14:01:05 <mlavalle> #startmeeting neutron_drivers
14:01:06 <openstack> Meeting started Fri Feb  1 14:01:05 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is mlavalle. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:01:07 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:01:09 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers'
14:01:25 <amotoki> hi
14:01:35 <mlavalle> good evening amotoki
14:01:39 <slaweq> hi
14:01:52 <slaweq> Good Morning/Evening! :)
14:02:20 <mlavalle> hi slaweq
14:02:29 <mlavalle> when do you leave for Israel?
14:02:53 <slaweq> tomorrow morning
14:03:02 <amotoki> safe travel!
14:03:03 <davidsha> o/
14:03:05 <mlavalle> enjoy the trip
14:03:10 <slaweq> thx :)
14:03:12 <amotoki> I enjoyed watching ski jumping world cup games last week.
14:03:20 <slaweq> hi davidsha
14:03:27 <davidsha> slaweq: hey!
14:03:30 <mlavalle> hi davidsha
14:03:35 <mlavalle> welcome
14:03:44 <amotoki> davidsha: welcome
14:04:08 <slaweq> amotoki: Kamil Stoch is good one :)
14:04:22 <wwriverrat> o/
14:04:34 <amotoki> slaweq: yeah, he made a new hill record!!
14:04:56 <slaweq> yes, I saw it
14:04:59 <mlavalle> wwriverrat: are you here to discuss the routed networks PoC?
14:05:16 <amotoki> I was there :)
14:05:18 <wwriverrat> if it pleases the group :)
14:05:47 <yamamoto> hi
14:05:55 <slaweq> hi yamamoto :)
14:06:00 <mlavalle> wwriverrat: mhhhh, that is not what this meeting is about. Can we discuss in the patch? If that is not sufficient, can we start a ML thread?
14:07:00 <wwriverrat> sure. ML thread being generated. I'll just sit and watch.
14:07:11 <mlavalle> wwriverrat: thanks!
14:08:16 <mlavalle> ok, we have quorum
14:08:21 <mlavalle> #topic RFEs
14:08:51 <mlavalle> First in the list: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1809878
14:08:52 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1809878 in neutron "[RFE] Move sanity-checks to neutron-status CLI tool" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq)
14:09:18 <slaweq> Some time ago I asked mriedem about opinion about it
14:09:27 <slaweq> he told me that he don't see anything against :)
14:10:25 <mlavalle> ahh cool, yeah, we talked about asking mriedem
14:10:27 <amotoki> so we have no blocking thing to approve this?
14:10:42 <mlavalle> I am ok with this proposal
14:10:53 <slaweq> it's here: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-neutron/%23openstack-neutron.2019-01-15.log.html#t2019-01-15T14:18:20 :)
14:11:29 <slaweq> I think it's is something "nice to have" and I will work on it slowly if it will be approved
14:11:51 <amotoki> slaweq: makes sense
14:12:59 <mlavalle> makes sense to me as well
14:17:29 <yamamoto> neutron-status is supposed to be installed on every nodes?
14:17:58 <slaweq> yamamoto: I think so
14:18:39 <yamamoto> ok, then it makes sense to merge sanity check
14:18:41 <slaweq> it's defined in entry_points like neutron-sanity-check https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/setup.cfg#L58
14:19:04 <amotoki> me too as it is installed by entry_points, but it might depend on distros.
14:19:20 <slaweq> so maybe some packagers will have to adjust it but I don't see any reason why it won't be installed everywhere
14:19:53 <amotoki> agree
14:20:40 <mlavalle> all good moving ahead with this RFE?
14:20:42 <mlavalle> +1
14:21:17 <slaweq> I'm not voting on this one :)
14:21:36 <mlavalle> you shouldn't ;-)
14:22:20 <amotoki> +1
14:22:52 <yamamoto> +1
14:23:00 <mlavalle> cool
14:23:06 <slaweq> thx :)
14:23:10 * mlavalle updating the RFE
14:24:39 <mlavalle> slaweq: you doing this slowly, right? do you think it will make it in Stein?
14:24:54 <slaweq> mlavalle: I hope so
14:25:08 <mlavalle> cool
14:25:29 <mlavalle> Moving on
14:25:50 <mlavalle> Next one to discuss today is https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1811352
14:25:52 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1811352 in neutron "[RFE] Include neutron CLI floatingip port-forwarding support" [Wishlist,New]
14:27:01 <amotoki> I think this should go to openstacksdk and python-openstackclient
14:28:06 <slaweq> I agree
14:28:33 <slaweq> and those projects uses storyboard already
14:30:00 <mlavalle> amotoki, slaweq: let me make sure I understand what you are saying: this RFE should have not been reported against Neutron?
14:31:18 <slaweq> IMHO yes, it's something missing in OSC/SDK
14:31:39 <amotoki> mlavalle: at least we need to file a RFE to their storyboard.
