14:02:35 #startmeeting neutron_ipv6 14:02:36 Meeting started Tue Aug 12 14:02:35 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sc68cal. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:02:37 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:02:39 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_ipv6' 14:02:49 hello 14:02:58 hi 14:03:02 Hi 14:03:20 o/ 14:03:56 Agenda is pretty light today, I think most of the time can be for just coordinating code review 14:06:42 xuhanp: how goes the stateful/stateless work? 14:06:58 sc68cal, I got some interesting comments from baoli 14:07:31 Hi 14:07:56 one is that the extra options of dhcpv6 and dhcp are different, so I am thinking about how to let the code make sense. 14:08:06 baoli, do you have any suggestions in mind? 14:08:43 xuhanp, I was thinking that there might be a couple of ways of dealing with it. 14:09:38 xuhanp: when user supplies the extra_dhcp_opts in the port API, is there any verification on if the option is valid? 14:09:47 I mean existing verification 14:09:54 I don't see any verification currently. 14:11:18 right now it's just name value pairs 14:11:39 It used to be ok since it only deals with ipv4. With ipv6 added, would it make sense for the user to indicate if an option is meant for v4 or v6? 14:12:41 yeah. that will requires API change 14:13:28 If you check the dnsmasq definition for the option name strings, same name may be used for both v4 and v6 if the option applies to both. 14:14:05 so I think that it will take some thoughts to get it right from user's point of view and implementation point of view 14:14:23 yep. but if the option involves with v4 or v6 address we should separate them. 14:14:45 maybe we can think about it and discuss on mail list. 14:16:22 xuhanp: sure 14:17:30 I think the difficult case here is when the port has both IPv4 and v6 address. otherwise, we can just simply use option or option6 for extra_dhcp_opts 14:18:31 xuhanp, that's right. But subnet can alos be added after the port is created. 14:18:49 yep. that makes it even more complicated. 14:19:29 maybe we can change the format of extra_dhcp_opts name to option:XXX or option6:XXX 14:19:34 maybe we can use the name string like v[4|6]: 14:19:47 xuhanp, looks like we are on the same page 14:20:01 but we will need to make sure it's backward compatible. 14:20:50 v[4|6]: is optional, and by default it's v4. 14:21:18 sounds like a plan 14:21:34 I will send a email to list 14:21:53 in addition, verification may be needed to make sure that the user provides correct options 14:22:25 yep 14:22:40 cool 14:23:32 did you check the file dhcp_common.c? which should help a lot 14:24:03 not yet. will do 14:26:53 Very cool. 14:27:39 I think that J-3 is going to have a lot of stuff trying to land 14:28:15 so if possible let's try and keep the review cycles short on some of this stuff so we can get cores on it asap 14:30:00 sc68cal, sounds good. Maybe the extra_dhcp_opts validations stuff baoli and I discussed today can go to a separate patch, so we can get the major part landed first. 14:30:16 +1 14:30:32 Yeah it sounds like there are lots of gotchas in that 14:30:35 splitting it up makes it less likely for other parts to miss because of nits on one bit 14:31:14 Yes, I can see it being viewed as a separate bug 14:32:03 sounds good to me 14:32:46 in that case, I'll +1 on this current patch 14:33:08 very cool 14:33:12 I will add a TODO or FIXME at your comment place 14:33:24 xuhanp, thanks 14:35:31 xuhanp: I'll also test the patch in the lab at some point just to allay my fears about the host file. Your code looks fine, I just get a little feaful when someone is in that area of the dnsmasq code :) 14:35:44 The mention of a separate patch brings up a question I have. How are people keeping track of everything that's in flight and what pieces are needed in order to get various parts of IPv6 working? 14:36:19 pcarver_: the specs that get merged in neutron-specs is what I use to track 14:36:54 There's a list of code reviews on https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/IPv6 but all the links are broken. Is that info no longer used? 14:37:28 pcarver_: that wiki is way out of date 14:37:38 pcarver_: it's probably out of date, but it looks like the updated gerrit system broke links too :( 14:37:49 when they did the upgrade to gerrit 14:38:33 Would it make sense to either delete it or update it? Right now it's the top Google hit for "neutron ipv6" 14:39:28 I'd be happy to update it if I knew what to update it to 14:39:59 Are the list of reviews still accurate if I just search in Gerrit for the correct links? 14:40:43 Or have some of them been obsoleted and new ones needed that aren't on that list? 14:41:02 Many of those reviews did get merged, so I think we can remove that section 14:41:29 Ideally we should add some docs to docs.openstack.org and link from the wiki 14:45:24 Maybe we'll eventually need separate sections for J-release blueprints and upcoming K-release blueprints. 14:49:18 I'll see what I can do about cleaning up the links on the wiki. My problem is that I still feel kind of fuzzy on where we are at a high level. i.e. what user meaningful functionality we expect in J vs K 14:49:54 J release will support *all* configurations for the ipv6 modes 14:50:08 meaning radvd and dnsmasq will be configured properly for v6 14:50:39 basically the following specs 14:50:49 http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/juno/ipv6-provider-nets-slaac.html 14:50:58 http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/juno/ipv6-dnsmasq-dhcpv6-stateless-stateful.html 14:51:04 http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/specs/juno/ipv6-radvd-ra.html 14:52:41 ok, I'll take a crack at updating the wiki and see how it goes. 14:54:17 pcarver_: thanks 14:56:37 Do we have any other business? Otherwise I'll give everyone back a couple minutes 14:57:05 I put some code up for review. 14:57:09 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113339 14:57:44 Blueprint is still in limbo, not -1 or -2'd, but no response for feature exception freeze 14:58:46 Having the code posted, I think that'll help get it merged early in K 15:00:51 ok everyone, till next week! 15:01:00 Doing great work, keep it up! 15:01:05 #endmeeting