21:00:25 <danwent> #startmeeting quantum
21:00:26 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Jan 28 21:00:25 2013 UTC.  The chair is danwent. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
21:00:27 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
21:00:29 <danwent> nati_ueno: everything ok?
21:00:30 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'quantum'
21:00:44 <danwent> #info agenda: http://wiki.openstack.org/Network/Meetings
21:00:44 <zyluo> jo
21:00:44 <SumitNaiksatam> hi all!
21:00:49 <zyluo> hi
21:00:55 <alexpilotti> hi all
21:01:14 <nati_ueno> danwent Thanks going better
21:01:17 <danwent> #info we will be trying a slightly different format for the meeting, trying to get the quantum sub-team leads more involved.  we'll probably have to iterate a coupel times to get it right.
21:01:43 <danwent> #info Updated the Quantum Community Project page: http://wiki.openstack.org/QuantumStarterBugs
21:01:52 <danwent> any other announcements before we get things started?
21:02:14 <danwent> #topic quantum documentation
21:02:41 <danwent> do we believe we have filed doc bugs for all G-1 and G-2 items by now?
21:03:25 <danwent> #info we had some questions around what plugins where compatible with which nova virt layer configs, so I added this issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1104828
21:03:27 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1104828 in openstack-manuals "Q-admin: compatibility matrix for q-plugin vs. nova-virt " [High,Confirmed]
21:03:38 <danwent> I will likely be contacting you about this if you are a plugin maintainer
21:03:50 <markmcclain> danwent: this bug is too low https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1099574
21:03:54 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1099574 in openstack-manuals "Quantum DB migration" [Medium,Confirmed]
21:04:18 <danwent> markmcclain: ok, bumped to high
21:04:43 <danwent> markmcclain: i also got a question a few days ago about configuring metadata with grizzly, is there a doc issue tracking that?
21:05:17 <markmcclain> danwent: yes, https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1099573
21:05:18 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1099573 in openstack-manuals "Quantum Metadata Proxy should be documented" [Medium,Confirmed]
21:05:46 <danwent> markmcclain: ok, i'm marking everything we definitely need to do for grizzly as a high, but it seems like the docs people are marking them as medium :)
21:06:09 <danwent> markmcclain: you can email annegentle to get permissions to set the priorities of doc issues yourself if you need to do it frequently.
21:06:18 <danwent> i'll bump that one
21:06:27 <gongysh> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/metadata-non-routed
21:06:51 <gongysh> there is another BP for metadata, which should be implemented.
21:07:02 <danwent> salv-orlando: i saw you added the api docs bugs you promoised, thanks.  any idea why they don't show up here? https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-api-site/+bugs?field.tag=netconn-api
21:07:12 <markmcclain> gongysh: included a comment about that further down the agenda
21:07:13 <salv-orlando> missing tag
21:07:15 <danwent> gongysh: i think mark is talking about that later on the agenda
21:07:40 <danwent> salv-orlando: a, perfect.
21:07:51 <salv-orlando> danwent: fixed
21:08:18 <danwent> #info in the next three weeks, as we wrap up G-3, please make sure that as features merge, we add doc issues for them.  If its a community-wide feature, doc issue should be 'high'.
21:08:31 <danwent> salv-orlando: thanks, seeing them now.
21:08:39 <danwent> Ok, any other doc issues before we move on to G-3?
21:09:06 <danwent> #topic grizzly-3 status
21:09:46 <danwent> #info we're going to try and have a slightly different format here.  We'll go through the 5 community-wide 'high' issues, then give the sub-team leads a chance to comment on the status of any other blueprints.
21:10:03 <danwent> but first off, I wanted to give me regular warning, just so people aren't surprised.
21:10:28 <danwent> #info g-3 branch date is Feb 19th, 3 weeks away.
21:11:24 <danwent> #info all features must be in code review a week before the branch date (and even that isn't a guarantee of merging).  The goal here is to avoid a final rush of last minute reviews, were core devs are pressured to quickly review a ton of code, as this tends to lead to low standards
21:11:53 <danwent> #info for G-3, the only feature-freeze exceptions would be for community-wide 'high' priorities (no matter how important a feature is to you!)
