22:00:29 <kevinbenton> #startmeeting neutron_drivers
22:00:30 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Jul  6 22:00:29 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is kevinbenton. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:00:31 <kevinbenton> o/
22:00:32 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
22:00:34 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers'
22:00:35 <armax> that’s abrupt
22:00:38 <kevinbenton> :)
22:00:44 <armax> not even hello
22:00:47 <kevinbenton> hello
22:00:48 <amotoki> hi
22:00:50 <mlavalle> o/
22:00:51 <armax> too late
22:00:54 * amuller is lurking
22:01:23 <kevinbenton> ok, i want to look at a few things from the list here
22:01:25 <kevinbenton> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bugs?field.status%3Alist=Triaged&field.tag=rfe
22:01:40 <kevinbenton> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1627987
22:01:41 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1627987 in neutron "[RFE] SR-IOV accelerated OVS integration" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to Moshe Levi (moshele)
22:02:03 <kevinbenton> this one seems easy enough to me
22:02:08 <armax> kevinbenton: I looked at it and reviewed the patches just now
22:02:36 <armax> not sure I see much of an RFE material in the sense that this feels like a minimal enhnancement
22:02:40 <armax> am I missing something?
22:03:00 <kevinbenton> nope
22:03:05 <kevinbenton> that's why we can just approve
22:03:14 <mlavalle> pretty well contained
22:03:14 <kevinbenton> and skip spec
22:03:17 <armax> well, I’d argue we should just remove the rfe tag :)
22:03:27 <armax> though
22:04:00 <armax> this reminds of https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1506127
22:04:01 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1506127 in neutron "enable vhost-user support with neutron ovs agent" [Wishlist,Fix released] - Assigned to Terry Wilson (otherwiseguy)
22:04:03 <armax> which was an RFE
22:05:02 <armax> but it brought in a user-facing change and some contention in relation to the networking-ovs-dpdk  project
22:05:29 <kevinbenton> nope
22:05:43 <kevinbenton> seems to just be an agent flag to change info in vif details to nova
22:05:54 <armax> nope to what?
22:06:03 <amotoki> what is the difference between removing rfe tag and approving rfe without requesting spec?
22:06:10 <kevinbenton> not user facing or anything like that
22:06:14 <amotoki> the change would be simple
22:06:23 <armax> amotoki: none, just ignore me :)
22:06:38 <armax> kevinbenton: agreed, but won’t we need to add a new value to https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237264/19/neutron/plugins/ml2/drivers/openvswitch/agent/common/config.py@56?
22:06:47 <armax> sorry I meant
22:06:51 <armax> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237264/19/neutron/plugins/ml2/drivers/openvswitch/agent/common/config.py@52
22:07:58 <kevinbenton> (sorry, internet is really slow)
22:08:45 <kevinbenton> armax: what was that a link to?
22:08:49 <amotoki> amuller: you mean https://review.openstack.org/#/c/237264/19/neutron/plugins/ml2/drivers/openvswitch/agent/common/constants.py ?
22:09:00 <amotoki> amuller: sorry
22:09:10 <amuller> :)
22:09:14 <amotoki> armax: ^
22:09:18 <armax> no
22:09:44 <armax> I meant the datapath_type config option agent side
22:09:50 <amotoki> ah i see. datapath_type
22:09:59 <armax> the RFE states
22:10:11 <armax> that a new hw_acc value would be used
22:10:17 <kevinbenton> yeah, so an operator option is needed then
22:10:18 <armax> to make sure we can do a direct binding
22:10:41 <armax> kevinbenton: that’s what I thought, and hence I posted my question in the review
22:10:42 <kevinbenton> is there a problem we are trying to figure out here?
