| *** david-lyle is now known as david-lyle_afk | 00:17 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 00:24 | |
| *** david-lyle_afk has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 01:12 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:18 | |
| *** mwang2_ has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 01:22 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:23 | |
| *** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:27 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 01:31 | |
| *** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC | 01:39 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 01:39 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has quit IRC | 02:08 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 02:19 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 02:24 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 02:42 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 02:46 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 02:55 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 02:57 | |
| *** sbalukoff has quit IRC | 03:03 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 03:20 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 03:30 | |
| *** nikhil_k|vacay has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 05:02 | |
| *** kobis has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 06:24 | |
| *** shwetaap has quit IRC | 06:51 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 06:51 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 09:11 | |
| *** sbalukoff has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 10:03 | |
| *** naohirot has quit IRC | 10:29 | |
| *** naohirot has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 11:00 | |
| *** shwetaap has quit IRC | 11:16 | |
| *** naohirot has quit IRC | 13:29 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 13:58 | |
| *** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:04 | |
| *** evgenyf has quit IRC | 14:06 | |
| *** evgenyf has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:06 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:10 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 14:11 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:34 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:35 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 14:46 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 14:47 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 14:58 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 15:08 | |
| *** nikhil_k|vacay is now known as nikhil_k | 15:15 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:16 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:22 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:27 | |
| *** nikhil_k is now known as nikhil_k|vacay | 15:29 | |
| *** jamiem has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:31 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 15:35 | |
| *** vjay-netscaler has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:35 | |
| *** vjay-ns has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:36 | |
| vjay-ns | Hi All, Is there an LBaaS meeting today? | 15:41 |
|---|---|---|
| *** ajmiller has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:51 | |
| dougwig | yep, starting in 3 minutes. | 15:56 |
| vjay-netscaler | ok! | 15:57 |
| *** xgerman_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 15:57 | |
| dougwig | we're going to discuss this later in the meeting, so if anyone hasn't had a chance to peek at it yet: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136835 | 15:58 |
| sbalukoff | Thanks for the link, eh! | 15:59 |
| dougwig | #startmeeting neutron lbaas | 16:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 25 16:00:10 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 |
| dougwig | #topic Roll call and Agenda | 16:00 |
| sbalukoff | Howdy, folks! | 16:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Roll call and Agenda (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:00 | |
| dougwig | hiya | 16:00 |
| ajmiller | o/ | 16:00 |
| dougwig | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/LBaaS#Meeting_25.11.2014 | 16:00 |
| blogan | \o/ | 16:00 |
| dougwig | #topic Announcements | 16:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Announcements (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:01 | |
| xgerman_ | \o/ - nobody vacations like blogan | 16:01 |
| dougwig | lol | 16:01 |
| blogan | i'm a masochist | 16:01 |
| dougwig | our fourth v2 review merged! thanks oleg and mestery! | 16:01 |
| dougwig | next review that needs attention: #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/123487/ | 16:01 |
| xgerman_ | go see the sights -- the alamo is nice thgis time of year! | 16:01 |
| dougwig | any other announcements, besides that blogan doesn't know how to vacation? | 16:02 |
| sballe | o/ | 16:02 |
| dougwig | #topic Subteam charter | 16:02 |
| blogan | that review needs to be fixed for jenkins and address some comments, ill try to do that today | 16:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Subteam charter (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:02 | |
| xgerman_ | also we are looking to gte in touch with mlavalle -- we ant to run the tempest tests | 16:02 |
| dougwig | mestery introduced this wiki yesterday: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronSubteamCharters | 16:02 |
| dougwig | i put in a quick blurb for us, but if anyone disagrees, holler. | 16:03 |
| dougwig | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronSubteamCharters | 16:03 |
| blogan | i disagree with the rainbows | 16:03 |
| xgerman_ | I on the other hand like them | 16:03 |
| xgerman_ | but I also want unicorns, lots of them | 16:04 |
| sbalukoff | The rainbows are important. | 16:04 |
| dougwig | gerrit fight. go! | 16:04 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman +1 | 16:04 |
| blogan | i do have a question that is somewhat related | 16:04 |
| dougwig | shoot | 16:04 |
| rm_work | yo | 16:04 |
| blogan | if we want all reviews merged into the feature branch, it is not in our best interest to add more reviews to be merged to that feature branch | 16:05 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 16:05 |
| blogan | which means it is not in our best interest to add new features or change things until after the split | 16:05 |
| dougwig | in my mind, we keep going with the feature branch as if the split isn't going to happen. when the split occurs, a few reviews might need to be moved. | 16:05 |
| blogan | so what if getting things merged into the feature branch becomes a blocker to getting the split done? | 16:06 |
| blogan | mark has hinted this could be the case | 16:06 |
| dougwig | the spec linked above calls out that case, and as not a blocker. | 16:06 |
| dougwig | (doesn't mean that it's anywhere near consensus, but that topic hasn't come up yet.) | 16:07 |
| blogan | consensus is like rainbows and unicorns | 16:07 |
| dougwig | i don't like serializing stuff around imminent changes in openstack, since there are *always* imminent changes in openstack, and they can't all be relied upon. we'd literally be in paralysis all the time. | 16:07 |
| sballe | +1 | 16:07 |
| dougwig | that's just my opinion, though. | 16:08 |
| sballe | mine too | 16:08 |
| blogan | i know, i agree that there really shouldn't be a dependency on pending reviews into the feature branch | 16:08 |
