05:01:38 #startmeeting servicevm-device-manager 05:01:39 Meeting started Tue Jul 8 05:01:38 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is yamahata. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 05:01:40 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 05:01:43 The meeting name has been set to 'servicevm_device_manager' 05:01:55 wow so many people 05:02:01 #topic Announcement 05:02:20 today bob skips meeting unfortunately 05:02:40 I pushed first code to gerrit system 05:02:53 link? 05:02:53 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:stackforge/tacker+branch:master+topic:bp/tacker-api,n,z 05:03:01 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:stackforge/python-tackerclient+branch:master+topic:bp/tacker-api,n,z 05:03:44 Although it needs api review and code review, obvious patch(removing neutron file, rename neutron -> tacker) can be merged at first. 05:03:56 I marked it as obvious by adding my +1. 05:04:27 If you have any issues on those obvious patches, please add -1 and push it back to me. 05:04:55 The server can run as standalone server and provides its api. 05:05:24 The next things to do is to refine API and implement l3-plugin with servicevm server. 05:05:47 I've uploaded a blueprint for l3-plugin with servicevm 05:06:12 yamahata: link? 05:06:13 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/105078/ 05:07:29 So we show the roadmap for servicevm and Bob and Karthik can push their own specs/patches as in future it can be consolidated based on roadmap 05:08:07 yamahata: thanks for links. I'll review this week. 05:08:27 For api review I've upload it to gerrit 05:08:33 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/103724/ 05:09:12 that's all from me to announce. 05:09:18 anyone else to announce? 05:10:06 seems nothing. let's move on 05:10:48 #topic Open Discussion 05:11:06 #undo 05:11:07 Removing item from minutes: 05:11:15 #topic servicevm spec review 05:11:32 Do we have anything to discuss with API now? 05:11:44 The detailed discussion can be done with gerrit. 05:12:03 yamahata: sure 05:12:20 At least Bob gave his feedback on google-doc. So I'll address them. 05:12:34 Okay seems nothing. 05:12:46 #topic Open Discussion 05:13:25 Does anyone have anything? 05:14:07 If no, I'd like to discuss on dnrm. 05:14:39 natarajk: So far I've thought on how to consolidate/integrate dnrm code. 05:14:51 natarajk: let me check my understanding. 05:15:07 yamahata: sure, go ahead 05:15:33 At first, the terminology is quite different. 05:16:08 With dnrm terminology, resource is ~= VM. it might be physical appliance or virtual appliance. 05:16:20 Yes 05:16:20 with servicevm terminology, it's hosting device. or simply device 05:17:34 Do you mention the hosting device as "resource" in your spec ? 05:17:34 Do you stick to "resource"? or is "hosting device" acceptable? 05:18:07 natarajk: yes. 05:18:22 I think mostly same meaning. 05:18:57 Or any better terminology? 05:18:58 for physical appliance, "hosting device" terminology might be confusing 05:20:08 To be honest, I don't care which terminology personally. 05:20:31 Bob introduced "hosting device". 05:20:57 Unfortunately we don't have Bob today, let's continue at gerrit or next meeting 05:21:17 continue the discussion 05:21:32 Ok. we need to find something common on for both virtual and physical appliance, i guess 05:21:43 Yes. 05:21:47 if it's only virtual appliance, "hosting device" might be ok. 05:22:45 Okay, then next termnology is "driver". 05:22:46 we can continue the discussion. 05:23:16 I think "driver" in dnrm is the code to spin up/donw VM and so on. 05:23:21 Correct? 05:24:04 Yes. But we are open to common terms there 05:24:14 let me read your specs in detail this week. 05:24:38 I just confirmed to make sure. "driver" is common. 05:25:10 The dnrm code doesn't allow "template" in servicevm terminology. 05:25:41 basically "template" is "driver" name + parameters to nova client. 05:26:11 So i think "template" is superset of dnrm "driver" 05:26:15 Yes. Those were made as configurable in plugin configuration file 05:27:05 Is it acceptalbe to use "template" instead of dnrm "driver"? 05:27:29 For dnrm driver, no parameter will be specified. 05:28:07 thinking ... 05:28:25 Ah, this is not a final call. We can discuss with actual code later. 05:28:38 I'd like to check my direction with others. 05:29:02 before starting actual coding. 05:29:42 yamahata: if the parameters are for provider (service drivers) to initialize, it is more commonly driver entry point, or in flavor framework it is metadata 05:29:54 Maybe I should write details it in spec. 05:30:36 yamahata: we will need some time to review this. May we sync up with you later in the week? 05:30:42 s3wong: Agree. Later we can utilize flavor framework 05:30:49 sweston: Sure. 05:31:06 yamahata: reminder: last week we agreed that this meeting will be 30 minutes :-) 05:31:13 We don't have to have conclusion now. 05:31:14 yamahata: thanks 05:31:25 s3wong: thanks. 05:31:33 anything else to discuss? 05:32:22 okay thanks everyone. see you next week. 05:32:27 thanks! 05:32:31 thanks 05:32:32 #endmeeting