14:00:23 #startmeeting neutron_drivers 14:00:23 Meeting started Fri Jul 22 14:00:23 2022 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is lajoskatona. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:23 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:23 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers' 14:00:24 o/ 14:00:27 Hi 14:00:31 hi 14:00:34 hello 14:00:36 Let's see if we have enough drivers 14:00:39 hi 14:02:10 ralonsoh I am running frr 7.2.1 and ovn-bgp-agent checkout from latest clone, openstack is latest master from devstack openvswitch-switch version 2.13.5 14:02:31 ok, let's start 14:02:31 spatel, let's talk after the meeting 14:02:37 sure! 14:02:42 ralonsoh, spatel: thanks 14:02:52 We have one RFE for today: 14:02:56 hi 14:02:59 [rfe][ovn] Support address group for ovn driver (#link [rfe][ovn] Support address group for ovn driver ) 14:03:35 sorry wrong link: https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1982287 14:04:46 how is this different to address groups? 14:04:50 If I understand well the OVN side of this feature is already there, just the ml2_ovn part is missing 14:05:04 or is it the same concept just directly supported by ovn 14:05:07 ? 14:05:18 mlavalle: yes as I see the same feature but with OVN 14:05:20 it is the same, just missing the implementation in OVN 14:05:46 ralonsoh: more precisely, missing in ML2/OVN? 14:06:04 exactly, core OVN supports that 14:06:08 seems pretty obvious to approve then :) 14:06:13 yeap 14:06:18 obondarev: +1 14:06:24 brings parity to ml2 / ovn 14:06:57 to me, it is a no brainer 14:07:06 only question from me if it's needs a spec or not 14:07:56 yeah, let's ask a spec, specifically explaining how this play with the current address groups implementation 14:08:03 I don't think so. a spec is not necessarily required and this looks straight-forward 14:08:08 if the API/interface is same that neutron already has - then probably no spec is needed 14:08:18 I don't think there will be any API/DB change 14:08:21 yeap, that was my concern 14:08:37 so spec maybe won't be necessary 14:08:44 it is is going to stick to the current API and DB, the no spec is needed 14:08:57 if it ^^^ 14:09:03 agree, if it is just to adopt ovn driver to create address sets based on the API req of address groups, I see no need for spec 14:09:21 but let's indicate that when we approve the RFE 14:09:27 explicitely 14:09:35 so expectations are clear 14:09:36 +1 14:10:01 +1 14:10:04 +1 14:10:07 Ok, so I add comment to the RFE that if the same API and db can be used the RFE can go without spec, otherwise let's request one 14:10:08 +1 14:10:12 +1 14:10:31 if only all RFEs be so nice! 14:10:36 ok, it was quick :-) 14:10:37 hehehe 14:10:39 Could we also please have an update on https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1979816 before we close today? 14:11:47 atimmins, let's finish the previous topic 14:12:43 I think we accepted the RFE with the condition that it is "only" an OVN driver 14:12:51 perfect 14:12:55 #topic On Demand Agenda 14:13:28 atimmins: you refer to your last comment on the RFE pointing to the etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/fwaas-api-evolution-spec#L244 ? 14:13:38 Yes 14:15:48 atimmins: if this strata concept covers your issue with fw goup ordering, isn't that good to create a spec based on this in the etherpad? 14:16:00 spatel, sorry I missed this... note the blogpost is a bit old, and there has been quite some changes 14:16:30 spatel, there is a WIP patch for devstack support https://review.opendev.org/c/x/ovn-bgp-agent/+/814185 14:16:44 perhaps yo ucan take some ideas about how you shoul configure theee agent for devstack 14:16:57 luis5tb working with ralonsoh and made some progress but stuck here https://paste.opendev.org/show/bYxy4cBWygOQ21JgEJZb/ 14:17:05 Perhaps I am just unaware of the process for creating a spec - is that something I should do myself, and if so, is there documented guidance for doing so? 14:17:57 atimmins: this is the neutron specs repo: https://opendev.org/openstack/neutron-specs 14:18:08 atimmins, you need to propose something like this 14:18:09 https://github.com/openstack/neutron-specs/blob/master/specs/yoga/distributed-metadata-data-path.rst 14:18:17 exactly 14:18:30 in any case, what is in the etherpad is different from group ordering 14:18:37 atimmins: please note there is a directory for the zed cycle: https://opendev.org/openstack/neutron-specs/src/branch/master/specs/zed 14:18:51 you are introducing priority levels (but we can discuss this in the spec) 14:19:09 yes, the spec would be a good place to discuss that 14:19:13 and, btw, in the previous meeting we talked about the current behaviour 14:19:27 that doesn't match the current spec (allow by default) 14:20:00 atimmins: please also note that in that zed directory there is a placeholder.rst file that you can use as a template 14:20:39 This is all very helpful, thanks! I'll work on putting a spec together in the zed directory. 14:20:44 when you have you first version of the spec, just submmit is to gerrit with git review, like any other patch in the OpenStack project 14:21:19 Will do 14:21:22 atimmins: and we will have a discussion over gerrit, just like any other piece of code 14:21:23 atimmins: before pushing you can build it with tox -edocs I think, and can check in browser 14:22:19 I have another quick sentence for today: 14:22:33 I started the Antelope etherpad: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/neutron-antelope-ptg 14:22:40 cool! 14:22:56 and the next release will be Antelope :-) 14:23:09 so bad for anteater 14:23:30 I think antelope is much better for marketing people :-) 14:24:08 If there is no more topics to discuss, let's close the meeting 14:24:11 the anteater would have gotten all the bugz :) 14:24:30 haleyb: that was my reasoning also :-) 14:25:10 but there are no bugs left, coffee must be working if i'm talking 14:25:32 :-) 14:25:41 #endmeeting