17:00:04 <johnsom> #startmeeting Octavia 17:00:05 <openstack> Meeting started Wed Aug 2 17:00:04 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is johnsom. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:06 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:08 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia' 17:00:12 <johnsom> Hi folks 17:00:22 <jniesz> Hi 17:00:47 <rm_mobile> o/ 17:00:52 <johnsom> I'm going to get things rolling while folks show up. Lots of announcements today 17:00:53 <johnsom> #topic Announcements 17:00:58 <JudeC> o/ 17:01:05 <johnsom> PTL nominations are open 17:01:11 <johnsom> #link https://governance.openstack.org/election/ 17:01:26 <gans> o/ 17:01:31 <johnsom> See the above link for information on the nomination process. 17:01:59 <johnsom> The queens PTG is September 11-15th in Denver. 17:02:06 <johnsom> #link https://www.openstack.org/ptg 17:02:13 <rm_mobile> I nominate johnsom! 17:02:20 <johnsom> I have setup a planning etherpad here: 17:02:27 <johnsom> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/octavia-ptg-queens 17:02:39 <johnsom> rm_mobile Well, I think you *can* do that 17:02:54 <xgerman_> o/ 17:03:15 <johnsom> Though I don't have info from my employer yet on whether they will support me in another round. 17:04:07 <johnsom> For the PTG, please sign up on the etherpad if you will be attending. The foundation is trying to pick room sizes for teams and would like an estimate of the folks that will be in the Octavia room. 17:04:27 <johnsom> Also, if you have other topics we should discuss, please feel free to add it to the list. 17:05:16 <johnsom> Our next milestone is the RC1 release scheduled for the week of August 7th. 17:05:23 <johnsom> #link https://releases.openstack.org/pike/schedule.html 17:06:04 <johnsom> We should strive to have any critical bugs in by then if we can. 17:06:38 <johnsom> Also, in case you missed the announcements, voting for sessions in Sydney has started. 17:06:48 <johnsom> #link https://www.openstack.org/summit/sydney-2017/vote-for-speakers 17:06:59 <johnsom> Vote early, vote often... 17:07:32 <johnsom> Even if you aren't going, you can vote for sessions you are interested in watching on YouTube after the summit. 17:08:29 <johnsom> We did release Pike-3 last week, so we are on track with the release schedule. 17:08:52 <johnsom> Also of note, I have marked us complete for one of the two community goals for queens: 17:08:56 <xgerman_> I did some OSA stuff: 17:09:14 <johnsom> #link https://governance.openstack.org/tc/goals/queens/policy-in-code.html#octavia 17:09:29 <xgerman_> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/484440/ 17:09:30 <johnsom> Any other announcements? 17:09:41 <xgerman_> Enabling our V2 API in there 17:09:44 <xgerman_> please comment 17:10:03 <xgerman_> and then the terraform provider for LBaaS had issues: https://github.com/xgerman/terraform-provider-openstack/tree/LBaaS_V2_Timeouts 17:10:20 <xgerman_> in case somebody is using that stuff ;-) 17:10:45 <johnsom> #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review 17:11:03 <johnsom> xgerman_ Cool stuff getting the v2 API setup as an option for OSA 17:11:37 <johnsom> What was up with the timeouts? Not waiting long enough for nova to boot? 17:11:42 <jniesz> os the default option is to have neutron pass through to the octavia v2 api? 17:11:54 <xgerman_> they are just crazy — amde them more sane 17:12:13 <rm_mobile> No 17:12:26 <xgerman_> I assumed standalone.. 17:12:49 <johnsom> jniesz The proxy plugin for neutron hasn't merged yet and could use some reviews: 17:12:50 <johnsom> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/418530/ 17:13:47 <johnsom> Yeah, standalone makes sense for the octavia role. The proxy option should be part of neutron or neutron-lbaas role I would think. 17:14:48 <xgerman_> they all need to play nice together 17:15:11 <xgerman_> since I wanted to introduce that change I ahven;t done the full swoop 17:15:21 <johnsom> I was out for a family reunion for a couple of days, so not a lot of progress to report other than the Pike-3 release and some reviews. 17:16:01 <johnsom> I'm hoping to get back to the failover API patch this week. Also still have some docs migration patches to do, most notably, neutron-lbaas. 17:16:47 <johnsom> I will also do a bug scrub today/tomorrow to make sure we have those cleaned up for Pike. We made a bunch of progress 17:16:57 <johnsom> Any other updates from folks? 