16:00:17 <gthiemonge> #startmeeting Octavia
16:00:17 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Wed Nov 13 16:00:17 2024 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is gthiemonge. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:17 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:17 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'octavia'
16:00:19 <gthiemonge> o/
16:00:35 <johnsom> o/
16:02:18 <tweining> o/
16:02:29 <gthiemonge> #topic Announcements
16:02:37 <gthiemonge> * 2023.1 unmaintained
16:03:01 <gthiemonge> FYI 2023.1 is now unmaintained, the patch merged yesterday
16:04:17 <gthiemonge> if you had open reviews on 2023.1, they are abandoned \o/
16:04:57 <gthiemonge> * 2025.1 Epoxy Release Schedule: Epoxy-1
16:05:03 <gthiemonge> it's already Epoxy-1
16:05:13 <gthiemonge> a first release patch was proposed for octavia-lib
16:05:22 <gthiemonge> (it only includes a change for the SGs on VIP ports)
16:05:46 <gthiemonge> of course we can have other releases of octavia-lib if needed
16:05:52 <gthiemonge> any other announcements?
16:08:28 <gthiemonge> #topic CI Status
16:08:36 <gthiemonge> I think we have nothing for this topic
16:08:44 <gthiemonge> I haven't noticed CI failures
16:09:04 <johnsom> FYI, tempest made a change that impacts certain response codes. This broke Designate
16:09:25 <johnsom> #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tempest/+/934515
16:09:48 <gthiemonge> ack
16:10:01 <johnsom> Also, the tempest-plugin repo never updated the hacking version, so would break with f-strings. I have posted a series of patches to update/fix that.
16:10:25 <gthiemonge> thanks johnsom
16:10:48 <gthiemonge> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia-tempest-plugin/+/934390
16:11:00 <johnsom> Yep, that one
16:11:24 <gthiemonge> the child patch can be merged too
16:11:32 <gthiemonge> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia-tempest-plugin/+/934392
16:12:42 <gthiemonge> #topic Brief progress reports / bugs needing review
16:12:55 <gthiemonge> I have a patch that fixes a missing GARP packet for UDP listeners in SINGLE LBs
16:13:03 <gthiemonge> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/933871
16:13:10 <johnsom> Aside from fixing a bunch of gate issues, the RBAC patches are ready to go.
16:13:23 <johnsom> I am also hoping to pivot back to SRIOV for members.
16:15:20 <tweining> https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/octavia/+/934638 i wanted to highlight this change (not mine). a new option to automatically failover on error (no bugreport or changelog yet)
16:15:50 <tweining> IDK what to think of it
16:16:20 <johnsom> Hmm, I have not dug into this yet, but my first thought would be along those of Mohammed.
16:16:55 <johnsom> There is a reason we stop at an ERROR state after the initial failover attempt. We don't want to make a broken cloud worse by flooding retries
16:16:57 <gthiemonge> yeah this is a good point
16:17:48 <johnsom> This exact situation was a failure point in previous LB technologies in OpenStack.
16:22:02 <gthiemonge> can you add a comment in the review johnsom?
16:22:23 <johnsom> Yeah, I will try to get a review in on it.
16:23:39 <tweining> thanks
16:24:29 <gthiemonge> #topic Open Discussion
16:24:32 <gthiemonge> any other topics?
16:25:08 <johnsom> I don't think I have anything
16:25:11 <tweining> wait a sec. let me check last weeks notes
16:27:24 <tweining> did we decide who will take care of the abandon-old-patches task? the PTL? I just wanted to clarify that I am not looking into that ATM
16:28:19 <gthiemonge> I didn't have the time to look at my own old patches :/
16:28:39 <tweining> yeah, it is not that important
16:30:22 <tweining> nothing else from me
16:30:47 <tweining> or maybe one thing
16:31:04 <gthiemonge> I looked at some of my old tempest plugin patches, and some are still valid
16:31:20 <johnsom> ^^^ Yeah, I expect there is a lot of that
16:31:21 <gthiemonge> but sometimes I don't understand what I did
16:32:03 <tweining> since it is only the three of is in this meeting and we rarely discuss anything urgent here, could be consider changing this meeting to a bi-weekly schedule?
16:32:48 <gthiemonge> twice of week? /s
16:32:54 <gthiemonge> 'a'
16:34:12 <tweining> it is not something we need to decide now. just a suggestion.
16:34:26 <gthiemonge> having biweekly meetings would give a bad sign of health IMHO
16:35:56 <gthiemonge> even if folks cannot attend, they can get some updates from the logs (https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/octavia/2024/)
16:36:08 <johnsom> And I will probably get which week is which wrong
16:36:52 <tweining> ok, no problem
16:38:02 <gthiemonge> ok, I guess that's all for this week
16:38:10 <gthiemonge> have a good week folks
16:38:13 <gthiemonge> thank you!
16:38:16 <gthiemonge> #endmeeting