20:00:02 <xgerman> #startmeeting Octavia
20:00:03 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Sep 23 20:00:02 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is xgerman. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
20:00:04 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
20:00:07 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia'
20:00:13 <xgerman> #chair blogan, johnsom
20:00:13 <openstack> Current chairs: blogan johnsom xgerman
20:00:17 <johnsom> o/
20:00:20 <crc32> Here
20:00:22 <madhu_ak> hi
20:00:24 <blallau> hi
20:00:24 <bana_k> hi
20:00:35 <xgerman> #topic Announcements
20:00:35 <fnaval> o/
20:00:43 <minwang2> o/
20:00:44 <Santoshs> Hi
20:00:59 <xgerman> oh #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Octavia/Weekly_Meeting_Agenda#Agenda
20:01:00 <johnsom> Octavia is the reference driver for neutron-lbaas!
20:01:06 <minwang2> yeah!!!
20:01:09 <johnsom> How is that for an announcement....
20:01:12 <xgerman> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/liberty
20:01:27 <madhu_ak> (awesome)
20:01:28 <xgerman> ^^^ yeah
20:01:41 <minwang2> love the green color
20:02:14 <xgerman> Mitaka design summit ether pad: #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-mitaka-designsummit
20:02:29 <xgerman> good stuff… add any topics which you like to see discussed
20:02:30 <johnsom> I want to congratulate the whole team.  We worked together well and pulled off a huge accomplishment in taking Octavia from an empty repository to the reference driver in about a year.
20:02:38 <xgerman> +100
20:02:49 <crc32> o/=
20:02:53 <madhu_ak> rightly said
20:03:37 <xgerman> yeah, thanks everybody — this is HUGE!!
20:03:55 <xgerman> also thanks to our lt dougwig and fearless leader mesentery for support
20:03:59 <xgerman> mestery
20:04:12 <johnsom> +100
20:04:14 <minwang2> +1000
20:04:23 <xgerman> dow we get a 10,000?
20:04:36 <dougwig> mestery: i think he thinks you're like dysentery.
20:04:42 <sbalukoff> Howdy, howdy!
20:05:05 <dougwig> huge huge kudos to the team.  lbaasv2 + octavia.
20:05:14 <fnaval> hh
20:05:16 <fnaval> gg
20:05:23 <sbalukoff> And yes, that's friggen awesome, y'all!
20:05:59 <crc32> What are people leaving teams? This sounds like a retirement party.
20:06:33 <xgerman> the namespace server retired; labs v1 retired — thank you for your service you two
20:06:42 <xgerman> labs=lbaas
20:06:44 <sbalukoff> crc32: Eh... taking a moment to appreciate how far we've come is totally appropriate, eh. But it doesn't mean we're stopping by any stretch of the imagination.
20:06:52 <johnsom> No, but we should celebrate the achievement.  No worries crc32, I'm sure we will be handing out new work by the end of the meeting...  grin
20:07:02 <crc32> ok. Just making sure.
20:07:28 <crc32> It sounded like. "Congradulations this company has come really far. But... Times are getting hard and ...
20:07:56 <xgerman> nah, things are only tough if you are doing LBaaS v1 (not looking at a certain LB vendor)
20:08:02 <sbalukoff> On that note-- has RC1 officially been cut? Are we now open to getting other patches reviewed / merged that we know weren't going to make it into RC1?  (I'm thinking mostly of the pool sharing patch that I keep on having to babysit. ;) )
20:08:16 <xgerman> yes mitaka is open
20:08:22 <sbalukoff> Sweet!
20:08:28 <xgerman> once a certain patch merges
20:08:33 <sbalukoff> I shall start harassing y'all for reviews forthwith!
20:08:36 <johnsom> We are going to talk about Octavia release a bit later in the meeting
20:08:38 <sbalukoff> D'oh!
20:08:45 <sbalukoff> ok
20:08:58 <xgerman> yeah, today I even posted the agenda
20:09:03 <mestery> dougwig xgerman: o_O
20:10:45 <xgerman> ok,  Locking servers by service token” - #link  https://review.openstack.org/#/c/203880/
20:11:07 <xgerman> from our friends who run their service vms in the tenants project
20:12:29 <xgerman> interesting argument that the boundary between tenant spaces is stronger than between vms in a service tenant
20:13:14 <xgerman> #topic Tagging our release + packaging
20:13:48 <johnsom> I think we should tag a release for Octavia.
20:14:12 <sbalukoff> johnsom: +1
20:14:21 <xgerman> +1
20:14:30 <johnsom> We need to decide on the release number if you all agree we are ready for a release.
