22:02:08 <danwent> #startmeeting
22:02:09 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jun 14 22:02:08 2011 UTC.  The chair is danwent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
22:02:10 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
22:02:11 <ryu_ishimoto> i'm here
22:02:18 <danwent> anyone we need to wait for?
22:02:38 <danwent> (i.e., does anyone know of someone who is coming for sure but is not here yet?)
22:03:01 <bmcconne> troy will likely turn back to his monitor at some point :)
22:03:14 <danwent> #topic project status
22:03:43 <danwent> #info dendrobates is beginning the process of applying for netstack to be an openstack incubation project
22:04:15 <SumitNaiksatam> Hello!
22:04:19 <danwent> I believe most of you saw this email, but we also switched from https://blueprints.launchpad.net/network-service to https://launchpad.net/quantum for quantum specific code
22:04:24 <ecarlin> hello
22:04:37 <danwent> if you have branches or bugs that are quantum specific, please move them to quantum.
22:05:10 <danwent> I also see melange code on the network-service page.  Troy, what is the long term plan for where this repo will live?
22:05:39 <danwent> (anyone at rackspace that is close enough to kick troy? :P)
22:05:42 <bmcconne> just got his attention
22:06:28 <danwent> ok, we'll come back to that.
22:06:41 <danwent> #topic quantum update
22:07:01 <danwent> we're continuing to do testing and bug finding on quantum.
22:07:08 <troytoman> just caught up. we are working on a plan to have melange live within the Nova project. it looks like we can make that work
22:07:28 <danwent> troytoman: great, thanks.  so eventually the branches in network-service will go away? (no rush)
22:08:05 <troytoman> yes. there are some issues with where the code lives and how we tie together running tests etc. I expect that will be settled within the week.
22:08:14 <troytoman> then it will move out of network service
22:08:24 <danwent> k, great
22:08:30 <danwent> on quantum: we're will have a plugin that works with KVM soon, though it may require a tweaked version of nova
22:08:52 <danwent> we're turning our focus more to how quantum will work with nova + melange.
22:09:04 <danwent> on the topic of nova, ryu, can you provide an update on the nova refactoring?
22:09:42 <danwent> (or anyone from midokura?)
22:10:03 <midodan> hi there
22:10:14 <midodan> i'll try to kick Ryu awake
22:10:22 <danwent> ah, i thought I saw him join just a bit ago
22:10:32 <ryu_ishimoto> yup i'm here, sorry
22:10:37 <jlm^> He is on channel.
22:10:42 <midodan> :)
22:10:59 <danwent> ryu, can you give a quick update?
22:11:18 <danwent> particularly with respect to the vif-plugging side of things.  We've had a couple questions on that from folks at Cisco as well.
22:11:44 <ryu_ishimoto> sure, that's also where we are struggling a bit with
22:11:57 <ryu_ishimoto> VIsh is here this week in Japan and we have been discussing how we should implmeent that part
22:12:21 <SumitNaiksatam> is this discussion being captured/documented somewhere?
22:12:22 <danwent> Ok.  would be great to see a BP, so we can provide feedback.
22:13:02 <midodan> yes, i agree.  there have been several conversations about this issue going on in separate forums.  we will write a doc and get some feedback.
22:13:22 <danwent> Great, thanks.  There's a lot of interest particularly around the flexibility of generating <interface> config for libvirt...
22:13:23 <SumitNaiksatam> much appreciated...as with everything else, sooner would be better :-)
22:13:45 <danwent> Ok, anything else on quantum?
22:13:46 <SumitNaiksatam> at least at a high level as to where the discussion is heading...
22:14:05 <midodan> danwent: you mentioned that there would soon be a version running with KVM
22:14:45 <midodan> how will that work?  with libvirt?  do you have a doc describing it?
