| *** chuckC_ has quit IRC | 00:10 | |
| *** david-lyle is now known as david-lyle_afk | 00:13 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:13 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 00:25 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has quit IRC | 00:29 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:37 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 00:42 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:43 | |
| *** chuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:45 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 00:48 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:49 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 00:58 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:02 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:06 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 01:07 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:07 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 01:29 | |
| *** mwang2 has quit IRC | 02:03 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 02:24 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 02:37 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 02:51 | |
| *** chuckC_ has quit IRC | 02:59 | |
| *** chuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:00 | |
| *** sbalukoff has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 03:14 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:14 | |
| *** naohirot has quit IRC | 03:27 | |
| *** chuckC_ has quit IRC | 03:39 | |
| *** naohirot has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 04:02 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 04:29 | |
| *** sbalukoff has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:03 | |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:16 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 05:21 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:21 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 05:24 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:26 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 06:06 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 09:45 | |
| *** naohirot has quit IRC | 10:27 | |
| *** pc_m has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:25 | |
| *** pc_m has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:43 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 11:52 | |
| *** naohirot has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:51 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 12:59 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 13:13 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 13:35 | |
| *** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 13:51 | |
| *** mestery has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 13:55 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:02 | |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:05 | |
| *** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:26 | |
| *** david-lyle_afk is now known as david-lyle | 14:43 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 15:01 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 15:05 | |
| *** naohirot has quit IRC | 15:06 | |
| *** vishwanathj has quit IRC | 15:08 | |
| *** ChuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:11 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 15:11 | |
| *** ChuckC_ has quit IRC | 15:21 | |
| *** ajmiller has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:39 | |
| *** blogan_mobile has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:43 | |
| *** blogan__mobile has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:48 | |
| *** blogan_mobile has quit IRC | 15:50 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:51 | |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:57 | |
| *** a2hill has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:57 | |
| *** johnsom_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:58 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:58 | |
| *** jamiem has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:59 | |
| sbalukoff | Is the LBaaS meeting happening in here right now? | 16:00 |
|---|---|---|
| johnsom_ | Should be | 16:00 |
| evgenyf | Hi, should be | 16:00 |
| jamiem | good morning | 16:00 |
| dougwig | hiya | 16:00 |
| dougwig | #startmeeting neutron lbaas | 16:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 18 16:00:54 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is dougwig. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 16:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 16:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_lbaas' | 16:00 |
| *** pc_m has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:01 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:01 | |
| dougwig | #topic Roll call and Agenda | 16:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Roll call and Agenda (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:01 | |
| johnsom_ | o/ | 16:01 |
| ajmiller | o/ | 16:01 |
| dougwig | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/LBaaS#Meeting_18.11.2014 | 16:01 |
| a2hill | o/ | 16:01 |
| sballe | o/ | 16:01 |
| *** jorgem has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:01 | |
| *** xgerman has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:01 | |
| dougwig | sbalukoff: yes, i was just spacing out in my chair. | 16:01 |
| jorgem | o/ | 16:01 |
| xgerman | o/ | 16:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hi | 16:01 |
| sbalukoff | Howdy, folks! | 16:01 |
| * pc_m lurking | 16:01 | |
| sbalukoff | Once again, thanks for changing the meeting time. | 16:01 |
| TrevorV_ | o/ | 16:02 |
| dougwig | it's 4pm here. i'll be grateful next week. :) | 16:02 |
| dougwig | #topic Announcements | 16:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:02 | |
| dougwig | latest v2 review to focus on: | 16:02 |
| dougwig | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/123485/ | 16:02 |
| xgerman | sbalukoff I take it you didn't go to the neutron meeting :-) | 16:02 |
| jamiem | o/ | 16:02 |
| dougwig | anyone have anything else to announce? | 16:03 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Nope! | 16:03 |
| dougwig | #topic Advanced services split | 16:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Advanced services split (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:03 | |
| dougwig | i'm going to defer to the recent neutron meeting here: | 16:03 |
| *** rm_work has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:03 | |
| dougwig | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-11-18-14.02.html | 16:03 |
| dougwig | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-11-18-14.02.log.html | 16:03 |
| rm_work | o/ | 16:04 |
| dougwig | the short answer was, not much of an update yet. | 16:04 |
| *** blogan_mobile has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:04 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 16:04 | |
| *** blogan_mobile has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| *** blogan_mobile has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:05 | |
| dougwig | i want to say, IMO, we should *not* be stalling lbaas v2 or octavia while we wait on this split. | 16:05 |
| xgerman | I think we have time for the long answer | 16:05 |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: +1 | 16:05 |
| xgerman | dougwig +1 -- but I am not sure how our chances us to make progress to get it merged without the split | 16:05 |
| rm_work | my understanding (and the direction I was leaning) was continuing full steam on octavia but slightly stalling neutron-lbaas work >_> | 16:05 |
| rm_work | xgerman ++ | 16:06 |
| *** blogan has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:06 | |
| blogan | im here! | 16:06 |
| dougwig | we still have our feature branch, so i don't see why we'd need to stall. | 16:06 |
| xgerman | yeah, we need to get everything merged into the feature branch. | 16:06 |
| *** blogan_mobile has quit IRC | 16:07 | |