21:12:09 <danwent> any questions concerns on these before we dive into the current 'high' issues?
21:12:38 <danwent> Multiple L3 + DHCP agents:
21:12:39 <danwent> dev: yong
21:12:40 <danwent> sub-team L3/IPAM/DHCP (markmcclain)
21:12:42 <danwent> spec: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-scheduler
21:12:43 <danwent> review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/18216/
21:12:44 <danwent> active core devs: garyk, salv-orlando, danwent
21:12:45 <danwent> status: ?
21:12:49 <danwent> gongysh, markmcclain status?
21:13:05 <danwent> i finally reviewed this last night, sorry for the LONG delay :)
21:13:13 <garyk> i am reviewing. still have to take a look at thelatest chnages. hopefully tomorrow
21:13:42 <gongysh> XML patches should be ok
21:13:50 <danwent> gongysh: yes, that's up next
21:14:13 <salv-orlando> I need to re-review
21:14:16 <gongysh> quantum scheduler has something to deal with.
21:14:25 <markmcclain> nothing additional to add on quantum-scheduler bp
21:14:44 <danwent> ok.  where do we expect to be on this blueprint by next week?
21:14:49 <gongysh> host, collection action, extension name.
21:15:09 <danwent> gongysh: sorry, don't understand
21:15:23 <gongysh> I have respond your comments in review.
21:15:34 <gongysh> I conclude three point from your comments.
21:15:41 <danwent> gongysh: ok, will take a look later today
21:16:23 <danwent> ok, so I expect we still think we'll be in review next week?
21:16:37 <gongysh> yes.
21:16:40 <danwent> what are our goals to achieve this week?  get key design questions cleared up?
21:17:02 <gongysh> I am updating the patches when I got comments.
21:17:27 <danwent> #info multi-agent blueprint is in feedback mode in review.  Expected to still be in review next week.
21:17:28 <gongysh> I hope so,  that depends on reviewers.
21:17:48 <danwent> #info goal is to clean up design questions and be to detailed code review and testing by next week
21:17:58 <danwent> (may be optimistic, but i'm an optimist :) )
21:18:13 <gongysh> the code can be tested now.
21:18:14 <danwent> XML for Quantum v2 API:
21:18:15 <danwent> dev: yong
21:18:16 <danwent> sub-team: API (salv-orlando)
21:18:18 <danwent> review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/19998/
21:18:19 <danwent> active core devs: markmcclain, garyk
21:18:19 <danwent> status: ?
21:18:33 <salv-orlando> Garyk approved.
21:18:37 <markmcclain> I need finish reviewing
21:18:39 <gongysh> it has passed garyk's test.
21:18:55 <garyk> Yup. tested and it worked. Yong solved all problems found
21:19:00 <gongysh> I have worked with him some time last week.
21:19:21 <garyk> salv-orlando: we need an extra +2 for approval.
21:19:22 <danwent> ok, sounds great.  I am not aware of any design issues still outstanding here, so it sounds like we expect this to merge fairly soon?
21:19:28 <salv-orlando> I just need to double check collections and handling of null values. Should be ok though since Gary has spent an awful lot of time on it.
21:19:58 <salv-orlando> This should be implemented for the next meeting
21:20:12 <danwent> #info xml API patch is further along in review, no major design issues.  Should be merged by next week.
21:20:17 <gongysh> salv-orlando: we have some test cases for it, nul, collections, etc.
21:20:26 <danwent> Security Groups (OVS plugin):
21:20:26 <danwent> dev: nachi
21:20:28 <danwent> sub-team: security groups / fw (arosen)
21:20:29 <danwent> review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/19436/14
21:20:30 <danwent> active core devs: arosen, amotoki, rkukura
21:20:31 <danwent> status: ?
21:21:05 <danwent> nati_ueno is at the hostital, may be slow to respond
21:21:15 <danwent> arosen, can you comment?
21:21:17 <nati_ueno> On review also blocked by nova bug
21:21:58 <danwent> nati_ueno: can you paste the nova bug that it is blocked on?  does that bug have active reviewers or do we need to identify them?
