03:00:05 <hongbin> #startmeeting zun
03:00:06 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Jan 10 03:00:05 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is hongbin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
03:00:07 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
03:00:09 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'zun'
03:00:12 <hongbin> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Zun#Agenda_for_2017-01-10_0300_UTC Today's agenda
03:00:14 <sudipto_> o/
03:00:16 <hongbin> #topic Roll Call
03:00:19 <Namrata> Namrata
03:00:24 <pksingh> pksingh
03:00:43 <kevinz> kevinz
03:00:48 <lakerzhou> lakerzhou
03:00:54 <Wenzhi> wenzhi
03:01:11 <hongbin> Thanks for joining hte meeting sudipto_ Namrata pksingh kevinz lakerzhou Wenzhi
03:01:15 <hongbin> Let's start
03:01:20 <hongbin> #topic Announcements
03:01:32 <hongbin> i have no announcement, anyone else has?
03:01:49 <hongbin> #topic Review Action Items
03:01:50 <hongbin> none
03:01:56 <hongbin> #topic Support multi-host deployment (hongbin)
03:02:02 <hongbin> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/support-multiple-hosts The BP
03:02:07 <hongbin> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/415554/ The patch
03:02:21 <hongbin> i have been working on this bp last week.
03:02:32 <hongbin> right now, all the patches were submitted
03:02:43 <hongbin> and they are under review
03:02:51 <hongbin> that is all from me
03:03:13 <hongbin> any comment?
03:03:38 <hongbin> ok, then next topic
03:03:46 <hongbin> #topic Cinder integration (diga)
03:03:47 <pksingh> hongbin: will look into it today
03:03:57 <hongbin> pksingh: ack. thx
03:04:02 <hongbin> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/cinder-zun-integration The BP
03:04:07 <hongbin> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/417747/ The design spec
03:04:17 <hongbin> it looks diga is not here
03:04:21 <hongbin> let's table this one
03:04:34 <hongbin> btw, i saw he submitted a spec for that
03:04:59 <hongbin> oh, it is the link above
03:05:18 <hongbin> anyone is welcomed to review his patch
03:05:22 <hongbin> ok, next one
03:05:28 <hongbin> #topic Support interactive mode (kevinz)
03:05:33 <hongbin> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/support-interactive-mode The BP
03:05:39 <hongbin> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/396841/ The design spec
03:05:43 <hongbin> kevinz: ^^
03:05:52 <kevinz> Hi Hongbin
03:06:03 <hongbin> hey
03:06:16 <kevinz> I have a question about zun-api talk to docker daemon
03:06:37 <hongbin> go ahead
03:07:08 <kevinz> Need to use "resize" command to Docker, will it implement by zun-api--> docker daemon   or  zun-api -->zun-compute -->docker daemon
03:07:38 <hongbin> i don't have a good answer for that
03:07:56 <hongbin> need to do some investigation, will work with you after the meeting
03:08:13 <kevinz> If use "zun-api --> docker daemon", in zun-api side need to add a httpclient for it
03:08:14 <kevinz> OK
03:08:39 <sudipto_> is re-size relevant to the interactive mode discussion?
03:08:49 <kevinz> sudioto_: yeah
03:09:17 <kevinz> resize the tty session size so that it can change according to users' local terminal
03:10:05 <kevinz> https://docs.docker.com/engine/reference/api/docker_remote_api_v1.24/#/resize-a-container-tty
03:10:26 <sudipto_> imho, the zun-api never should talk to the docker daemon directly because the driver abstraction is done at the compute layer...not at the API layer. So compute is the gateway to the runtime.
03:11:37 <hongbin> i guess interactive mode doesn't have to use the driver abstraction?
03:12:08 <hongbin> not sure right now, need to look into it
03:12:25 <kevinz> right I use zun-api talk to docker daemon directly to get the websocket link,
03:12:55 <sudipto_> typically the API would run on the controller node, so are you suggesting contacting a docker daemon on a remote machine via http in that case? Also - does the API become aware of various drivers eventually?
03:13:04 <sudipto_> like today it's docker, tomorrow it could be something else.
03:13:55 <hongbin> good point
03:14:38 <hongbin> perhaps, make a call to zun-compute to get the connection information first, then use hte connection info to connect interactively
03:15:22 <kevinz> Yeah that may be a good solutions for this
03:15:50 <hongbin> there might be other options
03:16:06 <kevinz> So  CLIS--> Zun-api --> zun-compute to get he websocket link?
03:16:26 <hongbin> yes
03:16:40 <kevinz> And CLIS--> Zun-api --> zun-compute to resize tty
03:17:16 <kevinz> That will be easy for tty to resize:-)
03:17:33 <hongbin> ok, let's discuss it later
03:17:39 <kevinz> OK
03:17:43 <hongbin> move on
03:17:50 <hongbin> #topic Make Zunclient an OpenStackClient plugin (Namrata)
03:17:56 <hongbin> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/zun/+spec/zun-osc-plugin The BP
03:18:00 <hongbin> Namrata: ^^
03:18:11 <Namrata> hi all..
03:18:56 <Namrata> i have added the patches for container API endpoints :Commands support
03:19:01 <Namrata> and they are up for review
03:19:16 <hongbin> yes, i saw a serious of patches
03:19:25 <hongbin> all are great work!
03:19:41 <Namrata> Furthermore I will be working on Image Api endpoint commands
03:19:45 <Namrata> thanks hongbin
03:20:27 <hongbin> Namrata: ack
03:20:49 <Namrata> thanks hongbin.Nothing to add more from my side
03:21:00 <hongbin> Namrata: i think the image api hasn't been fully implemented yet...