| rm_work | well, I'd much rather get 100% returns on Octavia work in the meantime, get that up and working, then focus on neutron-lbaas when we're in a better position to get things done quickly and effectively (when we know what's going on) | 16:07 |
| rm_work | but | 16:07 |
| rm_work | we do still need to keep an eye on it so we don't lose whatever momentum we gained with regard to making the split actually happen | 16:07 |
| dougwig | i don't think we need a lot of focus on lbaas; just enough to deal with -1's. | 16:07 |
| blogan | getting the reviews merged into the feature branch that have not will help | 16:07 |
| xgerman | blogan +1 | 16:08 |
| *** blogan__mobile has quit IRC | 16:08 | |
| blogan | and it won't take much time from our standpoint to push for that and to pester to people | 16:08 |
| xgerman | and I will see if I can get some of our QA look at v2 | 16:08 |
| xgerman | we also want to try it in a bigger installation than devstack | 16:09 |
| dougwig | is ctracey around? is he going to update the client/cli, or should we find someone else to pick that up? | 16:09 |
| rm_work | well, the TLS stuff in neutron-lbaas is very much broken/old/WIP | 16:09 |
| blogan | well that depends on how the client will get split as well | 16:09 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I'm guessing we should find someone else to pick that up. | 16:09 |
| rm_work | so I'll need to look at that again | 16:09 |
| blogan | rm_work: good point | 16:10 |
| sbalukoff | He's been very distracted by other BBG priorities, and I don't realistically expect him to spend time on LBaaS in the near future. | 16:10 |
| dougwig | sbalukoff: ok | 16:10 |
| dougwig | #action dougwig coordinate someone to take over client/cli lbaas stuff, maybe | 16:10 |
| blogan | i nominate sbalukoff | 16:10 |
| xgerman | (who can't program) | 16:11 |
| dougwig | rm_work: did evgenyf update the tis stuff? or are you? or someone else? | 16:11 |
| evgenyf | rm_work: Do you mean the Barbican Util? | 16:11 |
| blogan | lol he can program in perl | 16:11 |
| rm_work | he said he CAN, just slowly and badly :P | 16:11 |
| rm_work | evgenyf: yes, because for one, it is no longer a Barbican Util | 16:11 |
| sbalukoff | :) | 16:11 |
| sbalukoff | rm_work: +1 | 16:11 |
| rm_work | that whole thing is going to be replaced with CertManager (the interface that merged to Octavia for talking to SecretStore backends) | 16:12 |
| blogan | so we're saying that many of the reveiws that are currently ready for review in the feature branch are no longer valid? | 16:12 |
| blogan | as in they should be WIPs? | 16:12 |
| rm_work | possibly | 16:12 |
| xgerman | can we mark them accordingly? | 16:12 |
| a2hill | for the TLS ref impl the certmanager stuff is only real blocker | 16:12 |
| a2hill | if were still using that | 16:13 |
| rm_work | yeah dougwig took over ownership of all of them so only he can WIP :/ | 16:13 |
| dougwig | do we have a volunteer to fold that into the current review for the feature branch? | 16:13 |
| * blogan shakes fist at dougwig | 16:13 | |
| dougwig | rm_work: which do you want WIP'ed? | 16:13 |
| rm_work | https://review.openstack.org/#/c/123492/ needs it | 16:13 |
| dougwig | #action rm_work msg dougwig for WIP reviews | 16:13 |
| rm_work | /msg dougwig https://review.openstack.org/#/c/123492/ | 16:14 |
| rm_work | #done | 16:14 |
| dougwig | we need to fold the cert manager stuff into that one, right? | 16:14 |
| rm_work | yes | 16:14 |
| dougwig | any takers for that? | 16:14 |
| rm_work | A large amount of that code is going to be straight up replaced | 16:14 |
| blogan | that would also kind of make the needed by review a WIP as well | 16:14 |
| rm_work | I had assumed I would do it | 16:14 |
| evgenyf | dougwig: I will WIP TLS too | 16:15 |
| blogan | evgenyf: thanks | 16:15 |
| dougwig | i had hoped; wasn't sure if you had cycles. | 16:15 |
| rm_work | well, it all depends on priority :) | 16:15 |
| rm_work | if we say this is a priority, I can get on it ASAP | 16:15 |
| dougwig | i'm going to wager that octavia 0.5 is higher priority, due to the uncertainty. but if you get some cycles. | 16:15 |
| dougwig | anyone else have an opinion on that? | 16:16 |
| blogan | i think making it a priority bc i dont want the split happening if these reviews do not get merged in | 16:16 |
| xgerman | blogan +1 | 16:17 |
| blogan | i mean i dont watn the split dependent on these reviews | 16:17 |
| sballe | I agree | 16:17 |
| evgenyf | Can you please point me to the Octavia CertManager code? | 16:17 |
| blogan | of course the bigger bottleneck will be getting core review time, per usual | 16:17 |
| rm_work | evgenyf: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/131889/ | 16:17 |
| rm_work | evgenyf: ignore anything about CertGenerator | 16:17 |
| rm_work | we only need CertManager | 16:18 |
| dougwig | rm_work: have you talked to the oslo folks at all about a common cert client library? | 16:18 |
| dougwig | (maybe that could be you!) | 16:18 |
| rm_work | dougwig: yes, it's going to be a new project, probably named "Castellan" | 16:18 |
| rm_work | evgenyf: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/131889/9/octavia/certificates/manager/cert_mgr.py | 16:18 |
| evgenyf | rm_work: thanks | 16:18 |
| rm_work | very simple interface | 16:18 |
| sbalukoff | Huh. | 16:18 |
| rm_work | dougwig / sbalukoff: Castellan (manager of a castle) :P | 16:19 |
| rm_work | starting from Cinder's KeyMgr interface, rolling Cert support into it | 16:19 |
| rm_work | is "the plan" right now | 16:19 |
| xgerman | Castellan :-) | 16:19 |
| dougwig | nice. | 16:19 |
| dougwig | rm_work: please update that review when you get some time. i'd like to see things tied in a bow, like blogan, but i don't know what rax wants to see done first. let us know if it's going to get starved for time. | 16:19 |
| rm_work | and when I say "the plan" I mean "my plan" because that is not yet "their plan" but i'm working on it :) | 16:19 |
| rm_work | yeah, I think I'm going to bump my current sprint topic a bit and work on that, it shouldn't take me too long | 16:20 |
| blogan | dougwig: since rax will be using the v2 api and octavia, they're all kind of the same level of priority | 16:20 |
| blogan | at least that's what my advice would be | 16:20 |
| dougwig | blogan is always right. except for the many times that he is not. but he's right this time. | 16:21 |
| * blogan chokes dougwig | 16:21 | |
| dougwig | on that note... | 16:21 |
| dougwig | #topic Drivers, splitting status into operational and provisioning, and getting rid of DEFERRED | 16:21 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Drivers, splitting status into operational and provisioning, and getting rid of DEFERRED (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:21 | |
| dougwig | we talked about this at the summit. was anyone against it? | 16:21 |
| rm_work | I never really got the rundown... | 16:22 |
| xgerman | didn't we decide to work with the ML2 folks and use task flow? | 16:22 |
| rm_work | but I was sort of out of the loop of those internals, so don't mind me I guess | 16:22 |
| blogan | DEFERRED is the devil | 16:22 |
| blogan | xgerman this is a separate topic really | 16:22 |
| xgerman | I like to mix topics | 16:22 |
| blogan | you like mix ins eh? | 16:22 |
| rm_work | I like to mix drinks, but 10am isn't the time for it :P | 16:22 |
| dougwig | we are overloading the status field for operational and provisioning status, which results in ambiguity when something is provisioned but not yet useful. thus, the DEFERRED state was born, and it is complex, and that complexity is owned by the drivers. splitting that field makes the complexity disappear. | 16:23 |
| rm_work | dougwig: sounds good to me, as long as that description isn't leaving anything out :) | 16:23 |
| blogan | well using taskflow would make the complexity owned by the plugin and not the drivers, but it still needs to go | 16:23 |
| dougwig | xgerman: yes, this is subtly inter-related to the other meeting topics. | 16:23 |