| xgerman_ | I agree with getting v2 finished but I would elahy new work | 16:08 |
| xgerman_ | delay | 16:08 |
| blogan | there's also the prospect of redoing some of the v2 api | 16:08 |
| blogan | or changing some of it around | 16:08 |
| xgerman_ | I heard of that but we should continue our course | 16:09 |
| dougwig | do we want to push for a feature branch in the split repo, to account for some kilo churn? | 16:09 |
| vjay-netscaler | I didnt understand the conversation in full. what is the idea here, we get the split with code in main branch and then merge feature branch to split repo? | 16:09 |
| blogan | yeah but id rather avoid kilo having one version of the v2 api only to change it for L | 16:09 |
| dougwig | we also need to repropose our v2 specs for kilo | 16:09 |
| sballe | blogan: What would the re-work on v2 be? | 16:10 |
| xgerman_ | sballe +1 | 16:10 |
| blogan | sballe: we've discussed in last meeting i think, removing the need for the DEFERRED status is one | 16:10 |
| blogan | well its a big one | 16:11 |
| *** TrevorV has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:11 | |
| * TrevorV sorry I'm late :( | 16:11 | |
| blogan | then also having only one true root object, load balancer is a proposal | 16:11 |
| sballe | blogan: ok I'll look at the meeting logs and will sync-up with you | 16:11 |
| dougwig | blogan: we kind of got ourselves into that level of analysis paralysis when we first started getting consensus on v2. it's not an api any of us love, but it did get consensus. are we sure that if we go through that mill again that the result will be different/better? | 16:11 |
| dougwig | DEFERRED was added on the fly late; i'm not sure removing it is all that noticeable. the other stuff is bigger. | 16:11 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, I am very worried that we open a can of worms | 16:11 |
| blogan | it was agreed on at the midcycle | 16:11 |
| xgerman_ | but that was before task flow | 16:12 |
| blogan | well i guess the biggest change possibly is what Sam proposed on the ML | 16:12 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, and we are not in favor of it | 16:12 |
| dougwig | let's put this stuff as alternatives (or the main proposal) in the specs for kilo and go for consensus in gerrit? | 16:13 |
| sballe | I saw what Sam proposed but thought we were going to do that down the road if it still made sense. I do not feel we are down the road yet. We talked version 1.0 and we are not at v 0,5 of Octavaia yet | 16:13 |
| blogan | dougwig +1 | 16:14 |
| dougwig | i'm just worried about being duke nukem forever, openstack edition. | 16:14 |
| blogan | sballe: sam is talking about neutron lbaas v2 api | 16:14 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: +1 | 16:14 |
| sballe | blogan: I understand but I am still not in favor of touching that now | 16:14 |
| dougwig | blogan: can you repurpose your v2 spec for kilo, and we'll continue there? | 16:14 |
| dougwig | repropose | 16:14 |
| blogan | sure | 16:15 |
| sbalukoff | Neutron LBaaS v2 API does affect Octavia, though not initially. | 16:15 |
| blogan | action me | 16:15 |
| dougwig | #action blogan Re-propose lbaas v2 spec for Kilo | 16:15 |
| blogan | repurpose works as well | 16:15 |
| dougwig | ok, now that we're all warmed up... | 16:15 |
| sbalukoff | Again, we need to get v0.5 first | 16:15 |
| dougwig | #topic Advanced services split mechanics | 16:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Advanced services split mechanics (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:15 | |
| dougwig | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136835/ | 16:15 |
| dougwig | any comments or discussion on that spec that we can do in slightly higher bandwidth irc meeting? | 16:16 |
| blogan | pretty sure the next meeting will have that | 16:16 |
| sbalukoff | I'm just catching up on it. Will probably have more to say in gerrit. :) | 16:16 |
| rm_work | same | 16:16 |
| sballe | same here | 16:16 |
| dougwig | current hot points are: client? governance? extensions? core vs service plugins? dependencies and upgrades | 16:16 |
| dougwig | here, or gerrit, or the services meeting in 45 minutes... feedback anywhere is good. | 16:17 |
| sbalukoff | Eeexcellent. | 16:17 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, need to cathc up with the comments | 16:18 |
| dougwig | this topic seems to go dead silent in IRC. :) | 16:18 |
| dougwig | ok, moving on. | 16:18 |
| dougwig | #topic Open discussion | 16:18 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:18 | |
| dougwig | any topics to discuss here? | 16:19 |
| xgerman_ | so this is for the RAX guys -- we would like to get in touch with Miguel to learn more about the tempest tests | 16:19 |
| blogan | mind if i talk about Sam's proposal here a bit? | 16:19 |
| dougwig | this is my first meeting stateside at the new time. loving it. :) | 16:20 |
| blogan | after german's | 16:20 |
| dougwig | blogan: go for it | 16:20 |
| blogan | jorgem sits right next to miguel, though miguel is not always at his desk | 16:20 |
| blogan | TrevorV: is miguel there? | 16:20 |
| TrevorV | Nope, not right now | 16:20 |
| xgerman_ | ok, we also send him an e-mail :-) | 16:21 |
| TrevorV | I mean he could be in the office today but he's not physically at the desk right now | 16:21 |
| blogan | he might be on vacation this week | 16:21 |
| xgerman_ | ok, that makes sense | 16:21 |
| blogan | and he's smart unlike me | 16:21 |
| TrevorV | (like blogan should be) | 16:21 |
| sbalukoff | Haha | 16:21 |
| dougwig | lol | 16:21 |
| dougwig | #topic v2 objects as logical models | 16:21 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "v2 objects as logical models (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:21 | |
| dougwig | take it away, blogan | 16:21 |
| blogan | other than what i mentioned on the ML, and the fact that it would change v2 midstream, are there any cons to his proposal? | 16:22 |
| dougwig | that last is a pretty big con. city sized. | 16:22 |
| blogan | yes but if it is the best most amazing proposal ever, it'd be worth it | 16:23 |
| sbalukoff | I would like to see a fleshed-out version of reporting status as well as a state machine description. | 16:23 |
| sballe | sbalukoff: +1 | 16:24 |
| sbalukoff | Once you start sharing objects across entities (ie. not within scope of parent objects), status gets crazy. | 16:24 |
| xgerman_ | yep, I still fail to understand what sharing gets us -- you can *always* copy objects | 16:24 |
| dougwig | if we prep an alternate, i'd like to see other folks working on it, so we're going in parallel and not stalling out. | 16:24 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: it does, but the entities will not have statuses directly, they will be statuses only relevant to the parent | 16:24 |
| sbalukoff | I'm OK with sharing objects within the scope of parent objects. | 16:24 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Aah-- so there's effectively the built-in scope. | 16:25 |
| ptoohill | so the only way to view status is on the parent in this proposal? | 16:25 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, that actually makes more sense to me. | 16:25 |
| blogan | xgerman_: sharing gets a more intuitive UX for people, they don't have to recreate pools 100 times, and they don't have to update 100 pools | 16:25 |
| sbalukoff | ptoohill: Correct. | 16:25 |
| xgerman_ | well, for the people with a 100 pools -- so that solves a problem for a minority of my users | 16:25 |