17:17:13 <johnsom> I know Jude has started on our tempest plugin, yeah! 17:17:36 <JudeC> Yep its coming along 17:17:51 <jniesz> johnsom how close do you think we are with the flavor spec getting merged? 17:17:52 <johnsom> Cool, I hope to have a look soon. 17:18:16 <JudeC> Much appreciated :) 17:18:32 <johnsom> jniesz I think it is in good shape. We need to get some reviews logged on this revision. 17:18:45 <jniesz> yea, I saw you made the fixes 17:19:37 <johnsom> Yeah, really it is just waiting on getting some reviews 17:19:43 <johnsom> (there are none at the moment) 17:20:07 <johnsom> Remember, everyone can and should review. It's not just up to the cores.... 17:20:18 <xgerman_> +1 17:20:35 <rm_work> ah speaking of: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/489015/ 17:20:58 <rm_work> that is a really annoying one and would love to get some reviews/testing on that 17:21:20 <rm_work> ah, i see it needs a unit test :P 17:21:34 <rm_work> k i'll do that ASAP 17:21:49 <johnsom> Yeah, we were looking at that yesterday. I think it's a good fix, needs a unit test, but should help the member status be super accurate. 17:22:16 <johnsom> #topic Mascot 17:22:33 <rm_work> +1 17:22:35 <johnsom> So the artists came back after our request to make the number of feathers eight 17:22:36 <rm_work> I like it 17:22:45 <johnsom> #link https://usercontent.irccloud-cdn.com/file/6S5klrGB/peacock.png 17:23:05 <johnsom> Any additional comments or can I lock this in with the foundation? 17:23:10 <sanfern> I like it too 17:23:15 <gans> +1 17:23:17 <johnsom> I think we are good to go myself 17:23:25 <jniesz> looks a lot better 17:23:27 <jniesz> +1 17:24:13 <johnsom> Ok, unless I hear some negative feedback, I will e-mail the foundation that we are happy with this version. 17:24:18 <xgerman_> +1 17:24:26 <xgerman_> we all need stickers ;-) 17:25:05 <johnsom> Excellent. Yeah, we should be able to have stickers for the PTG and Sydney. 17:25:40 <johnsom> #topic Open Discussion 17:25:51 <johnsom> Ok, any other topics for today? 17:26:17 <johnsom> I would really appreciate some reviews this week. We have L3 Act/Act spec and flavors spec open still. 17:26:35 <xgerman_> and I am trying to get the OSA people to do reviews… 17:26:39 <johnsom> #link https://review.openstack.org/453005 17:26:47 <johnsom> #link https://review.openstack.org/392485 17:26:49 <xgerman_> so if you have friends over there… 17:27:15 <johnsom> Yeah, those interested in Ansible for Octavia, those are good patches to review 17:27:34 <jniesz> xgerman_ we have core here on OSA 17:27:41 <jniesz> I can reach out 17:28:19 <xgerman_> thx - I will mention patches in their meeting tomorrow. 17:28:29 <xgerman_> as well 17:28:50 <xgerman_> 2nd OSA patch: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/483520/ 17:29:33 <rm_work> what about the openstacksdk reviews 17:29:37 <rm_work> did anything happen there? 17:30:02 <johnsom> Very good question. 17:30:12 <johnsom> So, no, no one has reviewed any of those yet. 17:30:28 <johnsom> I plan to send an e-mail out on the dev list asking some questions about that. 17:30:45 <rm_work> maybe WE are supposed to? 17:30:55 <rm_work> and if we +1 they rubber-stamp? 17:31:02 <rm_work> since they prolly don't know much about octavia 17:31:04 <johnsom> I see they did a pypi release not too long ago, but they are not using the OpenStack release team, so I'm really not sure what the story is with that project. 17:31:29 <johnsom> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/python-openstacksdk+status:open 17:31:37 <johnsom> Yeah, +1's will probably help. 17:31:58 <johnsom> We are basically the top set of patches there. 17:32:11 <johnsom> I have yet to do quota, but everything else is implemented. 17:34:10 <johnsom> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/python-openstacksdk+status:open+topic:%255Eoctavia.* 17:34:16 <johnsom> There we go, better list 17:34:44 <rm_work> ah, we also need stats in the octavia client still, right? 17:34:47 <johnsom> Back story here, others started these patches, but did not finish. I have gone through and finished them. 17:34:48 <rm_work> if anyone is bored :P 17:35:01 <johnsom> This is the python SDK 17:35:19 <johnsom> Yeah, I think stats and status tree are still missing, as well as integrating the quota commands 17:35:37 <johnsom> My plan is to use this SDK for the backend of the octavia dashboard (horizon) 17:37:13 <johnsom> Any other topics for today? 