| xgerman | :-) | 16:23 |
| dougwig | ok, let's go there | 16:23 |
| dougwig | #topic Drivers, potential taskflow model, all async | 16:24 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Drivers, potential taskflow model, all async (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:24 | |
| dougwig | blogan, want to summarize this one? | 16:24 |
| evgenyf | dougwig: do we have some proposal paper for splitting status? | 16:24 |
| blogan | well we would like to get all the db logic out of the drivers, and go to the exception model where the drivers throw an exception if something went wrong and the plugin catches tehse and updates the statuses accordingly | 16:24 |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 16:25 | |
| blogan | looks like using taskflow will be the best way to do this, it will make the lbaas API async no matter what driver is being used | 16:25 |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:25 | |
| a2hill | taskflow is still a wip? | 16:25 |
| blogan | the problem is that neutron will be using taskflow as well and possibly in a different manner such that if we start using it now we may have to change how the drivers work as well when neutron's usage of taskflow happens | 16:25 |
| dougwig | https://github.com/openstack/taskflow | 16:25 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 16:26 | |
| dougwig | a2hill: yes, that's really the only issue with using that model for drivers. we can't just wait for it and neutron's use of it to be "done", so we need something in the interim. | 16:26 |
| dougwig | hence, getting rid of deferred and then basically sticking with a driver model similar to v1 in the interim. | 16:27 |
| a2hill | Agreed, just wanted that fact stated. ;) | 16:27 |
| blogan | dougwig: do you expect neutron to change how taskflow works or we will have to import a neutron.taskflow library to use it? | 16:27 |
| xgerman | I thought the ML2 plugin will use it | 16:28 |
| blogan | it will/is | 16:28 |
| xgerman | and we can use their model | 16:28 |
| xgerman | so we can just be like them? | 16:28 |
| blogan | yeah we need to talk to them some more | 16:28 |
| dougwig | i would expect we'd import or derive from some neutron base class, but it's really up in the air right now. | 16:28 |
| xgerman | well, deriving from ML2 might be ok | 16:28 |
| blogan | to xgerman's point, if its good enough for ML2 to use right now, why wouldn't it be good enough for us to use? | 16:28 |
| xgerman | blogan +1 | 16:28 |
| johnsom_ | blogan +1 | 16:29 |
| dougwig | it probably is; i don't much like re-implementing the glue twice in parallel, though. | 16:29 |
| a2hill | dougwig +1 | 16:29 |
| blogan | i think more conversations with ML2 is warranted | 16:29 |
| dougwig | +1 | 16:29 |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 16:30 | |
| blogan | and also markmcclain, just to gauge the stability of it | 16:30 |
| blogan | or volatility | 16:30 |
| dougwig | this topic was meant as an intro for everyone, today. | 16:30 |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:30 | |
| dougwig | ok, while we're beating drivers to death... | 16:30 |
| dougwig | #topic v2 Object Model - Potentially simplifying the object relations or making the objects purely logical constructs | 16:30 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "v2 Object Model - Potentially simplifying the object relations or making the objects purely logical constructs (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:30 | |
| xgerman | well, once you switch to exceptions the driver can throw operational and provisioning things and we can slot them into the right place | 16:30 |
| dougwig | during the summit, we asked if we should further simplify the object model to not have as many root objects, which led to sam restating his desire to see the models with many-to-many, and have us basically pass full trees around. | 16:31 |
| blogan | evgenyf: do you think you could ask sam to send an email out with his proposal? | 16:32 |
| dougwig | IMO - in the interests of not rehashing decisions we've made, i'm fine sticking with the delicate balance that we ended up with for v2. | 16:32 |
| blogan | or if you know it well enough to send it yourself? | 16:32 |
| evgenyf | blogan: I will ask him | 16:32 |
| dougwig | other opinions/comments? | 16:32 |
| dougwig | evgenyf: ty | 16:32 |
| xgerman | dougwig +1 | 16:32 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I'm all for not re-hashing decisions if there's not a compelling reason to. | 16:33 |
| blogan | the compelling reason to me is that it is confusing | 16:33 |
| xgerman | also we should wait until we have v2 ne in some trunk before we rock the boat | 16:33 |
| blogan | to an end-user | 16:33 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: +1 | 16:33 |
| blogan | also solving this could potentially solve the DEFERRED status issue as well | 16:33 |
| blogan | but yeah none of these chanegs would go in until after the split happens | 16:34 |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:34 | |
| blogan | at least that is my interpretation of all of this | 16:34 |
| dougwig | vivek's ui concept could make any of these schemes palatable. | 16:34 |
| dougwig | unless i hear an objection, we'll wait for sam's email, and otherwise continue with the status quo. | 16:35 |
| sbalukoff | Ultimately, I think it's a good idea to not have so many root objects. But again, does pushing for that now get us anything? | 16:35 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: not right now, but after the split | 16:36 |
| sbalukoff | Right. | 16:36 |
| dougwig | agreed | 16:36 |
| dougwig | #topic Open discussion | 16:36 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:36 | |
| dougwig | discuss away... | 16:36 |
| blogan | it gets us something after the split in that we aren't drastically changing the v2 api from one release to the next | 16:36 |
| blogan | dougwig: manish was the guy who was giving us a run down of taskflow and ML2 right? | 16:37 |
| dougwig | yes. | 16:38 |
| dougwig | #action blogan discuss taskflow drivers with ML2 | 16:38 |
| xgerman | please include me -- I like taskflow :-) | 16:38 |
| a2hill | Im still a bit unclear, but are we going to get the .5 driver in as a ref impl 'before' the split so it gets merged in? Or do we want to go forward with the ref impl that is there (wip atm)? | 16:38 |
| xgerman | I think we will wait for the split and then decide what makes the most sense at that point | 16:39 |
| dougwig | no, we are not going to tie the octavia and neutron schedules together. ref impl as is. | 16:39 |
| a2hill | Fair enough | 16:39 |
| a2hill | Thank you | 16:39 |
| blogan | yeah we shouldn't add any additional reviews to teh feature branch | 16:39 |
| dougwig | goal 1: split. goal 2: take over the world. | 16:39 |
| xgerman | +1 | 16:39 |
| blogan | goal 3: profit? | 16:39 |
| a2hill | :) | 16:40 |
| dougwig | any other items to discuss? | 16:40 |
| a2hill | adv services meeting next? | 16:40 |
| dougwig | yes | 16:41 |
| sbalukoff | a2hill: Yep | 16:41 |
| dougwig | alright folks, thanks, and bye. | 16:41 |
| a2hill | kk ;) | 16:41 |
| sbalukoff | See y'all in 19 minutes! | 16:41 |
| dougwig | #endmeeting | 16:41 |
| a2hill | \0 | 16:41 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 16:41 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 18 16:41:24 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:41 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_lbaas/2014/neutron_lbaas.2014-11-18-16.00.html | 16:41 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_lbaas/2014/neutron_lbaas.2014-11-18-16.00.txt | 16:41 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_lbaas/2014/neutron_lbaas.2014-11-18-16.00.log.html | 16:41 |
| jorgem | \o/ | 16:42 |
| xgerman | o/ | 16:42 |
| *** jorgem has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:42 | |
| *** pc_m has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:43 | |
| *** TrevorV_ has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:43 | |