20:14:42 <sbalukoff> I feel like we've hit a milestone and therefore should tag it.
20:14:55 <xgerman> well, we should release an RC
20:14:58 <xgerman> like Neutron
20:15:00 <sbalukoff> Let's call it 0.5 ?
20:15:06 <johnsom> 0.5.0 and 1.0.0 are on the table
20:15:32 <dougwig> i vaguely recall mark saying that openstack services had to be based on >1.0
20:15:33 <pc-pothole> Im in agreement with blogans comment earlier and feel its not quite poslished enough to be a 1.0
20:15:34 <sbalukoff> 0.5.0 corresponds with the roadmap we've had (with minor adjustments) for a very long time.
20:15:40 <pc-pothole> o
20:16:02 <pc-pothole> I mean were there
20:16:09 <sbalukoff> dougwig:  Aah... so we go with 1.0 for political reasons?
20:16:10 <johnsom> <blogan_> i guess i slightly prefer 0.5 because 1.0 just sounds more polished and feature rich to me, but its not a hard stance
20:16:17 <pc-pothole> just a lot of rushing happened past month or so and feel like we may be a bit off in some areas
20:16:34 <dougwig> sbalukoff: i don't have a strong opinion.  if there's no rule, 0.5 as planned is fine by me.
20:16:35 <xgerman> well I think we would release x.x-RC1
20:16:35 <sbalukoff> pc-pothole: So, what... 0.9?
20:16:43 <pc-pothole> sbalukoff: perfect!
20:16:50 <xgerman> RC1 indicating the lack of polish
20:17:18 <sbalukoff> If the release number has a lot of meaning outside this group, then I think we go with whatever makes us seem the most "legitimate"
20:17:25 <sbalukoff> Since we are, in fact, legitmate. :)
20:17:31 <sbalukoff> legitimate.
20:17:40 <xgerman> 2015
20:17:42 <xgerman> ?
20:17:50 <sbalukoff> I don't really have a strong opinion on it.
20:17:56 <johnsom> The release number will likely end up on the vendor packages
20:18:07 <sbalukoff> but I have a lot of niggling annoyances with how I see others doing release numbers wrong.
20:18:15 <sbalukoff> Like naming releases after dates.
20:18:20 * sbalukoff stares at xgerman
20:18:21 <xgerman> well there is an argument to sue the same as neutron-lbaas to indicate we are compatible
20:18:43 <sbalukoff> Yeah, but we're also independent.
20:18:53 <sbalukoff> So, I don't really like that either. XD
20:19:13 <xgerman> ok, dougwig any advice
20:19:24 <sbalukoff> Like... I don't think I've ever heard anyone using corosync and pacemaker separately... but these packages are distinct and have separate versioning.
20:19:26 <johnsom> #link https://review.openstack.org/226933
20:19:40 <johnsom> Independent is changing...
20:19:51 <dougwig> if it were me, i'd go with 0.5 as planned.   mestery, are there any requirements for us to use 1.0 or sync versions?
20:20:06 <dougwig> once independent changes, we don't get to choose.  it's synced, fyi.
20:20:34 <mestery> dougwig: I'm fine either way to be honest
20:20:39 <mestery> dougwig: Right
20:20:39 <sbalukoff> johnsom: Are you saying that we'll be back in the same boat we were in a year ago where only Neutron core devs can approve Octavia patch merges?
20:20:49 <mestery> dougwig: Once part of the release (in Mitaka), it will become 1.0.0 then
20:20:51 <xgerman> no
20:20:54 <sbalukoff> Because that's really, really not right.
20:20:55 <mestery> So, 0.5 makes sense now
20:20:57 <dougwig> sbalukoff: no, still a separate core team.  this is just release management.
20:20:58 <johnsom> sbalukoff no
20:21:02 <sbalukoff> Ok.
20:21:03 <mestery> sbalukoff: no
20:21:15 <pc-pothole> ah, this sounds good then
20:21:19 <sbalukoff> So... we *are* independent. Even if we work together closely (as we probably should try to do). :)
20:21:38 <mestery> sbalukoff: You are independant, but not release independant once the patch merges
20:21:45 <mestery> you're part of the neutron borg from a release perspective at that point
20:21:45 <mestery> :D
20:21:49 <sbalukoff> Right.
20:21:55 * mestery plugs sbalukoff in
20:21:57 <johnsom> Ok, so it sounds like 0.5 is ok.  Do we need to vote, or should we just make it so?
20:22:03 <mestery> johnsom: It is done
20:22:04 <mestery> ;)
20:22:10 <mestery> I just need to know when to release it to pypi
20:22:11 <xgerman> done + done?