17:37:33 <xgerman_> do we need to corrdinate with Neutron fort lbaasv2 17:37:46 <xgerman_> I think for the proxy we might need to file a FFE? 17:38:29 <johnsom> Well, it's our project, but we should have sent out a FFE e-mail already if we thought we were going to get it into Pike. 17:39:06 <rm_work> ah yeah i didn't know if we would land it in Pike 17:39:17 <rm_work> though I don't see a problem, it's a NEW thing 17:39:24 <rm_work> it can't break anyone right? :P 17:39:34 <johnsom> Famous last words... 17:39:54 <xgerman_> ok, if we don’t have the proxy our depreciation gets mices up but we can’t do that anyway 17:40:01 <xgerman_> mixed 17:40:18 <xgerman_> and also with neutron client going away things get messy when it comes to support 17:40:36 <johnsom> Yeah, I think we have to wait for providers before we start the deprecation clock. I think queens will be when neutron-lbaas deprecation is announced. 17:40:46 <rm_work> yeah i guess we can try 17:40:56 <rm_work> did you touch it since my last comments xgerman_? 17:41:00 <rm_work> wasn't sure 17:41:06 <xgerman_> I rebased 17:41:53 <johnsom> I added the bug to it for tracking 17:41:55 <xgerman_> your comment was cryptic so I ignored it ;-) 17:41:59 <rm_work> err lol 17:42:48 <johnsom> So, I'm not really feeling the need to rush this into Pike. I think we can do it at the start of Queens IMO. Open for discussion... 17:43:15 <xgerman_> what we need to do is figure out if the delay makes us having to write an openstack client plugin for lbaasv2 17:43:53 <johnsom> I don't really follow how the proxy plugin helps that. 17:44:18 <johnsom> Did Kevin announce they are pulling the client code out? I haven't seen that. 17:44:48 <xgerman_> it says deprecated every time I run it 17:45:17 <xgerman_> the plan was because of the proxy plugin and the openstack client that we don’t need an lbaasv2 openstack plugin 17:45:20 <johnsom> Yes, but I don't think there is a hard end date on that 17:45:55 <xgerman_> yeah, as I said it gets messy 17:46:02 <johnsom> I will ping Kevin just to make sure it's not getting pulled out of the code any time soon. 17:46:30 <xgerman_> yeah, if we can save having to write code by announcing deprecation earlier I am all for it 17:46:31 <johnsom> Yeah, lots of things with neutron-lbaas are messy.... 17:47:11 <johnsom> There is no support on either side to add neutron-lbaas commands to OSC. That just isn't going to happen. 17:47:59 <rm_work> ummm what prevents the existing client from "working" with neutron-lbaas, more or less? 17:48:02 <johnsom> The plan has always been to continue to use the neutron client until all of the projects are migrated and the split is complete 17:48:11 <johnsom> rm_work Nothing 17:48:14 <rm_work> soooo 17:48:17 <rm_work> I don't even see a problem 17:48:23 <rm_work> let's verify we can make that client work 17:48:27 <rm_work> and... we've got one 17:48:32 <johnsom> Yeah, me either 17:48:57 <johnsom> Yeah, the neutron client continues to work 17:49:15 <johnsom> Some of my testing scripts still use it. 17:49:25 <rm_work> well even if it is removed, people can use the openstack client for octavia to hit neutron-lbaas 17:49:40 <xgerman_> ok, we should say that somewhere 17:49:44 <johnsom> rm_work In theory yes. Has anyone tried it? 17:49:58 <rm_work> johnsom: erg you should fix that :P I have examples in mine of everything you'd need to replace i think 17:49:59 <rm_work> johnsom: that's what i'm saying, we need to just try it 17:50:00 <rm_work> and maybe there's a bug or two we can fix 17:50:28 <rm_work> ah like i know for neutron-lbaas for some reason member-subnet-id is required :/ 17:50:33 <rm_work> it should be optional 17:50:51 <johnsom> Ugh, debatable 17:51:02 <rm_work> technically anything is debatable 17:51:06 <johnsom> Right! 17:51:07 <xgerman_> +1 17:51:10 <rm_work> do both sides have merit? I don't think so :P 17:51:27 <johnsom> Hahaha, I know which side you are thinking of... 17:51:31 <rm_work> but we can debate 17:51:44 <xgerman_> We got bitten with deprecation V1->V2 so want to be super cautious this time around… 17:52:15 <johnsom> V1->V2 was handled very poorly, we are not doing that. 17:52:41 <rm_work> ok, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/489015/ has a unit test now 17:52:42 <xgerman_> that’s why I ask those questions ;-) 17:53:11 <johnsom> Any other topics today? 17:54:05 <johnsom> Alright, on to reviews! 17:54:08 <johnsom> #endmeeting