| *** ChuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:44 | |
| *** ChuckC_ is now known as ChuckC | 16:44 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:50 | |
| *** pc_m has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:54 | |
| *** pc_m has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:58 | |
| *** jackmccann has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:59 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | hi there | 17:00 |
| xgerman | hi | 17:00 |
| dougwig | o | 17:00 |
| dougwig | o/ | 17:00 |
| sballe | morning | 17:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: dougwig blogan sballe: hi! | 17:00 |
| sballe | 3rd meeting this morning :-) | 17:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sballe: :-) | 17:00 |
| sbalukoff | Morning again! | 17:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: hi | 17:00 |
| *** vishwanathj has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:00 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | we can decide how long we want this to be | 17:01 |
| *** pc_m has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:01 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | vishwanathj: pc_m: hi | 17:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | lets get started | 17:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #startmeeting Networking Advanced Services | 17:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 18 17:01:20 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 17:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_advanced_services' | 17:01 |
| johnsom_ | o/ | 17:01 |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:01 | |
| pc_m | SumitNaiksatam: hi | 17:01 |
| a2hill | o/ | 17:02 |
| vishwanathj | hello | 17:02 |
| dougwig | what is our agenda today? | 17:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | this discussion is a follow up to some of what happened in the neutron meeting earlier today | 17:02 |
| blogan | hello! | 17:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #info https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices#Agenda | 17:02 |
| rm_work | p/ | 17:02 |
| rm_work | o/ | 17:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: the agenda is something that is up for discussion as well | 17:02 |
| SumitNaiksatam | for those who missed the Neutron meeting in the morning, the short summary is that - there is no immediate update on the spin out/split | 17:03 |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 17:03 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | the plan is that an email will be sent to the ML with the proposal, and directed to the TC | 17:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i believe we will proceed from there | 17:03 |
| dougwig | #link http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking/2014/networking.2014-11-18-14.02.log.html | 17:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | did i miss anything in that summary? | 17:03 |
| dougwig | the log from that meeting | 17:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: thanks | 17:04 |
| dougwig | no, good summary | 17:04 |
| * banix listening in from the last row | 17:04 | |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:04 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: :-) | 17:04 |
| vishwanathj | what is the impact to this team? | 17:04 |
| s3wong | hello, sorry, a little late | 17:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the other thing that was dicussed is the charter/agenda for sub-team/groups | 17:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: hi | 17:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | vishwanathj: the spin ou/split is in the context of this team | 17:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | vishwanathj: i.e. advanced services spin out | 17:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | vishwanathj: so the impact is entirely on this team :-) | 17:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay so regarding the sub-team/group - | 17:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Team/Meeting logistics - should we be having this meeting | 17:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Team/Meeting logistics - should we be having this meeting (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:05 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | so one things, i believe is firmly on the table now is that that services are being spun out in some form | 17:06 |
| *** SridarK has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:06 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | and currently we udnerstand this to be a repo split, with a common repo for all the existing advanced services | 17:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *thing | 17:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | some of us came up with the following mission statement/charter for this new repo/project: | 17:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | To implement services and associated libraries that provide abstractions for advanced network functions beyond basic L2/L3 connectivity and forwarding. | 17:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the above complements the current charter for neutron | 17:08 |
| *** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:08 | |
| bobmel | SumitNaiksatam: Sounds pretty good to me, | 17:08 |
| pc_m | +1 | 17:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bobmel: pc_m: okay | 17:08 |
| blogan | +1 | 17:08 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: i think that this is a good first stab it | 17:08 |
| dougwig | +` | 17:08 |
| glebo | 'lo m8s | 17:08 |
| dougwig | +1 | 17:08 |
| s3wong | +1 | 17:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we also have a critical mass of people working in each of the services and collectively as a services’ team | 17:09 |
| sbalukoff | Yup! | 17:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so i would imagine that we have enough of a charter and team to form a sub-team/group? | 17:09 |
| * glebo realises he just missed the "good first stab" and wonders if someone will repost via cut-n-paste, pls? | 17:09 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: To implement services and associated libraries that provide abstractions for advanced network functions beyond basic L2/L3 connectivity and forwarding. | 17:09 |
| pc_m | I think so | 17:09 |
| glebo | +1 | 17:09 |
| glebo | looks great | 17:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so we agree that going forward we can represent this as a advanced services’ sub-team/group? (this might be obvious to most, but just making it clear) | 17:11 |
| glebo | another way to say "advanced network functions" that is a bit more 'standard' jargon is: "service layer networking functions" | 17:11 |
| sbalukoff | Sumit: Agreed! | 17:11 |
| xgerman | +1 | 17:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: sure, we can discuss tuning the charter offline | 17:11 |
| bobmel | +1 | 17:11 |
| pc_m | SumitNaiksatam: yes | 17:11 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:11 |
| s3wong | +1 | 17:11 |
| glebo | +1 | 17:11 |
| sbalukoff | glebo: Would 'service layer networking functions' include FWaaS? | 17:11 |
| *** damon__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:12 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: sure | 17:12 |
| johnsom_ | +1 | 17:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay, so the next part of the team logistics is the meeting | 17:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *this meeting | 17:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | do we need this meeting? | 17:12 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, verbage is important because it's what people unfamiliar with the purpose of the team / project will use as a first introduction of what it's about. :) | 17:12 |
