14:02:00 <ihrachyshka> #startmeeting neutron_qos
14:02:02 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Aug 12 14:02:00 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ihrachyshka. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:02:03 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
14:02:06 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_qos'
14:02:10 <ihrachyshka> #topic Announcements
14:02:36 <ihrachyshka> first thing first: hopefully, feature/qos lives its last days: we'll request merge back today.
14:02:48 <ajo> yipieeee :)
14:02:53 * amuller cries
14:02:57 <ihrachyshka> I'll send an email later once the merge patch is up for review, and ajo said he'll post a video with the feature
14:03:19 * ajo ajo is on it :)
14:03:31 <ihrachyshka> the original plan was to request merge on Mon, but on Mon we had some things to fix, like devref or the fact that we limited ingress instead of egress ;)
14:03:34 * jschwarz a video! \o/
14:03:45 <ihrachyshka> and yesterday we had gate failures that are now fixed
14:04:00 <ihrachyshka> I expect remaining feature/qos patches to merge in an hour. so stay tuned.
14:04:13 <ihrachyshka> any remaining work will proceed in master
14:04:17 <ajo> ack
14:04:27 <ihrachyshka> (unless there are major flaws that will need fix before merge-back)
14:04:31 <ajo> I found a issue with policy.json that will need fix,
14:05:00 <ajo> it will allow a tenant creating a policy, a rule, but crashes when updating a rule
14:05:20 <ajo> tenants should not create qos policies , or rules for this release
14:05:23 <ihrachyshka> good. we have stuff to fix, that's for sure.
14:05:37 <ajo> yes
14:05:45 <ihrachyshka> #topic ongoing work
14:06:43 <ihrachyshka> so I know that moshele was looking into refactoring qos extension drivers API. he has a patch: https://review.openstack.org/211090 but now it's abandoned
14:06:52 <ihrachyshka> moshele, I guess you'll revive it once in master, right?
14:07:03 <moshele> yes
14:07:34 <ihrachyshka> also, jschwarz was working on fullstack tests. and we have one: https://review.openstack.org/202492 but since it requires neutronclient changes first, it will wait
14:07:47 <jschwarz> yes
14:08:26 <ihrachyshka> finally, we have client changes: https://review.openstack.org/189655 and https://review.openstack.org/198277 thanks to vikram, Ramanjaneya and jschwarz for supporting those
14:08:39 <ihrachyshka> I hope we'll get them in quick after neutron merge
14:08:45 <Ramanjaneya> jschwarz: anything pending on neutron-client part?
14:08:47 <ihrachyshka> then we'll be able to proceed on fullstack
14:08:54 <irenab> ihrachyshka: spec update is waiting for second +2
14:09:01 <ihrachyshka> ajo, was that an issue in client to solve with the name filter? ^
14:09:12 <ajo> ihrachyshka, correct,
14:09:19 <ihrachyshka> oh right. we have spec to update:
14:09:21 <jschwarz> ihrachyshka, as ajo mentioned, we found a but on the neutronclient where the rule might be searched for using a name
14:09:21 <ihrachyshka> #link https://review.openstack.org/199112
14:09:29 <ihrachyshka> please review ^ and we'll make sure it's in :)
14:09:35 <jschwarz> that's of course an error because rules don't have a name. I'm looking into that now
14:09:41 <ajo> thanks jschwarz
14:09:52 <jschwarz> of course
14:10:07 <ihrachyshka> other than that, we will still have some TODOs here and there to solve, but nothing critical.
14:10:57 <ihrachyshka> I guess once client and server and spec are in, we can claim bp is done? fullstack will go as an optional beyond the blueprint I guess since it may take time to get the depending patches in first.
14:11:04 <ihrachyshka> what do you think?
14:11:27 <ihrachyshka> anything failing beyond it should be handled as a bug I thinik
14:11:30 <jschwarz> sounds good to me
14:12:15 <ihrachyshka> ok, I assume silence means everyone agrees :)
14:12:17 <amuller> nay
14:12:20 <ajo> jschwarz, vikram : looking at the spec:
14:12:21 <ajo> neutron qos-bandwidth-limit-rule-update <policy-name-or-id> <rule-id>
14:12:22 <ihrachyshka> NAY!
14:12:25 <amuller> you cannot claim the blueprint is complete without an integration test imo
14:12:27 <ajo> but the client expects the opposite
14:12:35 <ajo> <rule-id> <policy> which is counter intuitive
14:12:40 <ihrachyshka> amuller, hm. like... any other blueprint?
14:12:51 <jschwarz> ajo, well, that's not really something we can change I think...
14:12:51 <amuller> ihrachyshka: can we try and raise the bar?
14:13:11 <amuller> is there anything blocking the fullstack test after merge to master?
14:13:24 <jschwarz> ajo, the lbaas guys did opposite of what you wrote as well.. changing that goes deep into neutronclient mechanics I think
14:13:26 <ihrachyshka> amuller, we obviously can. I just wonder what it buys us. do you think we will stop working on fullstack right after it's marked done?
14:13:41 <ajo> jschwarz, ok, then we need to fix the spec
14:13:44 <ihrachyshka> amuller, I guess we need to go and review patches that jschwarz rebased..
14:14:14 <jschwarz> amuller, the neutronclient patches also block the fullstack test, and neutronclient is blocked because the gate is broken for that repo.