20:22:35 <dougwig> it's not an octavia meeting without a vote.
20:22:39 <dougwig> let's vote on whether to vote.
20:22:40 <sbalukoff> Haha!
20:22:52 <johnsom> hahaha, ah dougwig is feeling better....
20:22:55 <pc-pothole> #vote you cray
20:22:56 <xgerman> with belong gone I can use an iron fist :-)
20:23:06 <xgerman> blogan
20:23:08 <mestery> lol
20:23:26 <johnsom> Ok, so let's make it so.  0.5 and cut the release!
20:23:30 <crc32> blowgun
20:23:32 <pc-pothole> woot!
20:23:38 <sbalukoff> Yay?
20:23:41 <xgerman> yep - go, go, gop
20:23:42 <dougwig> mestery: are you going to put 0.5 on pypi?  what's that process?
20:23:51 <mestery> dougwig: yes
20:23:55 <johnsom> I will update launchpad
20:23:56 <dougwig> and how do we communicate to packagers that they need this with neutron-lbaas now?
20:23:59 <mestery> dougwig: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/devref/sub_project_guidelines.html#sub-project-release-process
20:23:59 <xgerman> also we probably need to branch/tag — so we can back port patches
20:24:00 <mestery> #link http://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/devref/sub_project_guidelines.html#sub-project-release-process
20:24:27 <sbalukoff> Cool.
20:24:46 <mestery> :)
20:24:54 <xgerman> sub project owner = blogan?
20:24:55 <mestery> I did some useful things as PTL after all!
20:24:56 <mestery> Imagine that!
20:25:02 <sbalukoff> Haha!
20:25:09 <sbalukoff> *cough* lameduck *cough*
20:25:10 <sbalukoff> ;)
20:25:24 <sbalukoff> Actually, we love you mestery. You've been good to work with, eh!
20:25:29 <mestery> rofl
20:25:37 <mestery> sbalukoff: I feel the same way my friend :)
20:25:49 <johnsom> I thought what mestery was doing included the tag/branch.  No?
20:25:50 <mestery> Never say a little smile and some kindness doesn't go a long way, because it does.
20:25:51 <xgerman> mestery for president!!
20:26:02 <mestery> johnsom: Yes, I do the release itself johnsom
20:26:52 <sbalukoff> Well. This is awesome, folks!
20:27:04 <xgerman> indeed
20:27:12 <mestery> You folks just need to say jump and 0.5 will be on pypi within an hour maybe :)
20:27:26 <dougwig> jump
20:27:28 <sbalukoff> jump!
20:27:38 <mestery> lol
20:27:38 <mestery> :)
20:27:43 <dougwig> sbalukoff: this is CS.  "jump!" != "jump".
20:27:44 <xgerman> #startvote jump? jump
20:27:45 <johnsom> jump, jump, yeah
20:27:45 <openstack> Begin voting on: jump? Valid vote options are jump.
20:27:46 <openstack> Vote using '#vote OPTION'. Only your last vote counts.
20:27:48 <mestery> OK, I'll start doing that now and ping folks if I hit questions :)
20:27:59 <sbalukoff> #vote jump
20:28:01 <mestery> #vote jump HA!
20:28:02 <openstack> mestery: jump HA! is not a valid option. Valid options are jump.
20:28:03 <dougwig> #vote please not a vote
20:28:04 <openstack> dougwig: please not a vote is not a valid option. Valid options are jump.
20:28:04 <mestery> :P
20:28:10 <xgerman> #endvote
20:28:11 <mestery> damn openstack bot
20:28:11 <openstack> Voted on "jump?" Results are
20:28:12 <openstack> jump (1): sbalukoff
20:28:12 <johnsom> Cool, I will watch and do the launchpad steps.
20:28:13 * dougwig dies inside.
20:28:14 <pc-pothole> #vote how high
20:28:21 * mestery falls over
20:28:22 <sbalukoff> HAHA
20:28:31 <sbalukoff> Mine was the only vote that counted.
20:28:34 <mestery> lol
20:28:35 <sbalukoff> As it should be. ;)
20:28:43 <xgerman> well, the vote was rigged to begin with :-
20:28:45 <xgerman> )
20:28:55 <mestery> lol
20:29:05 <sbalukoff> xgerman: Oh, you're just now catching on about that? ;)
20:29:09 <dougwig> folks... settle down.  :)
20:29:33 <johnsom> At least no one linked Kris Kross or Van Halen youtube videos...
20:29:45 <sbalukoff> Heh! Ok... so... what's next?