| glebo | sbalukoff: yeah, but I take it back. Because if we use Service Layer Networking, then we'd have to change the name from Advanced Services to match, and I think we already have too much marketing familiarity with "advanced services". So let's stick with it | 17:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: true | 17:12 |
| sbalukoff | glebo: Right. | 17:13 |
| SridarK | glebo: +1 yes pls lets keep what we have now | 17:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | reiterating my question - do we need this meeting? | 17:13 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: whether we needs this meeting, or can function inside the on-demand section of the neutron meeting, is a question that i don't think we can answer today. i'd say keep it. | 17:13 |
| sbalukoff | Anyway: I think the meeting is important as a way for us to coordinate and make sure we're making progress in the direction we want to go. | 17:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: sbalukoff: okay | 17:13 |
| sballe | dougwig: +1 | 17:13 |
| sbalukoff | It could be a short meeting if we aren't making much progress / are blocked on stuff. | 17:13 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: from last experience, this meeting is absolutely needed if we are going to talk about flavor again :-) | 17:13 |
| vishwanathj | +1 | 17:13 |
| s3wong | s/last/past | 17:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: :-) | 17:13 |
| bobmel | +1 | 17:13 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: yes i think this is good as we may not have enough bandwidth to discuss everything in the neutron mtg | 17:14 |
| damon__ | I think we need, for we have so many advanced services | 17:14 |
| xgerman | s3wong +1 | 17:14 |
| glebo | SumitNaiksatam: we need this mtg at present to work on the split issues | 17:14 |
| sbalukoff | s3wong: +1 | 17:14 |
| SridarK | s3wong: :-) | 17:14 |
| sballe | s3wong: +1 | 17:14 |
| glebo | split issues first and foremost. | 17:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay so i think there is fair agreement that on the team logisitics and this meeeting | 17:14 |
| sbalukoff | Yep. | 17:14 |
| damon__ | And maybe there are more and more advanced services since service chain release | 17:14 |
| pc_m | s3wong: +1 :) | 17:14 |
| SridarK | s3wong: lets go to Baskin Robbins :-) | 17:14 |
| sbalukoff | Haha! | 17:15 |
| sballe | SridarK: lol +1 | 17:15 |
| glebo | we need to get the "right" set of people into this meeting in order to really make progress on the split issue, | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so i believe we can put this charter and reasoning on the adv services’ meeting and team wiki | 17:15 |
| glebo | where "right people" includes | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: agree | 17:15 |
| glebo | some of the other cores and PTL and TC folks that are stake holders | 17:16 |
| blogan | charlie sheen? | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: :-) | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: that said | 17:16 |
| glebo | maybe what we need to do is craft a roster of who are the stake holders and then ensure we get buy in for participation | 17:16 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Charlie Sheen? That's John F. Kennedy! | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: l believe the suggestion was that we have the discussion regarding the split in the main neutron meeting | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we use this meeting as a follow up | 17:16 |
| glebo | blogan: charlie sheen:: role: marketing rep | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | to discuss between ourselves as to how to approach the work items | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | since the split involves decisions that impact neutron and openstack as a whole | 17:17 |
| sbalukoff | sumit: +1 | 17:17 |
| glebo | SumitNaiksatam: airtime and focus will be an issue in main neutron mtg. Just look at what happened today | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so the discussion in best served in the neutron meeting | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: i hear you | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: but still i dont think this is left to us to decide :-) | 17:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay moving to the split logistics | 17:18 |
| glebo | how do we mitigate that? failure to do so will, I'm afraid, push the split out of kilo | 17:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: we will mitigate that by making sure we raise this topic during the neutron meeting | 17:18 |
| *** SridarK_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:18 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: and also following up offline with the concerned folks | 17:19 |
| s3wong | glebo: you can certainly keep putting adv. services split as an agenda item on Neutron meeting until a point where the cores would have to give it some airtime :-) | 17:19 |
| glebo | SumitNaiksatam: may be insufficient, but lets take it offline | 17:19 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the first action item in that context will be to make sure that the email regarding the split gets sent to the ML asap | 17:19 |
| SumitNaiksatam | does everyone agree? | 17:19 |
| glebo | s3wong: true, and i think that is the plan so far | 17:19 |
| xgerman | +1 | 17:19 |
| sbalukoff | +1 | 17:19 |
| damon__ | +1 | 17:19 |
| glebo | +1 | 17:20 |
| vishwanathj | +1 | 17:20 |
| sballe | +1 | 17:20 |
| glebo | item owner? | 17:20 |
| xgerman | so how can we help mestery to get that done faster (ghostwrite the e-mail?) | 17:20 |
| johnsom_ | +1 | 17:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | once the email gets sent, we can make enough noise to keep the thread alive and kicking, until everybody is sick and tired of us :-P | 17:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: that is certainly an option, if mestery is willing to take it :-) | 17:20 |
| * glebo is pretty sure everyone is already sick and tired of us | 17:20 | |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: so based on this morning's meeting, mestery or markmcclain will send it out, according to russelb's request (of having one week ML time before being TC agenda item) | 17:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: true | 17:20 |
| glebo | xgerman: we can always provide some text and just say, "this may be of use" | 17:21 |
| *** SridarK has quit IRC | 17:21 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: you want to take the AI to follow up with mestery on that? | 17:21 |
| xgerman | sure, I can do that :-) | 17:21 |
| SumitNaiksatam | great | 17:21 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #action xgerman (among others) to follow up with mestery on sending the email regarding the adv services’ split to the ML | 17:21 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so lets say, as a team, we expect the email to be sent by the end of this week, fair? | 17:22 |
| glebo | I expect it to be sent tomorrow, latest | 17:22 |
| vishwanathj | +1 | 17:22 |
| glebo | TC needs to get it asap in order to get onto next week's TC calendar | 17:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: yeah the earlier the better | 17:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: agree | 17:23 |
| glebo | (per comments in Neutron this AM) | 17:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so latest by the end of this week | 17:23 |
| blogan | i expect it later rather than sooner | 17:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: :-) | 17:23 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so anything more to discuss in this specific context (next topic on agenda is about split logisitcs) | 17:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Project spin out logistics | 17:24 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Project spin out logistics (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:24 | |
