15:00:45 #startmeeting neutron_l3 15:00:46 Meeting started Thu Jun 5 15:00:45 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is carl_baldwin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:00:47 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:00:49 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_l3' 15:00:51 #topic Announcements 15:00:54 hi 15:00:57 hi 15:01:14 looks like I forgot to update the announcements section on the team page. 15:01:17 hi 15:01:24 Juno-1 is in one week. 15:01:33 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron-L3-Subteam 15:02:17 I did not add the second mid-cycle meeting either. 15:02:45 If you plan to attend, book your travel and hotel. 15:03:54 I’ll update the team page soon. 15:03:59 #topic Bugs 15:04:21 I have not seen any new bugs with tag l3-ipam-dhcp 15:04:29 Are there any bugs that need attention? 15:06:06 How many do we have today from the DVR team? I’m not sure if Swami is planning to join. 15:07:22 * carl_baldwin thinks this might be a short meeting 15:07:33 #topic IPAM 15:07:43 I'm just wanting to say that we are thinking about an alternative architecture for DVR 15:07:48 hi, sorry for the late connection 15:08:08 #undo 15:08:08 Removing item from minutes: 15:08:41 matrohon: We’ll get to DVR in a bit. 15:09:03 carl_baldwin : fine 15:09:18 #topic bgp-dynamic-routing 15:09:22 nextone, devvesa: hi 15:09:26 hi 15:09:37 Since I know you’re hear we’ll do your topic first. 15:09:40 hi 15:09:54 Thanks for updating the bp. 15:10:09 thanks for review it! 15:10:43 I think it is almost ready. I just want to understand the first use case a little better. 15:10:49 i think we have to discuss about the first use case, but I don't know if it has to be now 15:11:31 I have also started to develop the agent, and I have read exabgp and ryu speakers 15:11:48 documentation. i find ryu much more easy and pythonic 15:12:20 That is great. I have a bookmark on the comparison page. I’ll keep checking in. 15:12:40 Is the ryu speaker already in the tree or is that different? 15:12:59 in the tree? 15:13:33 In the neutron tree with the ryu code. 15:13:45 oh, maybe it is 15:13:58 i've just downloaded using pip and playing with it 15:14:04 thank you for trying ryu 15:14:20 yamamoto: I might ask you for help :) 15:14:40 yamamoto: Thanks for suggesting it. It sounds like a promising option. 15:14:48 also it has VPN advertisement. This is something that Nachi will appreciate in his bp 15:15:27 we plan to test ryu for its VPN advertisment too 15:15:38 bp link? 15:16:03 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/93329/ 15:16:48 https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/neutron-bgp-vpn in launchpad 15:16:53 thx 15:17:00 chuckC: Is that the bp you’re looking for or another? 15:17:18 just the one being discussed 15:17:33 yes 15:17:46 chuckC: They are linked from the subteam page. 15:17:54 There is also the bpg-dynamic-routing blueprint. 15:17:58 oh, the one we are discussing is this one: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/bgp-dynamic-routing 15:18:16 we also have of fork of exabgp which do VPN advertisment 15:18:28 we will communicate on it soon 15:18:56 matrohon: Could you add a note to the comparison page? 15:18:57 matrohon: who is “we”? 15:19:26 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/BGPSpeakersComparison 15:19:39 carl_baldwin : will do 15:19:49 matrohon: Great. 15:20:02 devvesa: We’ll discuss the use case offline. Is there anything else? 15:20:20 nothing else 15:20:23 yamamoto : me and my colleagues at Orange. But we might consider using ryu 15:20:41 BGP Ipv6 peering is not supported by quagga ? 15:21:13 this will be main issue w.r.t quagga then ? 15:21:52 keshava-hp: I’m not sure. It might be blank because no one who has editted the table has experience with that aspect of quagga. 15:22:07 OK 15:22:36 In my mind, the biggest issue with quagga will be integrating it and running it in an isolated namespace. I’ve had some diffiiculty with it myself. 15:23:06 #topic l3-high-availability 15:23:09 safchain: hi 15:23:44 I know it has been a while. 15:23:44 carl_baldwin, hi 15:23:58 I have read over your blueprint and I think it is ready to merge. 15:24:07 Do you have any other cores looking at it? 15:24:19 carl_baldwin, thx for reviews, not yet 15:24:42 safchain: I’ll have a look 15:24:47 armax, thx 15:24:48 carl_baldwin: ^ 15:24:53 armax: thanks. 15:25:28 I’d like to encorparate it in my DVR testing. 15:25:34 safchain: Anything else? 15:25:59 I think I will have some dependencies with the l3 dvr ext 15:26:22 probably I will rebase my work on the new l3 extra attr class 15:26:44 safchain: That is worth a try to see what conflicts may come up. 15:27:13 carl_baldwin, yes, currently reviewing the l3 dvr ext 15:27:29 How about DVR impacts on L3-High availability ? NAT session impact Highavailbality ? 15:28:06 keshava-hp, I need to check 15:28:30 keshava-hp: It has been on our minds for some time. 15:28:46 keshava-hp, carl_baldwin: I think it’s still early to understand the full implications 15:29:32 armax: I agree. It has been on ours minds though. :) 15:29:37 how about fragemented packet handling w.r.t HA ? 15:29:59 If before reassmeble complete if Active goes down how to recover that packet in Slave ? 