21:22:03 <nati_ueno> Akihiro looks almost ok for the patch
21:22:27 <arosen> nati_ueno:  patch looks pretty close to being good for me.
21:22:32 <danwent> https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1050433
21:22:35 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1050433 in nova "LibvirtBridgeDriver crashes when spawning an instance with NoopFirewallDriver" [High,In progress]
21:22:35 <arosen> I'll check it out again today
21:23:22 <danwent> nati_ueno: looks like daniel b has nova bug assigned, but i don't see a patch
21:23:27 <danwent> may be good to ping him
21:23:33 <nati_ueno> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/19126/
21:23:51 <nati_ueno> This is the review
21:24:05 <danwent> ah, its just not tagged with the bug-id
21:24:26 <nati_ueno> Yes I comented it on review
21:24:37 <danwent> I will update the bug to indicate that this is the fix.  That patch is stalled on some of the vif-plugging discussions we've been having on the ML, but i'm optimistic that that log jam may be opening up soon
21:24:58 <nati_ueno> I agree
21:25:14 <danwent> ok, any other concerns around the quantum side fo the patch?
21:25:22 <danwent> What are our goals for moving this forward in the next week?
21:25:45 <gongysh> problem is why this bug is blocking our patch?
21:25:48 <nati_ueno> I hope it merged in this week
21:26:07 <danwent> #info security group patch is blocked by quantum vif-plugging issue: https://bugs.launchpad.net/nova/+bug/1050433
21:26:08 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1050433 in nova "LibvirtBridgeDriver crashes when spawning an instance with NoopFirewallDriver" [High,In progress]
21:26:32 <nati_ueno> Yong we can't disable nova security group
21:26:41 <rkukura> One question on this review - are we trying to avoid sending notifications within transactions?
21:26:45 <danwent> #info seems possible to merge quantum OVS security groups this week, but relies on a nova change, so its unclear
21:27:30 <gongysh> if we use LibvirtOpenVswitchDriver, we can use that no firewall
21:28:02 <danwent> gongysh: nati_ueno's change requires IPtables, which requires hybrid driver for OVs, which is where the problem is
21:28:03 <nati_ueno> Yong it not working by the bug
21:28:17 <gongysh> ok.
21:28:26 <danwent> rkukura: not sure, someone more familiar with the change would need to comment
21:28:55 <gongysh> but I think ovs bridge is depending on open flow.
21:29:15 <gongysh> we can discard the hybrid driver now.
21:29:27 <nati_ueno> Rkukura I looks it should be. I will check the code
21:29:44 <danwent> LBaaS Agent-based Plugin:
21:29:45 <danwent> dev: Ilya + enikanorov
21:29:46 <danwent> sub-team: lbaas (danwent)
21:29:47 <danwent> spec: http://wiki.openstack.org/Quantum/LBaaS/Agent
21:29:48 <danwent> reviews: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20225/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20579/
21:29:49 <mestery> Agree with gongysh here.
21:29:49 <danwent> active core reviewers: garyk and ??
21:30:26 <enikanorov> went on review today and received a couple of comments
21:30:27 <salv-orlando> I won't be able to review before Friday
21:30:36 <garyk> there is a ton of code duplication here. an extra set of eyes would be very helpful
21:30:37 <danwent> enikanorov: yup, saw that
21:30:51 <danwent> garyk: interesting, dup with what parts of the code?
21:30:54 <danwent> existing code?
21:31:08 <danwent> (or within the patch itself?)
21:31:19 <garyk> danwent: there are the lbaas classes. yup within the pacth set
21:31:31 <danwent> garyk: got it
21:31:34 <garyk> i think that i added comments about this
21:31:46 <danwent> ok, so salv-orlando said he can be the second core dev
21:31:51 <danwent> I will update the agenda for next time
21:31:55 <garyk> maybe i am missing something (i am not the sharpest tool in the shed at the moment)
21:32:16 <enikanorov> I hope we discuss some lbaas stuff at the end of the meeting (related to one of these reviews)
21:32:44 <danwent> enikanorov: ok, sounds good.  we can actually discuss it in a few mins during the "sub-teams" section
21:33:21 <enikanorov> well. I've wrote an email about the concern of having conf-based dev management
21:33:25 <danwent> #info lbaas agent driver posted for review ( https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20225/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/20579/ ).  garyk and salv-orlando will be core devs (more welcomed!)