20:29:49 <mestery> hahahahhahaha
20:29:51 <xgerman> where is rm_work when you need him?
20:30:20 <crc32> yea where is he?
20:30:55 <xgerman> #topic Brief progress reports
20:30:55 <johnsom> Next up on the agenda is either progress reports (kind of covered) or Octavia talk
20:31:16 <xgerman> I think mwang2 did some work on docs
20:31:25 <minwang2> yep
20:31:26 <johnsom> I have been focused on the release.  I have more work to do on VRRP.
20:31:43 <bana_k> I started working on the heat
20:31:53 <xgerman> yeah!!
20:31:54 <minwang2> need more review #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/224929/2
20:31:59 <sbalukoff> So, I've compiled a lot of notes about different ways to get Octavia working in devstack for a potential lab situation. I think I like a small variation on rm_work's script best for this. I intend to document this both in tree to get people started, and potentially separately specifically for the lab session if people think we need it.
20:32:05 <bana_k> at the same time waiting for inputs from heat guys
20:32:19 <sbalukoff> Part of the reason I bring this up is because I'm not sure what we have planned for the lab.
20:32:29 <xgerman> sbalukoff we will need it
20:32:37 <sbalukoff> And writing a good how-to doc here will depend somewhat on what we intend to do in the lab.
20:32:41 <xgerman> and we haven’t planned anything yet — it’s still like 30 days
20:32:53 <xgerman> I usually prepare talks the night before :-)
20:32:55 <johnsom> sbalukoff I was going to start a vm image.
20:33:04 <sbalukoff> johnsom: Oh, good!
20:33:20 <sbalukoff> I heard something about someone distributing USB sticks with said image on it as well? Is that happening?
20:33:33 <xgerman> well, we still need a sponsor for the usb sticks
20:33:45 <xgerman> (see #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Octavia/Weekly_Meeting_Agenda#Agenda)
20:33:45 <johnsom> It seems previous labs have used vmware images.  I assume with player.  So that is the direction I am heading
20:33:54 <sbalukoff> johnsom: Also, do you have any specifics on what we might want to do in the lab with that image?
20:34:08 <xgerman> install it on people’s laptops
20:34:12 <crc32> I can contribute a baremetak server from a forgotten test account.
20:34:12 <xgerman> make them create lbs
20:34:16 <xgerman> look at logs
20:34:19 <xgerman> troubleshoot
20:34:21 <johnsom> sbalukoff I have got as far as "setup Octavia"
20:34:28 <johnsom> So, we need to hammer that out.
20:35:04 <sbalukoff> Heh! Ok, let's touch base outside the meeting then to come up with a plan. I figure a lab is a lot like a live demo-- you want to have a backup presentation in case things go sideways as a fall back in any case.
20:35:14 <johnsom> I'm going to put the lbaas talk up on google docs.  If you want I can setup a document for the lab too
20:35:27 <sbalukoff> johnsom: that would be great!
20:35:39 <xgerman> most important for a lab is step by step instructions people can do and then we walk around and help if they bet stuck
20:35:44 <johnsom> Ok, I'll put some links in the channel later today
20:35:58 <sbalukoff> xgerman: Agreed.
20:36:16 <xgerman> yeah, I did my fair share of labs in the day ;-)
20:36:33 <sbalukoff> johnsom: I appreciate it.
20:37:31 <xgerman> ok, trevorv any progress on containers?
20:37:54 <sbalukoff> Beyond that I do want to report that we've got some stuff in the works which is likely to make it onto the Mitaka development cycle. I'm working internally with teams here to refine that before we present it to y'all... but you can probably anticipate hearing about it in the next couple weeks.
20:38:12 <xgerman> sbalukoff cool!!
20:38:26 <sbalukoff> This is mostly around heat integration and moving forward with an active-active design... and getting more people to help review existing code and work toward greater stability.
20:38:41 <xgerman> all good stuff!!
20:38:44 <sbalukoff> Yep!
20:38:47 <xgerman> stability - that is awesome
20:39:03 <sbalukoff> That's it for me for now.
20:39:04 <johnsom> sbalukoff Until we see code, it doesn't exist.  Grin, just had to throw that back at ya
20:39:28 <xgerman> I think we covered the Octavia talk
20:39:32 <xgerman> so next up
20:39:38 <sbalukoff> johnsom: Oh yes! and I've been throwing that in the face of these IBM devs who have never done anything public OpenStack related before.