| blogan | xgerman_: true | 16:26 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: It does mean that if I have a pool shared across a bazillion listeners, updating one member initiates a ton of back-end work, any of which could fail. | 16:26 |
| ptoohill | So i wouldnt be able to query my members and see their statues, i would have to then query the parent and sort/find through its list of statuses for the members im interested in | 16:26 |
| dougwig | sam's proposal fits in especially well with taskflow. | 16:26 |
| ptoohill | Not a big deal i suppose | 16:26 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: that is true if the backend does not support sharing, but the user will end up manually causing a ton of back-end work anyway if sharing is nto enabled, though it will be easier for the system to handle in that case | 16:27 |
| rm_work | ptoohill: you mean like backend nodes? | 16:27 |
| ptoohill | or any object really | 16:27 |
| ptoohill | was just using that as example | 16:27 |
| dougwig | sbalukoff: unless the logical objects are treated as templates, and not real-time config. (create uses logical structure, edits affect LB tree only.) | 16:27 |
| rm_work | ptoohill: I would hope the same doesn't apply to statuses that come from health monitors | 16:27 |
| rm_work | blogan: ? | 16:27 |
| blogan | ptoohill: if neutorn extensions supported parent child nesting, that would make that easier and I'd like this a lot more | 16:27 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: I don't follow. How is that any different? | 16:28 |
| ptoohill | true | 16:28 |
| ptoohill | werent they talking about reworking that? | 16:28 |
| dougwig | sbalukoff: because then edits to a shared pool would only affect new LB's. | 16:28 |
| ptoohill | but thats a ways off even if it was true | 16:28 |
| blogan | ptoohill: they're focused on refactoring the API, i think extensiosn will be later | 16:28 |
| ptoohill | ah | 16:28 |
| blogan | though i need to spend time on seeing if i can hack it to work with the current exntesion loader | 16:28 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Aah, I see. That's not very intuitive for the user, though. | 16:28 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: If the user *wants* to affect all load balancers, they're back in the boat of updating everything themselves again.. | 16:29 |
| dougwig | depends on how it's presented. it's certainly more in line with the proposal of logical objects being divorced from their provisioned config and status. | 16:29 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: It seems messy to me. | 16:29 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 16:29 |
| sbalukoff | Honestly, I'd rather initiate all that back-end work. | 16:29 |
| blogan | that does remove half the reason to have shared objects in that updating one entity can update many | 16:29 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: That's my perception of its benefit, too. | 16:30 |
| xgerman_ | and my fear of support calls. | 16:30 |
| blogan | dont fear the reaper | 16:30 |
| sbalukoff | Oh, pshaw. Providing customer support is so 2014. | 16:30 |
| rm_work | <_< | 16:31 |
| dougwig | what company would be silly enough to bet on fanatical support? | 16:31 |
| dougwig | oh. | 16:31 |
| sbalukoff | Haha | 16:31 |
| dougwig | :) | 16:31 |
| blogan | some insane company | 16:31 |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:31 | |
| xgerman_ | well, I am not sure how Sam's proposal will make development easier + we can solve his use cases by copying stuff | 16:32 |
| sbalukoff | Ok, so... again, I want to see the idea fleshed out more, as well as some discussion of handling various scenarios (what I mean by state machine, I guess). | 16:32 |
| dougwig | does someone want to chase this down and ferret out if it's good enough to overturn the boat? blogan, before you answer, you are supposed to be on vacation. | 16:32 |
| sbalukoff | And I would like to see logical objects nested under parent objects as blogan says. | 16:32 |
| blogan | im pretty sure sbalukoff already asked for this on the ML | 16:32 |
| sbalukoff | Otherwise, I don't have a problem with this in theory. | 16:32 |
| xgerman_ | sbalukoff +1 | 16:32 |
| dougwig | so ,we wait for an ML response and table this for a week or two? | 16:33 |
| xgerman_ | nesting objects is goog | 16:33 |
| sballe | sbalukoff: +1 | 16:33 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Yep. | 16:33 |
| blogan | sounds good to me, hopefully sam responds with such | 16:33 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: With all the advanced services stuff in the works, I wonder how much traction we'd have overturning the boat. | 16:33 |
| blogan | evgenyf: you around? | 16:33 |
| sbalukoff | Though it seems Radware / Samuel would be on board. | 16:33 |
| dougwig | ok. i'd say we should go ahead with the v2 spec, and add this later if it bears fruit. | 16:33 |
| evgenyf | blogan: yes | 16:34 |
| sballe | dougwig: +1 | 16:34 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: +1 | 16:34 |
| blogan | evgenyf: could you relay to sam, if he doesn't know yet, that we'd like more fleshed out examples | 16:34 |
| evgenyf | Sure | 16:34 |
| blogan | thanks! | 16:35 |
| dougwig | #topic Open discussion | 16:35 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open discussion (Meeting topic: neutron lbaas)" | 16:35 | |
| dougwig | anything else this morning? | 16:35 |
| blogan | evgenyf: unless you can provide the examples | 16:35 |
| sbalukoff | Have a happy turkey day, for those who celebrate it? | 16:35 |
| blogan | i thought this week was happy rioting day | 16:36 |
| blogan | or week | 16:36 |
| dougwig | settle down. | 16:36 |
| sbalukoff | It's turning into riot week. | 16:36 |
| sbalukoff | Haha | 16:36 |
| dougwig | on that note, let's get out of here. thanks, everyone. | 16:36 |
| blogan | lol | 16:36 |
| sballe | bye | 16:36 |
| rm_work | see you all next week :) | 16:36 |
| xgerman_ | thanks -- see you in 24 | 16:36 |
| blogan | bye | 16:36 |
| sbalukoff | Thanks! Seeya! | 16:36 |
| dougwig | #endmeeting | 16:36 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 16:36 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 25 16:36:56 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:36 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_lbaas/2014/neutron_lbaas.2014-11-25-16.00.html | 16:37 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_lbaas/2014/neutron_lbaas.2014-11-25-16.00.txt | 16:37 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_lbaas/2014/neutron_lbaas.2014-11-25-16.00.log.html | 16:37 |
| dougwig | i wonder if you can undo an endmeetin | 16:37 |
| dougwig | #undo | 16:37 |
| *** TrevorV has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:37 | |
| dougwig | appears not. :) | 16:37 |
| rm_work | nup | 16:37 |
| blogan | it wouldn't accept your command | 16:37 |
| dougwig | #endmeeting | 16:37 |
| dougwig | just in case | 16:37 |
| *** shwetaap has quit IRC | 16:39 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:40 | |
| *** shwetaap has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:43 | |
| *** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:51 | |
| *** vjay-netscaler has quit IRC | 16:58 | |
| *** mhanif has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:59 | |
| dougwig | o/ | 16:59 |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 16:59 | |
| blogan | \o/ | 16:59 |
| ptoohill | o/ | 17:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hi there! | 17:00 |