21:33:40 <enikanorov> since it's incompatible with typical haproxy use case
21:34:00 <enikanorov> youcef has proposed a solution, we're evaluating it now
21:34:03 <danwent> enikanorov: ok
21:34:14 <danwent> HAProxy driver for Agent-based Plugin:
21:34:14 <danwent> dev: oleg
21:34:16 <danwent> sub-team: lbaas (danwent)
21:34:17 <danwent> spec: http://wiki.openstack.org/Quantum/LBaaS/HAProxyDriver
21:34:18 <danwent> review: (none yet. expected by next week?)
21:34:19 <danwent> anticipated core reviewers?
21:34:23 <danwent> enikanorov: are you contact for this as well?
21:34:41 <enikanorov> haproxy driver is expected on review at the end of the week
21:35:03 <danwent> #info lbaas HA proxy driver review expected by end of this week
21:35:28 <danwent> ok, before we move on to to the sub-team reports, there's one other comment that I meant to make above but forgot.
21:36:02 <danwent> as of today, we have 28 unmerged blueprints, which needs to be at 0 in three weeks through some combination of merging blueprints and dropping blueprints from the milestone.
21:36:26 <gongysh> so many!
21:36:28 <danwent> by tomorrow, I want to be under unmerged 25 blueprints, and by a week from now, under 15 unmerged blueprints.
21:37:06 <gongysh> by merging, u mean change two into one magically?
21:37:08 <danwent> so, my current target is that there are several blueprints that are 'not started', that will be booted out of the G-3 release in the next few days (i've already updated the whiteboards to warn the developers)
21:37:25 <danwent> gongysh: haha, no i meant, by merging the code into the repo (i.e., implementing it).
21:37:38 <gongysh> got it.
21:37:45 <danwent> gongysh: though that's a clever trick :)
21:38:28 <danwent> Ok, so sub-team leads, please chime in at this point with additional items you think need team updates (none required).
21:38:47 <danwent> also, if there are active technical discussions going on the ML around items in your sub-team, please highlight those
21:38:57 <danwent> let's start with API.  anything salv-orlando ?
21:39:14 <danwent> I see:
21:39:14 <salv-orlando> I am the approver for 4 blueprints.
21:39:15 <danwent> - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-api-wadl
21:39:16 <danwent> - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/support-pagination-in-api-v2
21:39:17 <danwent> - https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/load-plugin-supported-extensions
21:39:23 <danwent> beyond what we talked about above
21:39:25 <salv-orlando> thanks for pasting the list before me.
21:39:35 <danwent> salv-orlando: sorry to step on your toes!
21:39:36 <salv-orlando> We already said XML is in good shape
21:39:55 <salv-orlando> Pagination is too in good shape, but I need another core there.
21:40:03 <salv-orlando> I'm the only one reviewing it so far.
21:40:11 <zyluo> quantum-api-wadl expected to send review by this week
21:40:17 <markmcclain> I'll take a look at pagination
21:40:20 <danwent> #help need another core dev on https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/support-pagination-in-api-v2
21:40:23 <salv-orlando> zyluo: was going to ping you about that.
21:40:29 <danwent> #info markmcclain will help on pagination
21:40:46 <salv-orlando> Once we see the code for quantum-api-wadl (some is already on review) we can make a call there
21:40:55 <salv-orlando> the last one, it's borderline at the moment.
21:41:01 <salv-orlando> I need an update from the assignee.
21:41:18 <danwent> salv-orlando: agreed.  I'll update the BP suggesting we bump it.  its not critical
21:41:19 <salv-orlando> Without it, it's probably going to be booted out next week. (also because it's not really critcial)
21:41:24 <danwent> :)
21:41:34 <danwent> ok, anything else on API?
21:41:37 <nati_ueno> Holizon support also needed for pagenation
21:42:01 <danwent> nati_ueno: is there a BP filed?
