08:09:07 <takahashi-tsc> #startmeeting tacker
08:09:07 <opendevmeet> Meeting started Tue Apr 18 08:09:07 2023 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is takahashi-tsc. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
08:09:07 <opendevmeet> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
08:09:07 <opendevmeet> The meeting name has been set to 'tacker'
08:09:19 <takahashi-tsc> #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tacker-meeting
08:09:27 <yuta-kazato> Thanks too.
08:10:34 <takahashi-tsc> There is 1 topic from yu-kinjo. Will you discuss something at today's call?
08:10:45 <yu-kinjo> Thank you, Takahashi-san
08:11:28 <takahashi-tsc> #topic allow-VNFD-ID-duplication-among-different-tenants
08:11:40 <yu-kinjo> Continuing from last week, I want to discuss about bug report "allow-VNFD-ID-duplication-among-different-tenants"
08:12:09 <yu-kinjo> I received comments about enhanced_tacker_policy from <ueha> and <yuta-kazato> in last IRC.
08:12:24 <yu-kinjo> I checked https://docs.openstack.org/tacker/latest/user/enhanced_tacker_policy_usage_guide.html
08:12:44 <yu-kinjo> Regarding VNF packages, I understand that even if they belong to the same project, the access rights can be changed depending on the vendor.
08:13:05 <yu-kinjo> However, I don't think the implementation for this Bug report will change whether "enhanced_tacker_policy" is true or false.
08:13:26 <yu-kinjo> For example, permissions to vnf packages whose vendor is "company-A" are limited to "VENDOR_company-A" or "VENDOR_all".
08:14:03 <yu-kinjo> What I want to achieve is "users with rights for the resource can onboard this VNF package to each different project but cannot onboard it twice in the same project."
08:14:23 <yu-kinjo> For that, I think the following should be implemented, even if "enhanced_tacker_policy" is false.
08:14:36 <yu-kinjo> Do not allow duplication of VNFD IDs within the same project, but allow duplication between different projects.
08:15:24 <yu-kinjo> I think that "vendor" is not needed to consider.
08:15:33 <yu-kinjo> That's it.
08:15:46 <yu-kinjo> Does anyone has comments or questions?
08:16:10 <yu-kinjo> especially ueha-san or yuto-kazato san
08:18:29 <takahashi-tsc> Any comments...?
08:18:47 <ueha> Thank you, do you mean that the following case is no problem?
08:19:00 <ueha> If policy_enhancement is enabled and "tenant X/vendor A" user uploaded VNF Package, then "tenant X/vendor B" user can not upload same VNF Package.
08:22:31 <yu-kinjo> Yes. no problem.  I think a VNF package made by vendor A will be  onboarded users "vendor A" or "all".
08:24:09 <ueha> Does it mean that vendor B will not use the package created by vendor A in the actual operation..?
08:26:35 <ueha> In the actual operation, I'm sorry that I do not know what is the case of the "same tenant" with "different vendors"..
08:26:49 <yu-kinjo> At least not for our use case...
08:28:01 <yu-kinjo> So I think vendor B will not use the package created by vendor A in the actual operation.
08:30:04 <yu-kinjo> And for now, I hope this bug report only covers implementations that allow duplicate VNFD IDs in different projects.
08:30:30 <ueha> If I think about it carefully, there seems be not the same Package when vendors are different in actual operation..
08:31:47 <yu-kinjo> I think so too
08:32:00 <ueha> Thank you, I got it and I think it's okay to care about just tenant for this bug report.
08:32:19 <yu-kinjo> Thank you ueha-san
08:32:30 <yu-kinjo> Any other comments?
08:33:01 <yuta-kazato> Thanks for confirming documents, kinjo-san.
08:33:31 <yuta-kazato> I also understood that the enhanced tacker policy and your suggestion "Do not allow duplication of VNFD IDs within the same project, but allow duplication between different projects." is independent in this bug report.
08:34:30 <yu-kinjo> Thank you kazato-san. Yes. I think they are independent.
08:35:39 <yuta-kazato> Thanks. I agree to your proposal.
08:36:13 <yu-kinjo> Thanks
08:36:23 <takahashi-tsc> Thank you everyone, so currently there are no problem and it is ok to proceed with allow-VNFD-ID-duplication-among-different-tenants.
08:36:43 <takahashi-tsc> Is it correct everyone? any other comments?
08:37:13 <yu-kinjo> Thank you. If there are no other comments, I would like to start the implementation for this bug report.
08:38:07 <takahashi-tsc> Thanks! Of course, if any concerns are found, let's discuss it on IRC and Gerrit.
08:38:53 <yu-kinjo> Thank you for your coorporation!
08:39:02 <takahashi-tsc> I think that's all. And there is no agenda and we can close today's meeting.
08:39:24 <takahashi-tsc> Any others?
08:40:00 <ueha> Nothing from my side
08:40:47 <takahashi-tsc> Good, so let's close the meeting. Thank you! bye
08:41:01 <yuta-kazato> bye!
08:41:01 <ueha> thanks, bye!
08:41:02 <manpreetk_> Thanks, Bye!
08:41:06 <yu-kinjo> bye!
08:41:07 <ma-ooyama> bye
08:41:19 <takahashi-tsc> #endmeeting