| blogan | there's a lot of unknowns on this one | 17:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so we are not taking any decisions here in this meeting (i dont believe we are empowered to either) | 17:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | this is just to get everyone up to speed in terms of what we have set in motion | 17:25 |
| dougwig | on the technical side, i've been working with infra and mark on this, and was planning to post a bp/spec with the gory details on friday (i'm traveling back stateside tomorrow/thursday) | 17:25 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: do you want to update the team on the two things you are doing? | 17:25 |
| s3wong | any updates from dougwig? | 17:25 |
| s3wong | (OK, there it is :-) ) | 17:26 |
| blogan | dougwig will you give us some updates? | 17:26 |
| dougwig | we have an infra patch for the split itself; it is WIP pending knowing the real project name. | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: has posted this patch for the split: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/132998/ | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thats the infra patch ^^^ | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | he is also working on a script to split the repo (and preserve the git history while doing so) | 17:27 |
| xgerman | dougwig is a hero! | 17:27 |
| *** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:27 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | i believe this has been done before, and is on advice from the infra team | 17:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: yay, you rock! | 17:27 |
| dougwig | yep, it started from the oslo graduation script. | 17:27 |
| blogan | is the split going to be just cloning the neutron repo, or will it actually pull out the advanced services code? | 17:27 |
| xgerman | cloning and then delete what we don't need | 17:28 |
| dougwig | technically, it's two repos, identifying the files you want from each, and then selectively pruning the history to remove what is no longer relevant. you end up with two repos with the files you want, each with their own history, and then they diverge from there. | 17:28 |
| blogan | okay | 17:29 |
| damon__ | Good | 17:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: so you would end up pruning in both the repos, right? | 17:29 |
| dougwig | correct | 17:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: okay, so from day one we will support adv services only from the spun out repo? | 17:29 |
| dougwig | can you clarify that question? | 17:30 |
| dougwig | i think the answer to your question is 'yes', but i can interpret it a few different ways. | 17:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: so after you split (assuming it happens in the kilo time frame), we would no longer have the adv services code in the neutron repo, implying that, to deploy any adv services, you would have to use the adv servcies’ repo? | 17:31 |
| dougwig | that's correct. | 17:31 |
| xgerman | +1 | 17:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay | 17:31 |
| xgerman | but we would still have to backport fixes to the old repo | 17:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | that would save us the trouble of maintaining in two places | 17:31 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: you mean stable branch? | 17:32 |
| dougwig | xgerman: for stable/juno, stable/icehouse, yes. | 17:32 |
| xgerman | what dougwig says | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | yeah, those branches would still have the adv services code artifacts | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay, i think so far the technical plan is clear to most people | 17:33 |
| dougwig | there's other stuff, separate db, separate migration, tweak neutron to load out-of-tree plugins, but gerrit is likely a better place to discuss those. | 17:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | non-technical issue - what about naming? | 17:33 |
| xgerman | Positron? | 17:33 |
| blogan | positron prob won't work | 17:33 |
| xgerman | :-( | 17:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: really?? | 17:33 |
| blogan | http://www.positronsoftwares.com/ | 17:33 |
| s3wong | blogan: really, it is already taken? | 17:33 |
| a2hill | I couldnt find a class 9 trademark for positron | 17:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but isnt that different from just “positron”? | 17:34 |
| a2hill | some were dead, but none active | 17:34 |
| s3wong | I guess that's the reason why only dougwig and I show up on #openstack-positron... | 17:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | a2hill: yey to that! | 17:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *yay | 17:34 |
| xgerman | yay | 17:35 |
| blogan | dunno, but from talking to mark he didn't think it was plausible either | 17:35 |
| blogan | bc of that website | 17:35 |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| blogan | that doesn't mean its final though | 17:35 |
| xgerman | well, we need somebody who owns a physics book for more particle names | 17:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i would imagine there are legal folks employed by the openstack foundation to do this check, right? | 17:35 |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:35 | |
| blogan | muon | 17:35 |
| blogan | boson | 17:35 |
| damon__ | :-) | 17:35 |
| blogan | quark | 17:36 |
| s3wong | or we can go back to name after space/cosmic related stuff | 17:36 |
| blogan | SumitNaiksatam: yeah and mark will go through them | 17:36 |
| xgerman | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_particles | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: okay | 17:36 |
| xgerman | neutralino :-) | 17:37 |
| blogan | he learned some lessons from the quantum name and renaming it | 17:37 |
| blogan | it was a cosmic chance that neutron was available | 17:37 |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 17:37 | |
| blogan | neutrino | 17:37 |
| SridarK_ | I think rackspace offered quark if i am not mistaken | 17:37 |
| s3wong | Backspace has trademark right on 'quark'? | 17:38 |
| blogan | yeah thats our internal neutron plugin and i'd hate to take it | 17:38 |
| s3wong | s/Backspace/Rackspace | 17:38 |
| sbalukoff | It's not that hard to do a trademark search, eh. | 17:38 |
| SridarK_ | s3wong: yes and they offered it | 17:38 |
| blogan | that woudl be confusing to us internally! | 17:38 |
| a2hill | They said quark was not trademarked yet | 17:38 |
| blogan | im easily confused | 17:38 |
| xgerman | so am I | 17:38 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay so we can do some more homework on this | 17:39 |
| sbalukoff | It's also not that hard to submit a trademark application. ;) | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | be ready with the options so that we can propose them at the right time | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: want to try positron ;-) | 17:39 |
| sbalukoff | (Though it is time consuming) | 17:39 |
| a2hill | Using TESS there are live ™ on positron but none for class 9 | 17:39 |
| a2hill | But, i may be looking at things wrong | 17:39 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok moving on | 17:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Mid cycle meet up proposal | 17:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Mid cycle meet up proposal (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:40 | |
| SridarK_ | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/advanced-services-kilo-midcycle | 17:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i guess this follows from the discussion with TC etc | 17:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but we can have a plan ready | 17:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK_: thanks for the link | 17:41 |
| glebo | what did folks think of my suggestion about Dec 11, to ensure we have the right cores and TC and PTL and such? | 17:41 |
| blogan | mestery mentioned an email today? | 17:41 |
| glebo | (back on name) orgasmatron? | 17:41 |