| hareeshp | Hello | 17:00 |
| vishwana_ | hello | 17:00 |
| mhanif | hello | 17:00 |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:00 | |
| xgerman_ | o/ | 17:01 |
| *** kobis has quit IRC | 17:01 | |
| sbalukoff | Greetings, y'all! | 17:01 |
| s3wong | hello | 17:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: hareeshp dougwig blogan: hi | 17:01 |
| blogan | hola | 17:01 |
| banix | hi | 17:01 |
| dougwig | hiya | 17:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman_: sballe: hi | 17:01 |
| *** SridarK has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:02 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: hi | 17:02 |
| s3wong | good turnout for Thanksgiving week... | 17:02 |
| sbalukoff | Is... someone planning on actually starting the meeting? Or have an agenda? | 17:02 |
| *** bobmel has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:02 | |
| mhanif | Yes, agenda pleas! | 17:02 |
| s3wong | review the spec from dougwig, I suppose? :-) | 17:03 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 17:03 | |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 17:03 |
| hareeshp | +1 | 17:03 |
| sbalukoff | HAHA! | 17:03 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig! You're in charge again! | 17:03 |
| *** _sunil has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:03 | |
| SridarK | Hi | 17:03 |
| dougwig | sumit usually chairs, appears he lost network. | 17:04 |
| banix | i think sumit got disconnected | 17:04 |
| blogan | SumitNaiksatam leads these, and i know he is here | 17:04 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:04 | |
| sbalukoff | Oh, ok. | 17:04 |
| blogan | oh wait | 17:04 |
| blogan | nvm | 17:04 |
| dougwig | there he is. | 17:04 |
| blogan | there he is | 17:04 |
| sbalukoff | There he is! | 17:04 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam is back | 17:04 |
| blogan | jinx | 17:04 |
| sbalukoff | You owe me a coke? | 17:04 |
| blogan | you all owe me | 17:04 |
| sbalukoff | jinx! | 17:04 |
| blogan | not an exact jinx | 17:04 |
| blogan | you lose | 17:04 |
| blogan | you owe me for false jinxing | 17:04 |
| sbalukoff | Good enough for government work. | 17:04 |
| sballe | o/ | 17:04 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hi there | 17:05 |
| blogan | good thing this isn't in the meeting logs | 17:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | some issue with my connection i wasnt able to see any responses from any one | 17:05 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: do you want to have a meeting? | 17:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | lets get started | 17:05 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #startmeeting Networking Advanced Services | 17:05 |
| dougwig | maybe add a second chair, in case you drop again | 17:05 |
| openstack | Meeting started Tue Nov 25 17:05:34 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SumitNaiksatam. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 17:05 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 17:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:05 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_advanced_services' | 17:05 |
| *** vishwan__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:05 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | #chair blogan dougwig s3wong sbalukoff sballe | 17:06 |
| openstack | Current chairs: SumitNaiksatam blogan dougwig s3wong sballe sbalukoff | 17:06 |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:06 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | welcome to the party! | 17:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #info https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices#Agenda | 17:06 |
| _sunil | hello! I am here representing Embrane! First timer here...:) | 17:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | _sunil: hi there sunil! | 17:06 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Neutron subteams' charter | 17:07 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Neutron subteams' charter (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:07 | |
| s3wong | _sunil: marcodb too busy? :-) | 17:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | not sure if we are subteam or a full fledged team | 17:07 |
| sbalukoff | We're the A-Team. | 17:07 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 17:07 |
| SridarK | sbalukoff: +1 | 17:07 |
| sballe | +1 | 17:07 |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 17:07 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: yay that! :-) | 17:07 |
| _sunil | yeah...:) | 17:07 |
| vishwan__ | +1 | 17:07 |
| SumitNaiksatam | but at least prior to the split i think we need to have a charter | 17:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i put the most obvious things there | 17:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so feel free to edit update as seems relevant (perhaps send an email to the team if in doubt) | 17:08 |
| SumitNaiksatam | anything to discuss on that front? | 17:08 |
| dougwig | i noted a distinct lack of unicorns. | 17:08 |
| sballe | lol | 17:09 |
| * dougwig makes a note in Sumit's permanent file. | 17:09 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: all the unicorns and rainbows are taken | 17:09 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: i figured we would do real work :-P | 17:09 |
| *** nlahouti has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:09 | |
| mhanif | I thought Adv. services had sub-teams in it? Will LBaaS, VPNaaS be part of it or separate sub-teams? | 17:09 |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 17:10 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: we would treat those as subteam as well | 17:10 |
| sbalukoff | Those are included in the purview of advanced services. | 17:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sorry, should have posted: | 17:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronSubteamCharters#Advanced_Services_Team | 17:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | unless mestery informs us otherwise | 17:10 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: this should be clear from the stated adv services charter | 17:11 |
| mhanif | SumitNaisatam: Yes, it is. Thanks! | 17:11 |
| SumitNaiksatam | any other thoughts on this? | 17:11 |
| mhanif | I have suggested a brand new sub-team Edge-VPN | 17:12 |
| *** evgenyf has quit IRC | 17:12 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: sure | 17:12 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: perhaps check with mestery as well if there is enough to go around for this | 17:13 |
| mhanif | All, please let me your comments or if you have anything to add, please feel free, | 17:13 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: also would that not be a part of the VPNaaS team? | 17:13 |
| sbalukoff | Will do. | 17:13 |
| mhanif | No, since VPNaaS deals with end-2-end VPNs and we are talking about VON's from edge of the data center | 17:14 |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 17:14 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: okay, perhaps best to discuss with the folks currently involved with VPNaaS as well, if there is a way to join efforts | 17:14 |
| mhanif | VPNaaS talks about IPSec and L2TP VPNs while edge VPN deals with MPLS VPNs | 17:14 |
| SumitNaiksatam | just a suggestion, since, from a process perspective, i think Neutron is discouraging too many subteams | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: i agree with the technical differences | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ok moving on | 17:15 |