14:14:19 <ihrachyshka> amuller, ok, if you are against, I take it as order :)
14:14:22 <jschwarz> (for the last week)
14:14:43 <ihrachyshka> amuller, heh. and here you should put your testing hat on!
14:15:01 <amuller> time to fix a gate then...
14:15:21 <ihrachyshka> amuller, are you into the fix? are you in touch with pc_m?
14:15:28 <amuller> not at all
14:15:33 <amuller> I'll do that though
14:15:39 <ihrachyshka> thank you
14:15:48 <ihrachyshka> I think they may not see the end of the tunnel :)
14:16:08 <ihrachyshka> ok, let's move to open agenda
14:16:12 <ihrachyshka> #topic open agenda
14:16:26 <ihrachyshka> ajo, so can you update us about why tenants should not create policies?
14:16:28 <jschwarz> so we need to revisit the policy.json settings
14:16:37 <ajo> ihrachyshka: yes
14:16:50 <ajo> the initial plan was to only let admins create and maintain policies/rules
14:16:59 <ajo> if a policy is shared, a tenant can attach it to a port or net
14:17:02 <ajo> but not otherwise
14:17:16 <ajo> in the future, RBAC will make that more modular
14:17:39 <ajo> people willing to let their tenants do qos themselves, will have to modify policy.json, and we will document that
14:17:49 <ihrachyshka> ajo, but it's supported, right?
14:17:54 <ihrachyshka> with the policy change of course
14:17:58 <ajo> ihrachyshka, yes
14:18:04 <ihrachyshka> we have the code to handle access, kudos to jschwarz
14:18:11 <ajo> jschwarz++
14:18:12 <jschwarz> ^_^
14:18:19 <ajo> yes, we have to review and tune the policies
14:18:26 <ajo> and provide the 2nd alternate (open example) in documentation
14:18:28 <ihrachyshka> if we would have time, we could even get RBAC this cycle
14:18:38 <ajo> I'd leave that for M
14:18:46 <ihrachyshka> I think it's quite pluggable the way kevinbenton implements it
14:18:49 <jschwarz> ihrachyshka, RBAC still has unmerged code so...
14:18:52 <ajo> I believe we should focus in polishing, testing and debugging
14:19:01 <jschwarz> i agree with ajo here
14:19:05 <ihrachyshka> jschwarz, well, I'm almost sure it's a matter of days.
14:19:12 <ihrachyshka> I see a lot of review traction around it
14:19:21 <ihrachyshka> ok, let's polish :)
14:19:24 <ihrachyshka> or czech :)
14:19:27 <ajo> lol
14:19:30 <jschwarz> :)
14:19:38 <ajo> I'm more comfortable with spanish
14:19:44 <jschwarz> hebrew?
14:20:02 <ajo> :)
14:20:03 <jlibosva> nah, no czech :*
14:20:05 <jlibosva> :(
14:20:33 <jschwarz> ihrachyshka, in regards to the open agenda; neutronclient still requires a bit of work - there's that rule-naming thing and a few reviews still left unhandled
14:20:36 <ihrachyshka> anything else ongoing or needs discussion?
14:20:46 <ihrachyshka> jschwarz, I bet you are on it
14:20:49 <jschwarz> I'll get to them by tomorrow I think - it will be ready by time for L for sure.
14:20:51 <jschwarz> XD
14:21:02 <ihrachyshka> see?!! I tell ya
14:21:22 <jschwarz> just letting you know so that there are no surprises ;-)
14:21:42 <ihrachyshka> overall people, good work on the branch, I look forward to see us polishing the feature in another one ;)
14:22:00 <irenab> I have f question regarding nova flavor extra_spec settings for qos, but maybe we can discuss it next week, after pre-merge crisis is over
14:22:14 <ihrachyshka> jschwarz, I don't remember when there were any surprises from your side. it's generally like 'yeah, there is an issue. and btw, the fix is up'
14:22:32 <jschwarz> ihrachyshka, thanks ^_^
14:22:33 <ihrachyshka> irenab, ok cool.
14:22:56 <ajo> irenab, that's documented on the spec, nova can set flavors for qos, but that's not compatible with ours
14:23:08 <irenab> please check the spec update patch and if something else need correction, lets add it
14:23:21 <ajo> irenab, just added a nit now
14:23:24 <ihrachyshka> so if there is nothing critical, I suggest we end the meeting now and I go check the queue on whether I can proceed with merge request already.
14:23:29 <irenab> ajo: I think we should check ifwe can integrate both
14:23:45 <ajo> irenab, yes, we will certanly need to integrate for scheduling / guarantee purposes
14:23:49 <ihrachyshka> ajo, I think it's two parallel things, but let's move it to the next week :)
14:23:55 <ajo> irenab: I'm already talking with nikola dipanov for that :)
14:23:59 <ihrachyshka> ajo++
14:24:05 <jschwarz> ajo, do you want to work on the spec change re: neutronclient and I'll do the review afterwards?
14:24:05 <irenab> for users its easier to manage per flavor qos requremens
14:24:17 <irenab> ajo: please loop me in
14:24:28 <ajo> irenab, yes, also assigning neutron qos flavors to nova would be cool
14:24:30 <ajo> if that's what you mean :)
14:24:39 <ajo> irenab: I will :)
14:24:55 <irenab> ajo: I think so :-)
14:26:50 <ihrachyshka> ok, I take the silence as the lack of more critical things to discuss
14:27:00 <ihrachyshka> #endmeeting