20:39:47 <xgerman> #topic Open Discussion
20:39:48 <sbalukoff> johnsom: You know me, I flip shit in all directions. ;)
20:39:54 <minwang2> the following patches need to be reviwed  #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/226599/ #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/LBaaS/HowToRun, #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/215359/
20:39:55 <johnsom> hahaha
20:39:56 <Santoshs> I have following query : Is L7 capability is targeted  for Liberty (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/148232/)? If it is targeted  for Liberty corresponding changes could be done for  Vendor(NetScaler) Driver.
20:40:17 <xgerman> Santos should be M
20:40:21 <Santoshs> Seems it is targeted for Mitaka?
20:40:27 <Santoshs> Thanks
20:40:33 <xgerman> yep, but early M
20:41:02 <Santoshs> and will backport to liberty?
20:41:10 <xgerman> not sure yet
20:41:14 <sbalukoff> Yep. Work is close to compete on that for neutron-lbaas. And it shouldn't be hard to replicate in Octavia. (If nobody else tackles that before me, I'll probably get to it once the documentation and stuff for the talk is sorted.)
20:41:43 <sbalukoff> Yes, no decision on a back-port just yet.
20:42:00 <xgerman> I think we will decide once the code is in
20:42:16 <xgerman> dougwig would that be ok?
20:42:33 <xgerman> or is their a rule we can’t back port since it will affect vendors
20:43:08 <dougwig> i don't think it'll backport to liberty no matter what (l7, right?)  i've never seen a feature backported to stable.
20:43:30 <sbalukoff> dougwig: L7, yes.
20:43:30 <sbalukoff> er... correct
20:43:40 <xgerman> so that’s settled
20:44:13 <sbalukoff> Santoshs: I think most of the operators here are likely to go with a pre-release of the "M" version of neutron-lbaas and Octavia if they decide they need L7 badly enough. (We do!)
20:45:06 <Santoshs> Pre-release of M version??
20:45:17 <xgerman> well, master
20:45:23 <xgerman> or M-1
20:45:26 <Santoshs> k
20:45:41 <xgerman> the packagers will cut releases at the Milstones
20:45:58 <xgerman> so if we get it in early it will be in M1
20:46:02 <xgerman> M2...
20:46:03 <sbalukoff> And operators may choose to temporarily fork to get certain features.
20:46:18 <sbalukoff> Right. I'm hoping to get it in early. :)
20:46:42 <Santoshs> It could be assumed as some L + master version
20:46:52 <sbalukoff> Santoshs: Right.
20:47:01 <Santoshs> But not L
20:47:20 <sbalukoff> That is almost certainly the case.
20:47:33 <sbalukoff> In any case, the code has to land first. :)
20:47:39 <xgerman> +1
20:48:23 <xgerman> Lastly, sbalukoff / blallau — you said we had more EMEA based people for whom that time is to late
20:48:35 <xgerman> any input if we need to move the meeting time
20:48:43 <xgerman> also SantoshS
20:49:09 <xgerman> trying to gather if there is a need
20:49:17 <Santoshs> It would be great if it is earlier
20:49:21 <sbalukoff> The IBM teams I'm working with have set up an internal meeting on Thursdays at 16:00UTC. So if we were to move the meeting time, going earlier in the day would be better.
20:49:48 <sbalukoff> Though, I have not yet gotten a solid commitment to attend these IRC meetings from that team yet.
20:49:51 <rm_work> o/
20:49:56 <sbalukoff> So, I'm not sure what to tell you.
20:50:06 <xgerman> ok, blallau?
20:50:39 <Santoshs> I would like to be regular attendee if it is earlier
20:50:42 <rm_work> sorry, worked 17 hours yesterday, just woke up <_<
20:50:53 <xgerman> rm_work: no problem
20:51:00 <sbalukoff> rm_work: Don't worry, I voted for you.
20:51:08 <rm_work> sbalukoff: glad you like my script; xgerman: sorry i couldn't link contextually relevant youtube videos earlier :P
20:51:21 <rm_work> heh
20:51:22 <xgerman> no worries
20:51:46 <blallau> ok
20:51:59 <xgerman> earlier better for you?
20:52:11 <blallau> yes thanks
20:52:31 <xgerman> ok, I will propose some new time to the ML
20:52:39 <sbalukoff> For my own sake: please no earlier than 16:00 UTC!
20:52:50 <sbalukoff> I am the polar opposite of a morning person.
20:52:59 <xgerman> :-)
20:53:17 <rm_work> ... same
20:53:27 <rm_work> if that weren't obvious
20:54:34 <xgerman> yeah, we need to find a balance + the meeting channels need to be available (need to sync with dougwig how to figure that one out)
20:54:46 <sbalukoff> Ok.
20:55:20 <xgerman> anything else?
20:56:11 <xgerman> #endmeeting