| mhanif | Sure, open for any discussion there is | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | mhanif: thanks for chiming in | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | #topic Project spin out logistics | 17:15 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Project spin out logistics (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:15 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | much anticipated! :-) | 17:15 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: thanks for taking the initiative to post this spec | 17:16 |
| dougwig | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/136835 | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks ^^^ | 17:16 |
| sbalukoff | Lots of comments to catch up on there. | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i believe there have been a good number of comments and responses already | 17:16 |
| dougwig | current hot points are: client? governance? extensions? core vs service plugins? dependencies and upgrades | 17:16 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sbalukoff: looking forward to yours ;-) | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: that pretty much covers most of the spec ;-) | 17:17 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we agree to that we need the split! | 17:17 |
| blogan | i think the governance parts are beyond this spec's scope | 17:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i think we can spend good time here to discuss | 17:18 |
| dougwig | i hadn't intended to have a governance debate in that spec. i need technical feedback quickly. | 17:18 |
| dougwig | ok | 17:18 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, governance is hard to put in a spec | 17:18 |
| s3wong | dougwig, blogan: agreed --- difficult for a technical spec to determine governance | 17:18 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: dougwig: xgerman_: well, everything in openstack is a gerrit spec | 17:18 |
| sbalukoff | Heh! | 17:19 |
| dougwig | the current governance plan: | 17:19 |
| sbalukoff | We need somewhere to start on the governance question. | 17:19 |
| dougwig | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-November/050961.html | 17:19 |
| sbalukoff | Yay! | 17:19 |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 17:19 | |
| blogan | SumitNaiksatam: and maybe there should be a governance spec, but this is just teh technical details on how to do the code split | 17:19 |
| SumitNaiksatam | all governance issues are also being tracked and debated in gerrit specs, not saying good or bad | 17:19 |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:19 | |
| xgerman_ | well, you cna infer my opinion :-) | 17:19 |
| hareeshp | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:19 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i agree, the counter point is that these are tied at the hip | 17:20 |
| SridarK | dougwig: i think one of the reasons for a spec was to capture all aspects of discussion in a focussed manner | 17:20 |
| dougwig | well, we practically had crickets on the ML thread. and then we pounce on a semi-related gerrit spec. if y'all want gerrit, make a spec for it. :) | 17:20 |
| sbalukoff | Well... "focused" ;) | 17:20 |
| SumitNaiksatam | of course, personally i definitely favor the pragmatic approach of making progress wherever we can | 17:20 |
| dougwig | SridarK: i respect that, but i'm not sure we can swallow that large a rodent in one go. | 17:20 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 17:20 |
| blogan | mmm rodents | 17:21 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, also we are not really self governed so we are discussing things we can't change | 17:21 |
| SridarK | dougwig: i agree that this can "rathole" but ... | 17:21 |
| s3wong | SridarK: the downside would be that we would be suck into an endless loop of debate on governance issue but never do the actual work since the spec wasn't approved | 17:21 |
| xgerman_ | s3wong +1 | 17:21 |
| dougwig | s3wong: +100 | 17:21 |
| sbalukoff | s3wong: +1 | 17:21 |
| dougwig | maybe we take a few minutes now and just discuss governance, instead of discussing discussing governance. | 17:21 |
| sbalukoff | Haha | 17:22 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Why you gotta be like that, man? ;) | 17:22 |
| sbalukoff | Seriously though, +1 | 17:22 |
| SumitNaiksatam | yeah no one likes ratholes! | 17:22 |
| dougwig | anyone seen office space, with the whiteboard titled "Planning to Plan" in the background? :) | 17:22 |
| blogan | yes | 17:22 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: lol | 17:22 |
| s3wong | dougwig: what? we don't want to discuss about the merit of discussing governance? :-) | 17:23 |
| blogan | mike judge was a software engineer | 17:23 |
| s3wong | we should discuss the plan to discuss about governance then... | 17:23 |
| *** hareeshp has quit IRC | 17:23 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | on the technical issues, i didn’t see why the extension definition could not be part of the initial split | 17:24 |
| dougwig | so i'll throw in my $0.02, which is that it's unlikely we'll see "consensus" on the governance topic, and what Mark proposed can be a workable step forward, so let's take it. | 17:24 |
| xgerman_ | I like to see more self governance | 17:24 |
| ivar-lazzaro | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: like you said (or may be someone else), sometimes you need let every vent ;-) | 17:24 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *everyone | 17:25 |
| dougwig | i'm trying to trigger the venting. :) | 17:25 |
| s3wong | dougwig: so now the proposal is (a) API/DB models in "services-tron", (b) different core team with overlap, and (c) spec still driven by neutron-drivers | 17:25 |
| blogan | and extensions remain in neutron tree until kilo-3 | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: the API part is fuzzy | 17:26 |
| dougwig | (a) API/DB/extensions/plugins/tests in MEGAtron, then yes. | 17:26 |
| dougwig | well, control of API. i care not who is listening on port 443. | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: +1000 for megatron if we get it! ;-) | 17:26 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: I think the API part is the one we will have to clearly state in the spec (which dougwig did) | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: yes, API endpoint is not as important | 17:26 |
| SumitNaiksatam | the place for the API definition is | 17:26 |
| s3wong | dougwig: +1 --- everything service related (except service_base.py stuff) | 17:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i think kilo-3 is too late | 17:27 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: the issue to me is one of whether to have a breaking change across repos. will leaving the extensions in neutron for and extra month or two slow us down on something? | 17:27 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: well, that was the manager in me making a hedge, in case the refactor takes longer than expected. if don't in kilo-1, then the extensions will move much sooner. | 17:27 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: even if this is in the main repo, it will be stacked as several patches | 17:27 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: yes. I think that's harder to keep the extensions there | 17:28 |
