resouces with standard attribute." [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Hirofumi Ichihara (ichihara-hirofumi) 22:57:46 sorry 22:57:50 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1671634 22:57:54 ihrachys: can you take over that one? 22:58:18 kevinbenton, which of? 22:58:19 mtu? 22:58:30 yes, once it gets approved, I will move to it 22:58:35 someone had a very clear use case of connecting a neutron net to another with l2tp so MTU needed to be downgraded to match 22:58:38 so i think we can approve this 22:59:10 IIRC armax had opinions on this in a past meeting 22:59:22 armax: please release your opinions onto us in 30 seconds 22:59:43 I am ok with the it 22:59:46 yay! 22:59:48 I only fear the backlash 22:59:50 \o/ 22:59:52 :) 22:59:52 of bugs that will creep in 23:00:03 that's okay 23:00:04 bugs? I write no bugs 23:00:04 because of the allow_post=True now 23:00:10 #endmeeting