21:42:04 <salv-orlando> nati_ueno: that is desirable, but not mandatory
21:42:07 <danwent> i assume this is not required?
21:42:09 <danwent> yeah, great
21:42:14 <salv-orlando> API works as before
21:42:33 <salv-orlando> if you don't ask for pagination. Otherwise we would have broken bw compatibility :)
21:42:47 <nati_ueno> There wa bug when glance support pagenation
21:42:47 <danwent> ok, time is getting late, so let's keep moving to updates from mark's subteam(s)
21:43:19 <danwent> markmcclain: probalby don't need to go through all of them, just highlight anything you see as important for the community to have an update on.  including active technical discussions / design reviews.
21:43:39 <markmcclain> metadata on non-routed networks will be available this week
21:43:58 <danwent> btw, please use info tags for announcements so they are capture in notes
21:44:07 <danwent> #info metadata on non-routed networks will be available this week
21:44:20 <nati_ueno> The defaut limit was 20 and holizon didn't support pagenation. Then some image disapered from horizon
21:44:46 <markmcclain> oops… any rate moved a few BPs out of Grizzly and will finish moving more out that aren't started or need design decisions
21:45:05 <danwent> markmcclain: ok, thanks
21:45:34 <alexxu> nati_ueno, we disable pagination by default, so it will be ok
21:45:37 <danwent> also see l3plugin mentioned on the agenda: Migrate L3 from mixin to plugin: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/quantum-l3-routing-plugin
21:46:03 <nati_ueno> Alexxu it sounds good! Thans
21:46:04 <markmcclain> yeah.. folks should look at the mailing for the discussion
21:46:09 <mestery> danwent: Bob should be posting that review tomorrow, as far as I know.
21:46:09 <salv-orlando> nati_ueno: you're welcome to look at the patch on gerrit. This will allow you to see whether the problem occurs or not
21:46:16 <danwent> i think there is a design here to review.  I think people generally agree this is the right direction, but what is unclear is whether this can be done non-disruptively for G-3
21:46:25 <bobmel> I have code for that one. Planned to upload for review this week
21:46:40 <danwent> mestery: great.  I think seeing the code change is probably the only way to answer the "how disruptive" question, so yeah, I think that's the next step
21:46:46 <nati_ueno> Salvatore: ok I will review it
21:47:00 <danwent> #info expect review for l3-plugin change later this week.
21:47:01 <mestery> danwent: Yes, I asked Bob to post the review.
21:47:28 <danwent> ok, we're running late, any other important sub-team updates about core quantum?
21:47:40 <danwent> (we'll still have our regular agenda items after this)
21:47:58 <danwent> I wanted to make sure people saw this post by the Arista folks: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/quantum/+spec/ovsplugin-hardware-devices
21:48:01 <salv-orlando> bobmel design was not very disruptive. (assuming we're talking about the one I reviewed)
21:48:07 <danwent> There is an active ML discussion on it.
21:48:49 <danwent> #info I also think we are wrapping up our long-thread on vif-plugging on the ML.  Would be good to have people read the conclusions, as it will likely result in mandatory plugin changes in H to simplify nova.
21:48:50 <bobmel> No, I've tried to make it very incremental
21:48:56 <rkukura> are there plans to or need to do port security extension for linuxbridge and openvswitch?
21:49:05 <mestery> danwent: I saw that thread, seems as if there may be some opportunity for the Arista stuff to fit in nicely with thee ML2 plugin.
21:49:36 <danwent> mestery: yes, that is rkukura's impression as well, so hopefully it will work out.
21:49:51 <mestery> danwent rkukura: great!
21:49:59 <danwent> rkukura: my impression was that libvirt spoof prevention was sufficient
21:50:40 <danwent> enikanorov: is there more discussion needed on device management and LBaaS, or is current ML thread sufficient?
21:51:06 <danwent> (as in, do we need to talk about this at the team meeting, or is ML discussion sufficient?)
21:51:09 <enikanorov> well, I'd like to hear some more opinions or more detailed opinions
21:51:24 <enikanorov> if we have time now, then it'd be good
21:51:27 <danwent> Ok.  I'm working through my backlog of design reviews for quantum.