| blogan | well i can see a reason why the extensions should stay in neutron in the beginning, and that is because neutron's extension loader will need to have an idea as to wehre to load extensions from an external path | 17:28 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: yes, kilo-3 is practically late for almost everything substantial | 17:28 |
| dougwig | ivar-lazzaro: we're talking about a month or two. | 17:28 |
| blogan | if the extensiosn are split out | 17:28 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: so there will always be a window no matter which way we go | 17:28 |
| *** hareeshp has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:28 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: and a month can easily stretch out to much longer | 17:28 |
| dougwig | no, there's zero window if we wait. how is there a window in that case? | 17:28 |
| blogan | neutron will have to add logic in their extension loaded to load extensions from an external path no? | 17:28 |
| dougwig | it already has that. | 17:29 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: that logic already exists | 17:29 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: I see but we need a good reason to do so. By moving the extension we can work together so that the REST refactor on Neutron's side goes smoothly | 17:29 |
| blogan | well nvm | 17:29 |
| dougwig | our path just has to go into the conf file as a default. | 17:29 |
| blogan | ignore me | 17:29 |
| dougwig | ivar-lazzaro: i'm not sure that parallelism makes anything faster. the refactor is mechanical work to fit the new framework. by separating, we make that harder, not easier. | 17:29 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: If we wait instead, we are not guaranteed to catch all the possible issues with the refactor | 17:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: the path part can also be easily sorted (even before it goes into the config file) | 17:30 |
| SridarK | ivar-lazzaro: +1 my concern here too | 17:30 |
| s3wong | blogan: even Neutron can load extension from different path / package, the hairy part that we try to avoid is the API refactoring gating this | 17:30 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: i dont necessarily agree with that last statement | 17:30 |
| dougwig | i'm not concerned with the loading path. just the refactor overlap. | 17:30 |
| xgerman_ | s3wong+1 | 17:30 |
| blogan | s3wong: yeah ive been corrected and punished | 17:30 |
| xgerman_ | I am worried if we have gating things the spin off won't happen | 17:31 |
| ivar-lazzaro | blogan: Neutron can already do that | 17:31 |
| s3wong | blogan: I figure I should pour it on you while I have an opportunity to do so :-) | 17:31 |
| xgerman_ | so rather sign up for more work then to gate the spinoff | 17:31 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: Is refactor overlap bad? Do we really want to hit all the issues once the refactor is completed already? | 17:31 |
| dougwig | the impression that i've gotten from folks outside this conversation is that if we put extensions on the MUST list, we will gate the split on the refactor. i don't want that, and i can see at least one technical reason justifying that. | 17:32 |
| sbalukoff | s3wong: I take every opportunity, too. | 17:32 |
| blogan | well if the neutron core thinks that keeping extensions in neutron for the refactor will make it easier, i don't see how they will give that up | 17:32 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman_: +1, hence one of the views is that the split should happen with the extensions, and once the refactor happens in neutron, the same can be done in the services’ repo | 17:32 |
| banix | blogan: Neutron can already do that! (Just kidding!) | 17:32 |
| bobmel | What details about the API refactor do we have? Seems to be a number of unknowns there... | 17:32 |
| blogan | banix: lol | 17:32 |
| s3wong | dougwig: so I figure you have been in contact with markmcclain --- do you get a sense that he wants to postpone spinning off the extensions until API refactoring is done? | 17:32 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: I don't see why this should happen. Sounds like a threat :) | 17:33 |
| dougwig | consensus can be a threat. :) | 17:33 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: blogan: in that sense its not a technical discussion then, its a function of what you are hearing outside this converation? | 17:33 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam, all, what concerns me is that other principals, that is non “advanced services” crowd don’t seem to be here | 17:33 |
| blogan | i don't think viewing these things as threat is a constructive path to working well with neutron cores | 17:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: good point | 17:34 |
| dougwig | there are a million reasons to delay, and i am trying to thread a very tiny needle that doesn't gate us on anyone else. personally, i want to be really cautious on where we put our stakes in the ground. | 17:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: how can we ensure everyone attends? | 17:34 |
| dougwig | have the conversation in the neutron meeting would be my first suggestion. | 17:34 |
| SumitNaiksatam | to be fair, its difficult to keep up with so many meetings | 17:34 |
| xgerman_ | dougwig +1 increased velocity is the main reason for splitting | 17:34 |
| s3wong | "threat" is strong word, we are showing our goodwill on our willingness to work neutron core/drivers | 17:35 |
| s3wong | * work with | 17:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we seem to have a vested interest in this, hence we are making the time | 17:35 |
| dougwig | i took "threat" as a light-hearted joke up above. | 17:35 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman_: Increased velocity through self-governance? | 17:35 |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 17:35 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | but yes, the point has been raised before that we should not be discussing in a vacuum | 17:35 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: it totally was actually | 17:35 |
| SumitNaiksatam | hence we try to figure out during the last meeting whether we needed this meeting | 17:36 |
| s3wong | dougwig: I agree, let's put that on the next Neutron meeting agenda | 17:36 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: my point was that I don't see the reason to wait for the split in order to have the APIs from day one | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and the general consensus seemed to be that we did | 17:36 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: split/refactor | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | perhaps this meeting is not as effective to get the buy in from people outside the adv services’ team | 17:36 |
| dougwig | i think we might be in vi/emacs land on the extensions point. i don't seem much point in pulling over something that will just get broken. | 17:36 |
| SumitNaiksatam | so we should probably push that discussion to the main neutron meeting? | 17:36 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:36 |
| sbalukoff | SumitNaiksatam: I thought this meeting was mostly about trying to drive consensus among the adv.. services team. :) | 17:37 |
| banix | SumitNaiksatam: yeah i really don’t know…. just raising the concern from past experience. yes may be neutron call may be the place to discuss | 17:37 |