15:31:00 keshava-hp: Wouldn’t that be a fairly minor packet loss? 15:31:45 In the interest of time, we’ll move on if safchain doesn’t have anything else. 15:32:06 nothing else 15:32:12 safchain: thanks 15:32:17 #topic IPAM 15:32:26 seizadi: ping 15:32:29 Hi Carl 15:33:07 I checked in the bp yesterday. I don't know if you saw it? 15:33:14 I have not seen it. 15:33:19 Can you provide a link? 15:33:41 roaet: ping 15:34:51 seizadi: ^ 15:34:57 Here are the 3 bp https://review.openstack.org/#/q/owner:%22Soheil+Eizadi%22+status:open,n,z 15:35:18 This is the IPAM bp https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97967/ 15:36:03 seizadi: Thank you for posting that. I will have a look and add a few reviewers to it. 15:36:13 This is implementation of 3rd party external IPAM https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97986/ 15:36:42 Great. I look forward to reviewing it. 15:36:53 seizadi: Anything else? 15:37:17 #topic l3-svcs-vendor-* 15:37:20 pcm_: hi 15:37:27 carl_baldwin: hi 15:37:30 I saw your updates to the team page. Thanks for those. 15:37:38 Looks like you’ve updated your blueprint. 15:37:54 Updated BP spec. Pushed WIP code for community comments: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/96946/2 15:38:03 pcm_: Did you get all that worked out from the other day? 15:38:31 Yes, had more help on mocking w/side effects. Do have issues with UTs still though :( 15:38:34 * carl_baldwin can’t remember the details of what we were trying to work out. 15:39:12 Some high level test cases are calling into database code, but no mocking for service driver, so failing. Need to figure out how to address. 15:40:17 Is there anything we can do to help out? 15:40:52 pcm_: ^ 15:40:59 Yeah, could use some ideas on how to deal with the issues. I can post on IRC later. 15:41:30 pcm_: Sounds good. I’ll be off and on a bit today with errands but should be on solid in the afternoon. 15:41:36 pcm_: Anything else? 15:41:48 It's purely a UT problem...stuff not mocked. 15:41:56 carl_baldwin: No, that's it for me! 15:42:01 pcm_: Thanks. 15:42:06 #topic neutron-ovs-dvr 15:42:39 armax: hi. I don’t see Swami on. Anyone else on? 15:42:47 carl_baldwin: hi 15:42:59 I spoke with Swami yesterday 15:43:16 carl_baldwin: he’s going to be back online beginning of next wek 15:43:20 s/wek/week 15:43:48 okay 15:44:25 I had another quick review of the extension code last night. I think you’ve tagged all of my major concerns with FIXME comments. 15:44:52 carl_baldwin: yes 15:45:05 I think there are enough that I would feel funny merging with the fixmes not addressed. 15:45:36 carl_baldwin: to some degree it might make sense to address them as separate fixes 15:45:54 I plan to get this patch running again on my systems and start working testing it out through the API. 15:45:58 carl_baldwin: they does not necessarily mean that the patch should merge at it is 15:46:07 but the fixes could be rebased on top of the base one 15:46:35 carl_baldwin: I did some basic manual testing, jenkins and 3rd party seems to be happy 15:47:19 armax: right. Existing tests seem to be okay. 15:47:22 and the whole point of the way the code has been rearranged was to minimize the impact on existing functionality 15:47:44 far more than it was before 15:47:52 True. Good work there. 15:47:59 that said, the odd one out is always behind the corner ;) 15:48:13 I was thinking about trying it in my system to see if I can hit the code paths where I’m still confused. 15:49:05 It might become more clear to me what the code *should* be doing and allow me to provide more insightful feedback. 15:49:17 That is where I was thinking of going until Swami gets back. 15:49:34 carl_baldwin: I did try the ‘distributed’ path 15:50:04 at least from an API functional standpoint things behave the way they should 15:50:12 I am planning on writing tempest tests 15:50:21 those don’t need multi-host deployment 15:50:40 carl_baldwin: I got a draft, and I should be able to push it shortly 15:50:58 armax: very nice 15:51:08 then I am syncing with marun to do functional testing in-tree 15:51:52 carl_baldwin: so watch this space ;) 15:52:02 armax: I have nothing else to add 15:52:03 armax : by the way, do you know the status of mult-host testing in the gate 15:52:14 matrohon: I am afraid I don’t 15:52:33 matrohon: I don’t know the status either. 15:52:56 ok, that is something we plan to work on too, when we will have time :( 15:53:13 I just wanted to speak about an alternative DVR architecture that we are thinking about : 15:53:29 https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YiC-S1g3J7D8WLg9k4ZQKyrV4oMy4ELpGA2wJcBUKV4/edit 15:53:53 doc requires permission? 15:54:16 this is only a draft for the moment, but if you have thoughs, please comment it 15:54:36 matrohon: I cannot get to the doc now but will visit it later. 15:54:45 matrohon: doc’s permissions prevent me from accessing it 15:54:52 Google Drive “The app is currently unreachable" 15:55:33 Now I’m past that and to the permissions problem. 15:56:04 I'm not the doc owner, but permission should be ok 15:56:23 we already have sharedv it with other folks like safchain 15:56:40 I’ve requested access but that is all I can do for now. I’ll check back later. 15:57:31 Anything else on DVR? 15:57:33 carl_baldwin : thanks, we will make it totally public 15:57:53 Please stick to the reviews. We need quick reviewer turn-around on these. 15:58:51 #topic Open Discussion 16:00:04 Thanks, everyone. Keep it up! 16:00:11 #endmeeting