03:21:07 <Namrata> okay
03:21:18 <Namrata> so what do you suggest
03:22:11 <hongbin> Namrata: perhaps skip the image api for now, and consider this bp as implemented
03:22:23 <Namrata> okay sounds good
03:22:27 <hongbin> Namrata: i think all the container api are implemented, right?
03:22:28 <Namrata> thanks
03:22:35 <hongbin> great
03:23:00 <hongbin> Namrata: if you are looking for next task, you can ping me after
03:23:10 <Namrata> yes the etherpad which I created
03:23:12 <Namrata> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/zunclient_openstack-client-cli
03:23:26 <Namrata> the listed commands are implemented
03:23:35 <hongbin> awesome!!
03:23:36 <Namrata> yeah sure hongbin
03:23:46 <hongbin> ok
03:23:57 <hongbin> all, any comment about the osc bp?
03:24:11 <pksingh> its good work :)
03:24:35 <hongbin> indeed
03:24:38 <Namrata> thanks pksingh
03:24:48 <hongbin> #topic Open Discussion
03:25:05 <hongbin> anyone has topics to discuss?
03:25:36 <pksingh> hongbin: i just wanted to discuss about fuxi work by diga
03:25:59 <pksingh> cant be introduce an api for volume create and then attacha that volume to conatiner
03:26:04 <hongbin> pksingh: it looks diga is not here, but we can have a pre-discussion now
03:26:42 <hongbin> pksingh: i think docker has api to create/attach volumes
03:27:19 <pksingh> yes, just using that API and fuxi driver, can we expose our own rest API for volume create
03:27:26 <hongbin> pksingh: fuxi doesn't have any api, it is just a docker plugin, so that when you call api in docker, it translate it to api calls to cinder
03:28:02 <sudipto_> fuxi intends to be a docker only broker?
03:28:14 <pksingh> hongbin: yes, i understand that
03:28:15 <hongbin> sudipto_: right now, it is docker only,
03:28:29 <sudipto_> pksingh, the api should be in cinder though isn't it?
03:28:34 <hongbin> sudipto_: in the future, i am not sure yet, the roadmap is under discuss
03:29:07 <sudipto_> adding another API layer in fuxi, would mean we have two different APIs...
03:29:29 <pksingh> hongbin: i think this is the same way other drivers like flocker work,
03:29:38 <sudipto_> isn't zun going to be interacting with cinder eventually? which would talk to docker?
03:29:45 <sudipto_> via fuji.
03:29:54 * sudipto_ did not read the spec yet
03:29:57 <hongbin> sudipto_: both options are under consideration
03:30:17 <hongbin> what diga proposed is to using fuxi, which is the second option
03:31:20 <sudipto_> cinder already has a lot of storage vendor support, so i thought the flow could be something like : 1. Ask cinder for volumes from zun. Cinder creates the volume in the backend 2. Cinder gives the volumes to fuxi . 3. Fuxi does the attachment.
03:31:50 <hongbin> sudipto_: yes, that is totally possible
03:32:02 <pksingh> sudipto_: but we need to maintain the multitenancy too
03:32:25 <sudipto_> multi-tenancy is maintained at cinder for the volumes...
03:32:26 <hongbin> yes, one thing to note is that fuxi doesn't have multi-tenancy (too bad)
03:32:52 <sudipto_> no?
03:33:01 <hongbin> how fuxi works is writing down the admin credential to a config file, then all the volumes were created in the admin tenant
03:33:05 <pksingh> thats why i asked too maintain the volume records with tenants in our db
03:33:46 <pksingh> hongbin: ohh, then i think this will not work
03:33:48 <hongbin> yes, that means we need to skip fuxi if we wanted multi-tenancy
03:34:05 <sudipto_> I am not sure why fuxi is aware of multi-tenancy, or has to be aware of it.
03:34:27 <sudipto_> to me it appears to be low level in comparison to zun or cinder (sorry i have to read more maybe)
03:34:34 <hongbin> sudipto_: well, if you create a volume, you have to specify the tenant of the volume?
03:34:48 <sudipto_> hongbin, that happens at the cinder layer...
03:35:28 <hongbin> sudipto_: but zun need to use a tenant credential to interact with cinder?
03:36:29 <hongbin> sudipto_: but zun can pass down the user's context to cinder, that is fine
03:36:43 <sudipto_> hongbin, yeah something like that.
03:36:48 <hongbin> sudipto_: but docker doesn't pass down the user's contex to its plugin (fuxi), that is hte problem
03:37:23 <sudipto_> ok need to understand this better...will talk to you about this.
03:37:43 <hongbin> the problem is fuxi doesn't get any context passed from docker, so it has to use the admin credential in config file
03:37:50 <hongbin> ok
03:37:57 <pksingh> thanks hongbin for clarifying :)
03:38:26 <hongbin> sudipto_: pksingh : frankly, we can just skip fuxi if we wanted multi-tenancy
03:39:02 <hongbin> that is the same problem with kuryr right now (kuryr doesn't support multi-tenancy as well)
03:39:10 <hongbin> we can discuss that further later
03:39:15 <pksingh> hongbin: right now it seems so
03:39:27 <hongbin> pksingh: ?
03:39:36 <pksingh> hongbin: yes sure
03:39:43 <pksingh> we can discuss later
03:39:53 <pksingh> thanks for explaining
03:39:56 <hongbin> np
03:40:06 <hongbin> any other topic to be discuss?
03:40:35 <hongbin> ok, all. thanks for joining the meeting
03:40:38 <hongbin> #endmeeting