| sbalukoff | If we have a game plan, then we go to the Neutron meeting? | 17:37 |
| dougwig | when i roll a new version of the spec with some language around extensions alternatives, and we can chat about it in that meeting, sure. | 17:37 |
| s3wong | sbalukoff: and we just have a consensus to punt the decision to the Neutron meeting :-) | 17:37 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, what's the game plan? | 17:37 |
| dougwig | man, that was bad grammar. | 17:37 |
| dougwig | on my part. | 17:37 |
| xgerman_ | dougwig -- again we split things out. They brake - we fix it... | 17:38 |
| blogan | well we still have disagreement here on the extensions | 17:38 |
| blogan | not a consensus | 17:38 |
| sbalukoff | blogan: Exactly. | 17:38 |
| s3wong | blogan: we have a consensus to talk about it during the Neutron meeting :-) | 17:38 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has quit IRC | 17:38 | |
| blogan | lol | 17:38 |
| sbalukoff | What's the point in taking this to the Neutron meeting prematurely, when we don't even know what we want? | 17:38 |
| s3wong | and SumitNaiksatam is so angry that he quitted | 17:38 |
| xgerman_ | sbalukoff +1 | 17:38 |
| dougwig | s3wong: ha. | 17:38 |
| blogan | sbalukoff: one reason is to get more details | 17:39 |
| *** SumitNaiksatam has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:39 | |
| sbalukoff | Woot! I'm totally taking credit for that ragequit. | 17:39 |
| dougwig | sbalukoff: because we've crossed the threshold of new debate and are cycling. it's either get more voices, or just let someone pick a direction. | 17:39 |
| s3wong | guys, I think we all would LOVE to get the extension split off also as step 1 if the Neutron cores are OK with it. Right? | 17:39 |
| sbalukoff | dougwig: Are you saying we need a fearless dicta.... er... leader? | 17:40 |
| xgerman_ | s3wong +1 | 17:40 |
| bobmel | s3wong: yes | 17:40 |
| banix | sbalukoff: Neutron core may have other ideas that will influence our plan…. waiting for a complete plan and then taking it to them will not work | 17:40 |
| sbalukoff | ;) | 17:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | sorry guys, my client acted up again | 17:40 |
| xgerman_ | sbalukoff -100 | 17:40 |
| ivar-lazzaro | s3wong: I think it makes a lot of sense | 17:40 |
| dougwig | s3wong: no, i'd rather wait for the rest refactor, but it still be in kilo. | 17:40 |
| blogan | so I'm all for whatever gets the split done ASAP. sounds to be like the extension debate would hinder that process | 17:40 |
| _sunil | so, lets propose that nd let them nack it...:) | 17:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i typed in a bunch of stuff and went into /dev/null | 17:40 |
| hareeshp | s3wong: +1 | 17:40 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: automatic rage filter. | 17:40 |
| xgerman_ | lol | 17:40 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: ahah | 17:40 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: ;-) | 17:40 |
| s3wong | :-) | 17:40 |
| sbalukoff | Heh! | 17:41 |
| blogan | is everyone afraid that if the extensions stayed in neutron tree then neutron will never give them up? | 17:41 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i dont think afraid is the right characterization | 17:41 |
| sbalukoff | banix: I'm not saying make a plan and then present it to Neutron core to take it or leave it. They'll leave it, of course. What I'm saying is, we don't seem very unified here, so how are they supposed to work with that? | 17:41 |
| xgerman_ | my fear is that they won't get merged | 17:42 |
| s3wong | blogan: I think the fear is that by suggesting extensions in advanced service repo, we can't do split until API refactor is done | 17:42 |
| ivar-lazzaro | blogan: personally, I'm concerned that we may not see issues in the refactor that we would see by having the extensions in the new repo from day one | 17:42 |
| blogan | s3wong: but we can do the split without extensions | 17:42 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ivar-lazzaro: +1 | 17:42 |
| s3wong | I think it is silly to think that Neutron cores would mandate the extensions to stay in Neutron repo once all DB/API/plugin/....etc are all split | 17:42 |
| dougwig | ivar-lazzaro: issues seen on day one are irrelevant, though. | 17:42 |
| banix | sbalukoff: all I am suggesting that we should bring in those people from right now; if the meeting is not the right place we have to think of other ways to reach them. | 17:43 |
| s3wong | blogan: hence I am all for that IF the Neutron core team thinks that "it is best to wait for API refactoring" | 17:43 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: That's not true, if we feel we need some capabilities from Neutron that it has missing now, then we can make the proposal at refactoring time | 17:43 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: but day one has to happen sooner, otherwise day one gets pushed to the new cycle | 17:43 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: instead of finding it out later | 17:44 |
| xgerman_ | s3wong you are on that core them use your jedi minbdtricks | 17:44 |
| dougwig | issues with extensions found on day 1 are quite literally code that won't exist in another few weeks. | 17:44 |
| s3wong | xgerman_: I am NOT on the core team --- nachi_uno and SumitNaiksatam are :-) | 17:44 |
| xgerman_ | I always get confused | 17:44 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: yes i was responding earlier to your comment when i got dc'ed | 17:44 |
| blogan | s3wong: me too, i just want it done and I don't see why neutron would benefit from having the extensions in neutron for a long time after the split, so I trust that they will move the extensions over in a reasonable time | 17:45 |
| SumitNaiksatam | banix: i think we need to have the larger neutron to be a part of this discussion | 17:45 |
| blogan | but i am optimistic | 17:45 |
| dougwig | SumitNaiksatam: actually, i think that insisting on extensions from day one is what's going to push the split date. | 17:45 |
| ivar-lazzaro | dougwig: yes, and if those issues persist even after the refactor you lost a cycle :) | 17:45 |
| dougwig | ivar-lazzaro: neutron has other external extensions already. this is not new ground. | 17:45 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 17:45 |
| s3wong | dougwig: if you really think so --- then there is no point insisting on having extensions from day one. The delay is the #1 thing we want to avoid | 17:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: i havent seen a good argument why extensions should not be a part of split from day one (techincally thats the right thing to do) | 17:46 |
| sbalukoff | Agreed. | 17:46 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 17:46 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: what i am hearing is that folks ouside this discussion would not agree to it | 17:47 |
| ivar-lazzaro | s3wong: I actually don't see why it should hurt to make the proposal, we don't even know if this will really hold the split back | 17:47 |
| xgerman_ | so we ask for it and if they make us wait we take it off the table | 17:47 |
| ivar-lazzaro | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:47 |
| s3wong | ivar-lazzaro: yes, so we want a consensus from the team: | 17:47 |
| _sunil | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:47 |
| s3wong | then (a) bring this issue to Neutron meeting | 17:47 |