14:31:55 <amotoki> although it is nice if neutron team is aware of it
14:32:32 <mlavalle> I think from the strict point of view of the process, you are right
14:32:52 <amotoki> what I think now is to file a story on storyboard and then close the RFE in neutron with the storyboard link.
14:33:06 <mlavalle> but this kind of things with the clients are, to some extent, in a gray area
14:33:38 <mlavalle> because the trigger was Neutron. So to an extent we own it
14:33:40 <amotoki> mlavalle: totally agree
14:34:22 <amotoki> so is it better to keep this open and refer to the RFE in a proposed review?
14:34:51 <mlavalle> I'll take the action item of filing in openstacksdk and python-openstackclient
14:35:40 <amotoki> thanks. we just need one story and add tasks to sdk and osc
14:35:44 <mlavalle> and going forward, when client stuff shows up, the process is cross file and keep it open in Neutron
14:35:51 <mlavalle> does it make sense?
14:36:02 <amotoki> makes sense
14:36:07 <slaweq> yep
14:36:13 <slaweq> good for me
14:36:37 <mlavalle> I'll also take the action item to update our devref
14:36:58 <mlavalle> so we clarify how client related stuff is handled from RFE perspective
14:37:13 <amotoki> ++
14:37:48 <slaweq> ++
14:38:33 <mlavalle> I mean, ultimately we are responsible to deliver complete functionality and that includes the clients
14:38:58 <amotoki> completely agree
14:39:10 <mlavalle> yamamoto: any thoughts you might want to add?
14:39:53 <yamamoto> does it apply to horizon heat etc? or only client?
14:41:19 <mlavalle> that's a pretty good question. In other words, where do we draw the line?
14:42:10 <mlavalle> Maybe for the time being let's limit this to openstacksdk and python-openstackclient
14:42:34 <yamamoto> +1
14:42:34 <mlavalle> and I take the action item to discuss with the TC how they see this boundary issues
14:42:36 <amotoki> IMHO I see two lines: client support is MUST item, horizon/heat/others are optional
14:42:40 <slaweq> +1
14:43:02 <mlavalle> cool
14:43:27 <mlavalle> Let's take amotoki's reasoning as our position^^^^
14:44:01 <slaweq> +1
14:44:03 <amotoki> :)
14:44:06 <mlavalle> and I'll comment with the TC the more general boundary issue
14:45:35 <mlavalle> ok, next one is not quite ready to be discussed here. But since Midonet has this feature, I would like yamamoto to take some time over the next few days and give us his opinion here:
14:45:44 <mlavalle> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1810905
14:45:45 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1810905 in neutron "[RFE]Support NAT64" [Wishlist,New]
14:47:34 <yamamoto> i'm curious if the submitter has an implementation idea
14:48:35 <mlavalle> They might. I don't work there anymore, but ofthen they already have an idea
14:48:40 <mlavalle> we can ask in the RFE
14:48:52 <yamamoto> midonet uses vpp for the 4<->6 transformation as ovs datapath doesn't support it
14:49:38 <mlavalle> These are good points
14:49:50 <mlavalle> would you mind leaving a note there?
14:50:05 <yamamoto> sure, i'll leave a few questions
14:50:12 <mlavalle> Thanks!
14:50:24 <mlavalle> #topic On demand agenda
14:51:21 <mlavalle> amotoki sent me an email the other day asking me about Tap as a Service
14:51:50 <mlavalle> he was asked to review client code for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/603501/
14:51:55 <mlavalle> Right amotoki?
14:52:01 <amotoki> mlavalle: yes
14:52:22 <amotoki> in our policy, neutronclient accepts CLI supports for stadium projects, so it raised me the question.
14:52:46 <mlavalle> so since yamamoto is core in that project, I have a couple of questions:
14:53:05 <mlavalle> 1) Do we have enough core reviewing capacity in that project?
14:54:39 <yamamoto> 1) not enough to maintain the current "two +2 to merge" policy
14:55:20 <amotoki> yamamoto: do you mean you are only active core?
14:55:30 <mlavalle> I had a conversation with manjeets. He helped implementing and testing the patch above^^^^
14:56:08 <mlavalle> so he has come familiar with TaaS. He also spoke to his manager and he has support (an interest) in being core
14:56:12 <yamamoto> amotoki: sort of. usually kaz reviews if someone ping him.
14:56:22 <mlavalle> would that help yamamoto?
14:58:11 <yamamoto> i don't remember manjeets reviewing taas patches
14:58:49 <mlavalle> well, we can ask him to start reviewing
14:59:02 <mlavalle> I don't necessarily mean for him to be core now
14:59:07 <mlavalle> but works towards it
14:59:13 <mlavalle> with your guidance
14:59:35 <yamamoto> but good to hear he has an interest
14:59:53 <yamamoto> sure, let's ask him to start reviewing
15:00:02 <mlavalle> I just don't want the project to starve to dead
15:00:13 <mlavalle> ok we are at time
15:00:19 <mlavalle> Thanks for attending
15:00:23 <mlavalle> #endmeeting