22:14:47 <danwent> midodan: the quantum service will be the same regardless, I more meant that at least the OVS plugin will be able to work with KVM (this is really more of a libvirt thing)
22:15:02 <midodan> right right, that's the part i was wondering about, the ovs plugin
22:15:08 <danwent> This will require changes to nova in the vif-plugging area, which is what we were asking about.
22:15:36 <midodan> ok, we should have a discussion offline, perhaps later today, to sync up
22:15:47 <danwent> Code will be up.  At a high-level, its just using type="ethernet" instead of type="bridge" and making a couple ovs commands for setup/teardown
22:16:08 <danwent> Its just a hack now, to demonstrate the flexibility we would need from the nova refactoring of libvirt.
22:16:16 <ryu_ishimoto> danwent: right, that's how we implemented in our branch
22:16:19 <danwent> and to let people play with quantum with a single server KVM setup.
22:16:30 <danwent> ryu: yes, exactly
22:16:47 <midodan> ok, sounds good, thanks.
22:16:56 <ryu_ishimoto> danwent: ok let's keep the discussion going offline then.
22:17:03 <danwent> ryu: when you mention a branch, are you referring to the original branch discussed at the summit?
22:17:19 <ryu_ishimoto> danwent: no, the new branch, the one that's less disruptive
22:17:37 <ryu_ishimoto> danwent:  lp:~/midokura/nova/network-refactoring
22:17:51 <danwent> ryu: great, thanks.
22:18:00 <danwent> ok, anything else on quantum?
22:18:02 <ryu_ishimoto> but the old branch does the same thing in regards to libvirt interfaces
22:18:11 <RamD> kvm related is of our interest too.
22:18:40 <salv-orlando> on quantum API: I have implemented the changes proposed in last week's email
22:19:03 <danwent> RamD: yup.  you may want to do a similar hack with libvirt + the type="direct" to demonstrate the flexibility that you need, as I'm not sure the existing refactoring changes are sufficient.
22:19:20 <danwent> salv: can you quickly describe them?
22:19:39 <salv-orlando> 1) removing orchestration operation for PUT attachment
22:19:48 <danwent> ah, yes.  now I remember.  thanks.
22:19:55 <salv-orlando> 2) using detail action for retrieving list of resources attached to network
22:20:27 <danwent> Ok, does anyone want to give an update on melange or donabe?
22:20:29 <salv-orlando> changes are in a branch I'm using to fix a couple of bugs I spotted as well. Will propose for merge into trunk ASAP
22:20:45 <danwent> salv: awesome, great.
22:21:08 <salv-orlando> before moving to other projects, did we reach a consensus on the semantics of the attach operation?
22:21:29 <salv-orlando> I remember it was discussed two weeks ago, but I don't know whether we decided something
22:21:56 <danwent> I believe the semantics are basically of plugging a cable, or was there a more specific point that the discussion was focused on?
22:22:38 <salv-orlando> Sumit (if I'm not wrong) was proposing to remove the operation as it was beyond the scope of the quantum service
22:23:02 <salv-orlando> basically If I remember it correctly, it was responsibility of the compute node to "plug the cable"
22:23:24 <SumitNaiksatam> Salv: not I wasn't
22:23:25 <danwent> ah, i think the distinction here is a "logical plug" vs. the "hypervisor plug".
22:23:32 <salv-orlando> rigth
22:23:43 <danwent> I think we're clear on that now.
22:23:48 <danwent> Sumit?
22:24:04 <SumitNaiksatam> Yeah, I guess based on the discussion we had the other day
22:24:20 <danwent> Yup, we'll need to focus on the vif-plugging work in nova for that.
22:24:31 <salv-orlando> sweet, just wanted to make sure of that
22:24:38 <SumitNaiksatam> agreed
22:24:42 <danwent> salv: yes, thanks for bringing it up.
22:24:48 <danwent> #topic: open discussion
22:25:28 <danwent> speak now or hold you peace until next week :)
22:25:46 <danwent> #endmeeting