22:10:47 <armax> none
22:10:50 <kevinbenton> or can we move to review
22:10:50 <armax> as far as I can see
22:10:53 <armax> yeah
22:10:57 <kevinbenton> ok
22:11:12 <armax> so long as we document the whole thing etc we should be good
22:11:28 <kevinbenton> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1667877
22:11:29 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1667877 in neutron "[RFE] Allow DVR for E/W while leaving N/S centralized" [Wishlist,Triaged]
22:12:27 <kevinbenton> armax has a suggestion in there about an agent config mode to make it not do offload
22:12:52 <armax> kevinbenton: right now we have a config option used for L3 agents
22:12:54 <kevinbenton> armax: well i thought you did
22:13:10 <armax> whose values are ‘dvr’, ‘dvr_snat’, and ‘legacy’
22:13:19 <mlavalle> I went thorugh the bug again. Didn't see any change
22:13:25 <kevinbenton> armax: didn't you leave a comment somewhere?
22:13:28 <armax> we can add a new one ‘dvr_no_dnat’
22:13:46 <kevinbenton> armax: yeah, that would work for me
22:14:06 <armax> this way FIP requests will always go to ‘dvr_snat’ nodes
22:14:09 <amotoki> dvr_no_nat?
22:14:34 <kevinbenton> amotoki: yeah, that would be set on the compute node l3 agents
22:14:50 <kevinbenton> and then they would do no north/south translation
22:15:05 <kevinbenton> which would be left to a central node at that point
22:15:20 <mlavalle> and that woul;d by dnat, right?
22:15:28 <armax> kevinbenton: right, code agent side would need to be refactored a bit to avoid some of the spaghetti mess
22:15:46 <kevinbenton> armax: didn't you comment this somewhere or am i going crazy?
22:15:55 <kevinbenton> (other than above in this meeting)
22:16:02 <armax> kevinbenton: perhaps I was
22:16:08 <armax> kevinbenton: do you want me to repost?
22:16:23 <kevinbenton> yeah, put it in the bug if you can
22:16:28 <armax> yes, sir
22:16:50 <mlavalle> Swami commented this mroning during L3 team meeting he is ready to start working on this
22:17:02 <kevinbenton> does anyone have any objections then to having this option to basically disable the north-south capabilities on a compute node l3 agent?
22:17:05 <mlavalle> so any guidance we can leave in the rfe will be helpful
22:17:10 <kevinbenton> which would then force them back to the central agent?
22:17:17 <armax> mlavalle: OK
22:17:30 <mlavalle> I am ok with it
22:17:47 <amotoki> okay
22:18:05 <armax> kevinbenton: let me comment and if you’re happy with it then you can rfe-approve
22:18:18 <kevinbenton> armax: ok
22:18:32 <armax> the only difference between the initial approach
22:18:37 <armax> and this one being discussed right now
22:18:51 <armax> is that the centralized DNAT is always config driven
22:19:03 <armax> not based on some ‘circumstantial’ condition
22:19:24 <armax> which is based on agent health
22:19:59 <mlavalle> so operator chooses to centralize DNAT or not based solely on cofig, right?
22:20:00 <armax> and also the fact that we don’t have yet another config option a user must wrap her head around
22:20:01 <kevinbenton> yes
22:20:32 <kevinbenton> any l3 agents without external network access would have this option set
22:20:32 <armax> we need to understand what happens in clouds with a mix of agents where
22:21:00 <mlavalle> ok
22:21:04 <armax> a bunch are dvr (computes), dvr_snat (network nodes) and dvr_no_dnat (compute)
22:21:26 <kevinbenton> armax: shouldn't be anything too special there
22:21:37 <kevinbenton> just whatever was on no_dnat would be centralized
22:21:41 <kevinbenton> while other stuff remains the same
22:21:42 <armax> when a VM with FIP migrates from a compute running in DVR mode to one running in dvr_no_dnat what happens?
22:21:54 <armax> I still believe this is a can of worms
22:22:01 <armax> but hey, you want the rope
22:22:04 <armax> ...
22:22:07 <armax> have at it
22:22:07 <kevinbenton> the same thing as happens now
22:22:14 <kevinbenton> just a different destination :)
22:22:28 <armax> kevinbenton: let’s hope so :)
22:22:48 <kevinbenton> armax: ok, did you comment yet?