21:51:41 <danwent> enikanorov: unfortunately we don't, so we'll just have to live with encouraging people to chime in the ML
21:51:47 <danwent> #topic python-quantumclient
21:52:03 <rkukura> danwent: I'm just wondering if these plugins need to implement the API extension?
21:52:05 <danwent> thanks to markmcclain for creating the 3.0.0 release target on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/python-quantumclient/+milestone/3.0.0
21:52:43 <danwent> rkukura: ah, ok.
21:53:01 <danwent> #info thanks to markmcclain for creating the 3.0.0 release target on launchpad: https://launchpad.net/python-quantumclient/+milestone/3.0.0
21:53:26 <danwent> markmcclain, gongysh, please make sure priorities are set for those items.
21:53:45 <danwent> if anyone else is expecting a client change to make grizzly, please make sure it is targeted at this release.
21:53:58 <danwent> #topic quantum stable
21:54:14 <danwent> garyk: how are we looking for openstack stable folsom release in a few days?
21:54:27 <nati_ueno> Sorry I should go thanks bye
21:54:33 <garyk> danwent: we are looking good. i am backporting the port satus fixes (unless people object).
21:54:36 <danwent> nati_ueno: bye!
21:54:42 <garyk> nati_ueno: fo well and feel better
21:55:01 <danwent> ok, please ping the core team directly if additional urgent fixes are needed to make it in the stable drop.
21:55:06 <danwent> anything else on stable?
21:55:33 <danwent> #topic quantum system test
21:56:02 <danwent> two blueprints for system test, but neither assigned to grizzly.  are they active? https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/quantum-basic-api
21:56:02 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/quantum-extended-api
21:56:11 <mlavalle> danwent: I am developing the code for the first BP
21:56:22 <mlavalle> achieving good progress
21:56:40 <danwent> mlavalle: ok, great.  do tempest blueprints not need to be assigned to a release?  perhaps not, since it is just system test.
21:57:10 <danwent> #info making good progress on tempest + quantum work: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/tempest/+spec/quantum-basic-api
21:57:22 <mlavalle> danwent: my impression they don't have to. But I will check with Jay on the meeting on Thursday and report back to you
21:57:28 <danwent> mlavalle: thanks.
21:57:35 <danwent> #topic Quantum + Horizon
21:57:52 <danwent> amotoki and nachi are both out, so i'll just paste amotoki's summary
21:58:01 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/nova-net-quantum-abstraction (I will upload a patch this Tuesday)
21:58:01 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-floating-ip (I will upload a patch this Tuesday)
21:58:03 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-network-topology
21:58:04 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-vnic-ordering (Nachi's colleagues has a good progres)
21:58:05 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-security-group (I started)
21:58:06 <danwent> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/horizon/+spec/quantum-lbaas
21:58:23 <danwent> SumitNaiksatam: any update on lbaas work?
21:58:55 <danwent> #topic open discussion
21:59:03 <danwent> ok, two minutes to spare (phew!)
21:59:08 <danwent> any open discussion topics?
21:59:11 <mlavalle> danwent: you mentioned last week the need to improve the developers documentation. If we are not achieving any progress there, I want to take ownership of it. Here's what I propose:
21:59:28 <danwent> mlavalle: by all means!
21:59:30 <mlavalle> danwent: I want to give a presentation during the Summit on Quantum internals and how to hack it. I will develop the presentation and the documentation together
21:59:46 <mlavalle> danwent: Two caveats though. You won'y see much progress from today until G-3. I want to deliver as much of the tempest tests as possible
22:00:12 <SumitNaiksatam> danwent: regarding LBaaS, KC is making progress
22:00:16 <mlavalle> for G3. After that, I will devote time the the Summit presentation and the documentation
22:00:28 <danwent> mlavalle: that would be great from my perspective.  thanks.
22:00:38 <danwent> SumitNaiksatam: ok, i figured, but always good to ask
22:00:51 <danwent> ok, that's all folks.  have a good afternoon/evening/morning!
22:00:55 <danwent> #endmeeting