08:03:33 <dkushwaha> #startmeeting tacker
08:03:34 <openstack> Meeting started Tue May 28 08:03:33 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is dkushwaha. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
08:03:35 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
08:03:37 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tacker'
08:03:46 <dkushwaha> #topic Roll Call
08:04:00 <dkushwaha> who is here for Tacker weekly meeting?
08:04:11 <tpatil> Hi
08:04:24 <hyunsikyang> Hi
08:04:27 <hyunsikyang> all
08:04:29 <takahashi-tsc> Hi
08:04:38 <JangwonLee> Hi
08:05:25 <dkushwaha> hello all
08:08:11 <dkushwaha> ok lets start..
08:08:23 <dkushwaha> #topic vnf-rolling-upgrade
08:08:54 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, I see you have updated spec
08:09:07 <hyunsikyang> Yes
08:09:29 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, Regarding my comment on #65
08:09:37 <dkushwaha> any update ?
08:10:37 <hyunsikyang> Ah about your question, I amd Tomi replied.
08:11:03 <dkushwaha> Actually my concern was: At any point of time if failure occurred on a host, is it meaningful to move only VNFs which created with tosca.policies.tacker.Maintenance? Rather than control should be at VNFM(Tacker deployment) level so whenever maintenance required, policy will be applicable for all VNF on that site.
08:11:32 <hyunsikyang> Ah.
08:12:08 <dkushwaha> Although, with this, I have little doubt that how trigger will work. So I am open for both approach
08:12:08 <hyunsikyang> At first, in the case of VNF maintanance.. It's fine.
08:12:42 <hyunsikyang> But like your comment, Whatif, host have some problem , all VNF have to move..
08:14:10 <hyunsikyang> So about a second case, we think that it can cover by fenix. For example, we make a VNF group and assigned to move it all at a one time for specific group.
08:14:54 <hyunsikyang> But, Can i get your opinion as a view of tacker?
08:16:57 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, my point is: maintenance should be for a complete deployed site(which comes under Tacker), rather than just keeping it for VNFs
08:17:13 <hyunsikyang> Yes I understood.
08:17:15 <dkushwaha> * for few VNFs
08:18:44 <hyunsikyang> about a second case, we can support it later.. by fenix or by tacker.. we should think about it later.
08:19:10 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, ok, Thanks, So lets have a clear stand, and move with your approach(VNF specific).
08:19:25 <hyunsikyang> OK.
08:20:04 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, regarding comment on #21
08:20:05 <hyunsikyang> I also discuss it with fenix again and let you know.
08:20:19 <hyunsikyang> YEs
08:20:53 <dkushwaha> could you please update spec with the current scopes and future items
08:21:21 <hyunsikyang> OK. Did you check my comment?
08:23:12 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, yea i checked, and it will be good to mention scopes and action items clearly
08:23:56 <hyunsikyang> OK. thanks.
08:24:33 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, Thanks
08:25:54 <dkushwaha> #topic VNF packages support
08:26:19 <dkushwaha> tpatil, any update on this?
08:27:08 <tpatil> dkushwaha: We are updating the VNF package specs. Will upload it soon
08:27:44 <dkushwaha> tpatil, ok, thanks
08:28:02 <tpatil> In vPTG, we received few comments from you to update Upload workflow and also explain what validation will be carried out.
08:28:18 <tpatil> Working on the same. Also ,we have identified few other missing points.
08:28:28 <tpatil> After we address all these points will upload the specs
08:29:12 <dkushwaha> tpatil, nice
08:35:43 <hyunsikyang> he has some connection problem.. waiting..him
08:36:11 <hyunsikyang> Hello jaewook_lee and hochanlee
08:36:57 <jaewook_lee> Nice meet you hyunsikyang~
08:37:54 <hochanlee> Hi
08:37:58 <hyunsikyang> we are wating PTL..
08:39:39 <hyunsikyang> who is here now?
08:40:38 <dkushwaha> It seems I lost my connection
08:40:58 <hyunsikyang> anyway welcome back.
08:41:08 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, :D
08:41:18 <dkushwaha> #topic OpenDiscussion
08:41:26 <dkushwaha> I have nothing from my side for now
08:42:14 <hyunsikyang> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/659559/
08:42:15 <patchbot> patch 659559 - tacker - Kubernetes as VIM in Tacker in tacker-specs - 6 patch sets
08:42:33 <hyunsikyang> Please review this typo too.
08:42:58 <hyunsikyang> when i was checking Kubernetes VIM, I found this one too..
08:43:41 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, ok, will review it
08:43:42 <hyunsikyang> It is not urgent, but, it should be fixed .
08:44:18 <hyunsikyang> I am done
08:45:22 <dkushwaha> Folks, I just want to request all, to please help on review side as well.
08:45:50 <hyunsikyang> OK:) I will
08:46:02 <dkushwaha> hyunsikyang, thanks
08:46:19 <dkushwaha> If no one have any other item to discuss, we can close today meeting
08:46:40 <hochanlee> We have question about auto healing and scaling for vnffg spec
08:47:56 <dkushwaha> hochanlee, yes please
08:49:51 <hochanlee> As we said in mailing list, we want to go on developing those features.
08:50:35 <hochanlee> should we use those existing spec? or can we write new spec for those features?
08:50:48 <jaewook_lee> Hi dkuskhwaha! Hochan and me are going to develop the healing and scaling function for VNFFG in pike specifications.
08:51:00 <jaewook_lee> I wonder whether we need define new spec or not ?
08:52:30 <dkushwaha> hochanlee, jaewook_lee Do you see any challenge with existing spec?
08:52:57 <dkushwaha> If no, it is good to go with existing spec
08:53:22 <dkushwaha> as both spec are already merged
08:53:35 <dkushwaha> https://review.opendev.org/#/c/469975/ https://review.opendev.org/#/c/434974/
08:53:36 <patchbot> patch 469975 - tacker-specs - Enable scaling function for VNFFG (MERGED) - 10 patch sets
08:53:37 <patchbot> patch 434974 - tacker-specs - Add auto-healing function for VNFFG (MERGED) - 13 patch sets
08:54:31 <jaewook_lee> Okay! we are going to develop as follow the defined specs!
08:54:52 <hochanlee> OK Thanks we will :)
08:55:52 <dkushwaha> jaewook_lee, hochanlee Thanks for heading-up to implement these features
08:56:49 <dkushwaha> Ok, Thanks Folks for joining this meeting.
08:57:01 <dkushwaha> closing it now.
08:57:09 <dkushwaha> #endmeeting