| xgerman | glebo you like skiing? | 17:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: lol! | 17:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: email to the ML? | 17:42 |
| s3wong | glebo: yeah... that's a REAL name :-) | 17:42 |
| dougwig | glebo: i think de-focusing that meetup is not a good idea, nor will it breed goodwill. we should work to have those cores/ptl in attendance at whatever other meetup we do. | 17:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i meant to ask, is the email already sent to the ML? | 17:42 |
| glebo | http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orgasmatron_(disambiguation) | 17:43 |
| glebo | pretty sure it's not trademarked | 17:43 |
| blogan | SumitNaiksatam: no i dont think it has yet, i just understood that is what he menat | 17:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: ah okay | 17:43 |
| glebo | (from a woody allen move, sleeper, 1971) | 17:43 |
| glebo | movie | 17:43 |
| * pc_m can we have one discussion? | 17:43 | |
| s3wong | glebo: in addition to what dougwig said - after the split, we are independent projects with probably non-100%-overlapping contributors. And there is a great chance that some Neutron cores are just NOT too interested in adv. services | 17:44 |
| blogan | s3wong: similar to how it is now :) | 17:44 |
| glebo | dougwig: ack. just thinking that so much travel may not be realistic for normal humans, esp those w/ families | 17:44 |
| s3wong | blogan: :-) | 17:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i would hope that we can collectively decide the logistics of the meetup so as to give everyone’s opinion a fair chance | 17:44 |
| xgerman | then we do it in MSP | 17:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | glebo: completely understandable | 17:45 |
| glebo | s3wong: ack. Was hoping the meetup on 11th would be really tightly focused on split execution | 17:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: MSP? | 17:45 |
| xgerman | Minneapolis -- that's where Kyle lives | 17:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: ha :-) | 17:45 |
| glebo | xgerman: ha ha | 17:45 |
| dougwig | glebo: i'm really interested in the vendor split, so a split meetup will be, umm, hard. ;) | 17:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | in -30 | 17:45 |
| xgerman | I know the US by airport codes | 17:46 |
| SridarK_ | xgerman: Minneapolis in Dec ? | 17:46 |
| SridarK_ | :-) | 17:46 |
| glebo | dougwig: ha | 17:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | anyway, we can leverage the above etherpad for some of these discussions as well | 17:46 |
| johnsom_ | SridarK_ +1 | 17:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so in terms of agenda, i proposed some time for each of the adv services, just to cross-sync | 17:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i am not sure we have enough time today | 17:47 |
| dougwig | for lbaas, just scroll up one hour. :) | 17:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | may be we can do a quick 2 min rapid fire? | 17:47 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: is VPNaS going to be having their meeting during this hour :-) | 17:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: :-) | 17:47 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: no :-) | 17:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so lets start in reverse order | 17:48 |
| dougwig | for flavors, i spoke to eugene and mark, and will be re-proposing mark's spec for kilo/neutron, tweaking it for the feedback he got at the end. | 17:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic VPNaaS update | 17:48 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "VPNaaS update (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:48 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #undo | 17:48 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Topic object at 0x1dfca50> | 17:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Flavors | 17:48 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Flavors (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:48 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: thanks for that update | 17:48 |
| s3wong | dougwig: who is going to pick up flavor in Kilo cycle? | 17:48 |
| dougwig | s3wong: me | 17:48 |
| dougwig | it's my turn to be full of holes. | 17:49 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i also believe there is resistance to using the term “flavors” (sorry for bringing up a naming issue again) | 17:49 |
| s3wong | dougwig: because as we talked about during the summit, flavor is going to be part of Neutron instead of Positron | 17:49 |
| xgerman | let's call it ice cream then | 17:49 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: “flavor is going to be part of Neutron instead of Positron” which session was this discussed in? | 17:49 |
| xgerman | yeah, I also thought we own flavors | 17:50 |
| sbalukoff | s3wong: What was the reasoning there? So that people could use multiple types of SDN for layer 2/3 stuff in a single OpenStack installation or something? | 17:50 |
| dougwig | i'm going to propose it in neutron-specs, because no other specs repo exists yet. i was punting on the question of where. | 17:50 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: the Friday one --- it was a 5 minutes discussion, due to the fact that flavor framework will affect L3 services | 17:50 |
| xgerman | Friday was very confusing... | 17:50 |
| sbalukoff | s3wong: Do you recall how they affect L3 services? | 17:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: okay, i would have hoped “flavors” was inside positron, that made more sense to me | 17:51 |
| sbalukoff | Yeah, Friday was pretty much useless for me. | 17:51 |
| s3wong | sbalukoff: yes, the main reason for that is flavor can affect whether we select a vendor driver that can both be a router and FW, for example | 17:51 |
| sbalukoff | I think most if not all of us wanted flavors to be in positron. | 17:51 |
| sballe | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:51 |
| sbalukoff | s3wong. Aah. | 17:51 |
| s3wong | sbalukoff, SumitNaiksatam, dougwig: guys, it wasn't my idea :-) it was just being talked about during the meetup on Friday, I just reflected back on this | 17:52 |
| xgerman | mmh, but once we spin out that shouldn't be an issue any longer | 17:52 |
| sbalukoff | Well, there's always the possibility of making Neutron dependent on a shared flavors library which lives in positron once Neutron is in a position to actually offer that feature. :) | 17:52 |
| s3wong | I too would like this in Positron :-) | 17:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: to that i would say, we should probably not be ttying “multi-service” appliances to flavors | 17:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: understood | 17:52 |
| sbalukoff | Sumit: Agreed! | 17:53 |
| xgerman | ok, so we assume Friday never happened -- nobody remembers that day anyway :-) | 17:53 |
| sbalukoff | Haha! | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: i like that idea | 17:53 |
| sballe | lol | 17:53 |
| bobmel | SumitNaiksatam: What do you mean by the multi-service statement? | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bobmel: router + fw | 17:53 |
| s3wong | xgerman: well, when we get to FWaaS segment, the Friday meeting did have some important implication on what the FWaaS team needs to do prior to the split | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the simpler thing to do would be to have “flavors” per service-type | 17:53 |
| sbalukoff | Also not a terrible idea. | 17:54 |
| s3wong | so there is still important things coming out of that Friday meetup :-) | 17:54 |
| xgerman | I have a selective memory | 17:54 |
| sbalukoff | The flavor framework *ought* to be pretty light-weight. | 17:54 |
| s3wong | dougwig: is flavor per service-type the design now? | 17:54 |
| sbalukoff | But then, I could be horribly underestimating that | 17:54 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: can you explain what you mean by that? isn't the current proposal a per-service thing already? | 17:54 |
