15:00:54 <ralonsoh> #startmeeting neutron_qos
15:00:55 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jul 18 15:00:54 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is ralonsoh. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:56 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
15:00:58 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_qos'
15:00:59 <ralonsoh> Hello
15:01:32 <ralonsoh> I'll wait one more minute to start the meeting
15:02:14 <reedip_> hi ralonsoh
15:02:24 <ralonsoh> reedip_ hi
15:02:50 <ralonsoh> ok, slaweq is on annual leave
15:03:02 <ralonsoh> and he is the most active developer now in QoS
15:03:09 <ralonsoh> #topic RFEs
15:03:18 <davidsha> Hi
15:03:26 <ralonsoh> hi davidsha
15:03:37 <ralonsoh> I have reduced the set of rfes to 3
15:03:49 <ralonsoh> Which are the active ones
15:03:51 <ralonsoh> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1649517
15:03:52 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1649517 in neutron "qos policy attached to network, qos_policy_id is reflecting on neutron net-show , but not on the port with neutron port-show" [Wishlist,In progress] - Assigned to Reedip (reedip-banerjee)
15:04:08 <ralonsoh> reedip_: can you give us the status of this one?
15:04:48 <reedip_> ralonsoh : the Unit test needs to be corrected which slaweq mentioned. It is in my list but I have been involved in other items so not able to give full time on it
15:05:08 <ralonsoh> reedip_: ok, ping us whenever you update the patches
15:05:12 <reedip_> ralonsoh : rfe still needs to be approved though
15:05:28 <reedip_> ralonsoh : hopefully this weekend I will ( will try to do it before that )
15:05:57 <ralonsoh> reedip_: try to ping ihar to approve this one
15:06:00 <ralonsoh> or mlavalle
15:06:21 <ralonsoh> reedip_: this one is going to be for Pike
15:06:32 <reedip_> ralonsoh L ok
15:06:41 <ralonsoh> ok, next one
15:06:43 <ralonsoh> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1686035
15:06:44 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1686035 in neutron "[RFE] More detailed reporting of available QoS rules" [Wishlist,Fix released] - Assigned to Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq)
15:06:44 <reedip_> pike 3 is near , I will push it
15:06:52 <ralonsoh> I mean Queens
15:06:56 <ralonsoh> sorry, my bad
15:07:12 <ralonsoh> I don't think you are going to have time enough
15:07:17 <davidsha> I was thinking that was optimistic for something without RFE approved :P
15:07:22 <ralonsoh> without the ref approved
15:07:35 <ralonsoh> davidsha: yes, that's right
15:08:18 <ralonsoh> ok, slaweq did a very good job with https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1686035
15:08:19 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1686035 in neutron "[RFE] More detailed reporting of available QoS rules" [Wishlist,Fix released] - Assigned to Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq)
15:08:33 <ralonsoh> There are some bugs to fill related with docs
15:08:48 <ralonsoh> those are at the end of the REF
15:08:50 <ralonsoh> RFE
15:09:11 <ralonsoh> next one
15:09:14 <ralonsoh> https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1596611
15:09:15 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1596611 in neutron "[RFE] Create L3 IPs with qos (rate limit)" [Wishlist,Triaged] - Assigned to LIU Yulong (dragon889)
15:09:33 <ralonsoh> This one was commented in the drivers meeting
15:09:43 <ralonsoh> but the development was stopped one month ago
15:09:44 <ralonsoh> https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bug/1596611
15:10:04 <ralonsoh> again, I'll ping the developer
15:10:20 <ralonsoh> I have no more topics for this section
15:10:30 <ralonsoh> anyone has something?
15:10:51 <davidsha> I'm good.
15:10:59 <ralonsoh> #topic Bugs
15:11:06 <ralonsoh> I have one
15:11:07 <ralonsoh> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1701202
15:11:08 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1701202 in neutron "Create QoS rule fails on python 3.5" [Undecided,New] - Assigned to Slawek Kaplonski (slaweq)
15:11:34 <ralonsoh> I need to check with slaweq if this one is related to https://bugs.launchpad.net/oslo.versionedobjects/+bug/1687592
15:11:34 <openstack> Launchpad bug 1687592 in oslo.versionedobjects "The object is unhashable when inheriting the class ComparableVersionedObject" [Undecided,Fix released] - Assigned to Guoshuai Li (liguoshuai1990)
15:11:59 <ralonsoh> If so, we can check if the fix in 1687592 solves the problem in QoS
15:12:09 <ralonsoh> I'll take a look at this one this week
15:12:17 <davidsha> They mention in the comments that it probably is.
15:12:28 <ralonsoh> I know, and I want to check it
15:12:41 <davidsha> kk
15:12:55 <ralonsoh> no more bugs, anyone else?
15:13:19 <ralonsoh> #topic Other Changes
15:13:34 <ralonsoh> First, davidsha
15:13:46 <ralonsoh> what about common classifier for QoS?
15:13:55 <ralonsoh> what plans do you have?
15:14:43 <davidsha> I was thinking of adding an optional field to the DSCP marking rule to accept classifications.
15:15:23 <ralonsoh> will you create a bug describing this feature?
15:15:37 <davidsha> It would allow different traffic from the same source to have different drop priorities.
15:15:40 <ralonsoh> I don't think an spec is needed
15:16:24 <davidsha> There was an RFE made in Feburary of last year to introduce the classification API into Qos, so I believe I can repurpose that.
15:16:36 <ralonsoh> davidsha: perfect, and thanks
15:16:38 <davidsha> A spec might be needed as I'll be adding to the APi.
15:16:55 <davidsha> ralonsoh:  thanks!
15:17:02 <ralonsoh> hmmm yes but within the whole common classifier
15:17:19 <ralonsoh> or you need to change plugin by plugin?
15:17:42 <davidsha> what do you mean?
15:17:51 <reedip_> but would only the DSCP marking be affected by CCF ?
15:18:19 <ralonsoh> this could be the first step to implement in qos
15:18:49 <ralonsoh> davidsha: I mean you need to modify the QoS API for this
15:18:52 <ralonsoh> isn't it?
15:18:54 <davidsha> reedip_: I was planning on just adding it to dscp for now, I'm not sure would it be too much of a change to the BW limit rule to introduce it there.
15:19:30 <davidsha> ralonsoh: yes, just add an optional field to dscp_marking_rule to take in the classification ID.
15:19:41 <ralonsoh> davidsha: ok, so yes, you need this spec
15:19:48 <ralonsoh> for Queens??
15:19:57 <reedip_> I need to look into the CCF model once ...  :)
15:20:31 <davidsha> Yes, for Queens. We should have a Version 0 of the CCF out soon
15:20:38 <ralonsoh> perfect!
15:20:45 <davidsha> With Version 1 aimed for Queens.
15:20:55 <reedip_> kk
15:21:17 <ralonsoh> I have a question for hichihira
15:21:22 <ralonsoh> but he's not here
15:21:35 <ralonsoh> it's about the min-bw implementation in LB and OVS
15:21:43 <ralonsoh> but I'll ping him latter
15:21:49 <ralonsoh> later
15:22:14 <ralonsoh> I don't have any other topic
15:22:17 <ralonsoh> do you?
15:22:53 <davidsha> I have nothing.
15:23:10 <ralonsoh> ok, thanks guys!
15:23:12 <ralonsoh> #endmeeting