22:22:51 <armax> no
22:23:02 <armax> do I have to now? I can’t multitask :)
22:23:08 <kevinbenton> oh, no
22:23:08 <armax> if I comment, I can’t talk to you
22:23:12 <kevinbenton> i just thought you meant right now
22:23:20 <kevinbenton> let's move on for now then
22:23:27 <armax> I’ll ping you as soon as I do
22:23:42 <kevinbenton> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1669630
22:23:43 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1669630 in neutron "Network RBAC acceptance workflow" [Wishlist,Triaged]
22:24:24 <kevinbenton> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1669630
22:25:07 <armax> this would need a spec, wouldn’t it?
22:25:21 <armax> we need new CLI, docs etc, the whole lot
22:25:28 <armax> no?
22:26:53 * armax wonders how many bauds kevinbenton is running on
22:27:20 <amotoki> i think a spec is a good start
22:27:41 <mlavalle> yeah, it does enatil cli, api change, docs, etc
22:27:48 <mlavalle> entail^^^^
22:29:13 <kevinbenton> #chair armax
22:29:14 <openstack> Current chairs: armax kevinbenton
22:29:43 <kevinbenton> (bad connection, will read backlog later, sorry everyone!)
22:30:27 <mlavalle> kevinbenton: we were talking about a spec as a next step
22:30:48 <mlavalle> given that it entails cli, api change, docs
22:30:56 <mlavalle> that's as much as you lost
22:31:49 <mlavalle> maybe we lost him again
22:32:18 <armax> yeah
22:33:20 <armax> mlavalle: I suppose we can comment on the bug report for him
22:33:27 <mlavalle> yeah
22:33:36 <mlavalle> let's do that
22:33:48 <armax> no we have the option to continue to scrub the list or call the meeting off
22:34:41 <kevinbenton> #chair armax
22:34:42 <openstack> Current chairs: armax kevinbenton
22:34:46 <kevinbenton> did that make it through?
22:34:50 <kevinbenton> yay!
22:34:53 <armax> kevinbenton: yes it did
22:34:55 <mlavalle> yes it did
22:35:06 <kevinbenton> i'm okay with just ending the meeting for now if you folks want
22:35:13 <armax> mlavalle, amotoki thoughts?
22:35:19 <mlavalle> ok with me
22:35:21 <kevinbenton> i got the two burning ones blocking people
22:35:29 <armax> burning?
22:35:32 <amotoki> okay
22:35:33 <kevinbenton> this one
22:35:33 <kevinbenton> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1669630
22:35:34 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1669630 in neutron "Network RBAC acceptance workflow" [Wishlist,Triaged]
22:35:35 <mlavalle> burning rfe's
22:35:40 <mlavalle> armax: ^^^^
22:35:44 <kevinbenton> looks like it has a contributor that i can help
22:35:51 <armax> I hardly thought they were lukewarm
22:36:01 <armax> but sure
22:36:21 <armax> let’s wrap this up so that I can comment on these and move them through the pipeline
22:36:27 <armax> sounds good?
22:36:30 <kevinbenton> sounds good
22:36:36 <mlavalle> sounds good to me
22:36:44 <kevinbenton> did anyone have any other high priority things?
22:36:48 <kevinbenton> before we end?
22:36:51 <armax> yeah
22:36:56 <armax> anything anyone?
22:36:56 <mlavalle> I will make sure Swami gets the latest news about the fip rfe
22:37:06 <armax> mlavalle: aye
22:37:11 <kevinbenton> mlavalle: send him a carrier pigeon
22:37:17 <mlavalle> LOL
22:37:18 <armax> or a horse’s head
22:37:23 <armax> your choice
22:37:34 <kevinbenton> amotoki: anything you want to discuss?
22:37:37 <mlavalle> ROFL
22:37:59 <amotoki> kevinbenton: no priority item from me.
22:38:16 <kevinbenton> ok
22:38:19 <armax> ok
22:38:25 <kevinbenton> let's end then and chat next week
22:38:29 <kevinbenton> thanks everyone
22:38:33 <armax> kevinbenton: do you have spare bauds to close the meeting?
22:38:37 <kevinbenton> #endmeeting