| sballe | Do we want to discuss to have “flavors” per service-type? | 17:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: there could be a path for evolution :-) | 17:54 |
| dougwig | s3wong: yes, flavors specify a service, and a number of attached service profiles (meta-data configs) | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: if its per-service, then it does not address “router + FW” , right? | 17:55 |
| s3wong | sballe: flavor discussion is always the safest bet to occupy the ENTIRE meeting time :-) | 17:55 |
| dougwig | the service field is a string, and can be anything. | 17:55 |
| sbalukoff | Haha | 17:55 |
| sballe | s3wong: :-) | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: from experience :-) | 17:56 |
| bobmel | SumitNaiksatam: Why not? There could be flaovrs for router and flavors for FW | 17:56 |
| xgerman | well, let's wait for the proposal to surface so we can discuss it in gerrit | 17:56 |
| xgerman | also we are T-4 | 17:56 |
| s3wong | xgerman: +1 | 17:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bobmel: true, but s3wong was relaying the discussion specifying the need for a flavor which captures, both, a router and a firewall, as a one flavor | 17:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman: +1 | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic open discussion | 17:57 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:57 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | we have 3 mins | 17:57 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: that said, if we use flavor to select L3 service also, the argument remains | 17:57 |
| bobmel | I think it is preferable to keep flavors per service and not flavors that combines multiple services | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so skipped the per service update (thanks to flavors!) | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bobmel: okay | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: yeah, something to consider | 17:57 |
| s3wong | anyway, let's get some quick updates on FWaaS --- the per-router work as well as the service group work, how are these going? | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: sure | 17:58 |
| igordcard | What about more general flavors that combine service flavors? | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the team has met on a couple of occasions to discuss this | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK_: will is in the process of translating this into a spec (i am referring to the FWaaS insertion) | 17:58 |
| SridarK_ | SumitNaiksatam: and all yes working thru that | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we will also follow up on this topic on tomorrow’s FWaaS meeting, more details there | 17:59 |
| SridarK_ | would prefer a more generic model (perhaps ports) rather than just a router_id | 17:59 |
| xgerman | +1 | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | service groups spec is in review | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | SridarK_: +1 | 17:59 |
| s3wong | SridarK_: I (along with Kanzhe) vowed to NOT submit a service insertion spec unless and until Positron is spun off | 18:00 |
| SridarK_ | s3wong: :-) | 18:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | service groups: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/131596/ | 18:01 |
| xgerman | bye | 18:01 |
| *** xgerman has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:01 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | alright thanks everyone | 18:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bye! | 18:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #endmeeting | 18:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 18:01 | |
| SridarK_ | bye | 18:01 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 18 18:01:12 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:01 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-11-18-17.01.html | 18:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-11-18-17.01.txt | 18:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-11-18-17.01.log.html | 18:01 |
| *** pc_m has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:01 | |
| *** vishwanathj has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:01 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | may be we did not need to end so abruptly | 18:03 |
| SumitNaiksatam | did not realize that this channel is free most of the time :-) | 18:03 |
| sballe | bye | 18:03 |
| dougwig | lol | 18:03 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: #openstack-meeting-4 is quite unoccupied :-) | 18:03 |
| dougwig | it is the wild west right now. | 18:03 |
| sballe | lol | 18:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | yeah, so used to watching over the shoulder on the other channels :-) | 18:06 |
| *** evgenyf has quit IRC | 18:06 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:15 | |
| dougwig | because they're coming for you? | 18:16 |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:17 | |
| *** johnsom_ has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:27 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 18:33 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:34 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:53 | |
| *** glebo has quit IRC | 18:55 | |
| *** ajmiller has quit IRC | 18:56 | |
| *** ajmiller has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:56 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:58 | |
| *** mwang2 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:58 | |
| *** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:01 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| *** SridarK_ has quit IRC | 19:02 | |
| *** glebo has quit IRC | 19:07 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 19:16 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 19:31 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:34 | |
| *** damon__ has quit IRC | 20:01 | |
| *** jamiem has quit IRC | 20:18 | |
| *** hareeshp has quit IRC | 20:21 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 20:44 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:44 | |
| *** jamiem has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:49 | |
| *** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:49 | |
| *** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:57 | |
| *** glebo has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| *** hareeshp has quit IRC | 20:59 | |
| *** glebo has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:00 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 21:05 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:10 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 21:11 | |
| *** glebo has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:19 | |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:50 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 21:56 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 22:00 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:02 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:33 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:35 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 22:41 | |
| *** jamiem has quit IRC | 22:46 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 23:07 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 23:11 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:16 | |
| *** bobmel has quit IRC | 23:17 | |
| *** mwang2 has quit IRC | 23:29 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:36 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:37 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 23:37 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:37 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 23:39 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 23:42 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:57 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:57 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!