| dougwig | i believe i brought up the fact that breaking refactor changes can happen inside one repo if they stay temporarily. i consider that a good reason. | 17:47 |
| s3wong | and (b) if the Neutron core team thinks it is OK. We as a team would be happy to split extension also from day one | 17:48 |
| dougwig | s3wong: ok, let's do it. | 17:48 |
| sbalukoff | Yay! | 17:48 |
| SumitNaiksatam | dougwig: it seems like the benefit of splitting out weighs the small window of downtime for that breaking | 17:48 |
| _sunil | what;s the worse that could happen?...:) | 17:48 |
| blogan | if splitting extensions out on day 1 does not delay the process I am all for it as well | 17:48 |
| s3wong | and (c) otherwise (if Neutron core team thinks it is best to delay until refactoring), we as a team agree to split WITHOUT extension from day one | 17:49 |
| xgerman_ | ok, who decides if it delays? | 17:49 |
| SridarK | dougwig: and lets find out sooner what else is broken than wait to K -3 | 17:49 |
| blogan | SumitNaiksatam: could you enumerate the benefits? | 17:49 |
| xgerman_ | ask that perosn | 17:49 |
| ivar-lazzaro | xgerman_: I think that's a community decision :) | 17:49 |
| sbalukoff | xgerman: Being told "wait for the refactor" is a delay. | 17:49 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i think ivar pointed out earlier - but splitting on day one gets us (technically) closer to where we eventually want to be | 17:50 |
| sbalukoff | Yep. | 17:50 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: so if there are issue they are weeded out early in the cycle as opposed to later (or never) | 17:50 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: +1 | 17:50 |
| xgerman_ | I am just trying to be pragmatic -- and ivar-lazzaro obviously the community hathered here doesn't make the call | 17:50 |
| ivar-lazzaro | There's a lot of stuff we can do by having the extensions in from day one (approving new APIs without being a burden on Neutron's core) | 17:51 |
| xgerman_ | (assuming we have responsive cores) | 17:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | ivar-lazzaro: true that is the other big point here | 17:51 |
| blogan | well those features are going to have to be approved by the drivers team anyway | 17:51 |
| ivar-lazzaro | This will gain us enough time to justify the extra effort of fixing the refactor | 17:51 |
| s3wong | xgerman_: agreed, hence we bring it up in Neutron meeting. For those who are passionate about splitting extension from day one, please attend the next Neutron meeting to voice your opinions | 17:51 |
| SridarK | ivar-lazzaro: now that is another unchartered territory. :-) | 17:51 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay time check - 9 mins :-) | 17:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | is pcm here? | 17:52 |
| xgerman_ | also Neutron meeting is oin the middle of thenight for me | 17:52 |
| bobmel | SumitNaiksatam: PTO | 17:52 |
| blogan | so then another question, if neutron cores are determined to keep extensions in neutron for now and it will delay the split, do yall still want to hold out for the extensions? | 17:52 |
| SumitNaiksatam | xgerman_: :-) | 17:52 |
| SridarK | SumitNaiksatam: pcm pto | 17:52 |
| s3wong | xgerman_: but you don't have an opinion :-) | 17:52 |
| xgerman_ | I feel like being banned from the polling place | 17:53 |
| s3wong | blogan: I think (hope) the consensus is that if we can't get Neutron cores to OK; then we split without extension on day one | 17:53 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i believe the opinion being expressed here is to put the extensions split on the table | 17:53 |
| xgerman_ | +1 | 17:53 |
| blogan | s3wong: me too | 17:53 |
| mhanif | +1 | 17:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: and udnerstand why it cannot be done, if so | 17:54 |
| s3wong | blogan: I think it only makes sense --- I mean, dougwig already compromised :-) | 17:54 |
| SumitNaiksatam | it it cannot be done on day one, we try to understand what would be the alternate (and it be clearly mentioned in the spec in terms of timelines) | 17:54 |
| blogan | SumitNaiksatam: playing devil's advocate here, what if they don't give any "good" reason but still want to keep the extensions in? what is our recourse? | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | *if | 17:55 |
| xgerman_ | mutany | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: :-) | 17:55 |
| *** shwetaap1 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:55 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | i thought we were having a debate on a “technical” spec, silly me! ;-) | 17:55 |
| ivar-lazzaro | blogan: That's kind of a awkward scenario :D | 17:55 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay time check again - 5 mins | 17:56 |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: so I am good with that. We need to get the reasons from the opposing Neutron cores; and state that in spec; but if the Neutron community / cores/drivers think we should wait for API refactoring, we should NOT gate the split to wait for extension | 17:56 |
| ivar-lazzaro | I'm pretty sure there's a lot of good will between the 2 teams about the split, so the discussion will be held technically | 17:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: i would suggest that we make a call based on the discussion in the spec | 17:56 |
| SumitNaiksatam | shall we transition to the “open discussion” | 17:57 |
| blogan | ivar-lazzaro: very awkard indeed, but i just dont want us going down a path of creating a lot of friction with the neutron cores over this | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | and continue this discussion, in case nothing else is on anyone’s mind? | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: +100 | 17:57 |
| s3wong | blogan: +1 | 17:57 |
| SumitNaiksatam | i am not sure i have the chair any more, someone want to change the topic to “Open Discussion”? | 17:58 |
| blogan | #topic Open Discussion | 17:58 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: Networking Advanced Services)" | 17:58 | |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: thanks | 17:58 |
| blogan | np | 17:58 |
| SumitNaiksatam | anyone has any update on the flavors discussion (dougwig?) | 17:58 |
| *** shwetaap has quit IRC | 17:59 | |
| s3wong | SumitNaiksatam: too ambitious to do flavor in 2 minutes :-) | 17:59 |
| blogan | is dougwig re-proposing it? | 17:59 |
| xgerman_ | yeah, we like flavors | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | s3wong: yeah silly me again! | 17:59 |
| *** mhanif has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 17:59 | |
| s3wong | blogan: dougwig mentioned he is re-proposing in Kilo | 17:59 |
| SumitNaiksatam | blogan: i believe yes | 18:00 |
| s3wong | (during the last meeting) | 18:00 |
| blogan | ok i thought so | 18:00 |
| xgerman_ | yep, that's what he said | 18:00 |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:00 | |
| blogan | he gets to drag that boulder around now | 18:00 |
| SumitNaiksatam | okay we are at the hour | 18:00 |
| xgerman_ | yep, some #chair close the meeting | 18:00 |
| blogan | #endmeeting | 18:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 18:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Tue Nov 25 18:00:54 2014 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-11-25-17.05.html | 18:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-11-25-17.05.txt | 18:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_advanced_services/2014/networking_advanced_services.2014-11-25-17.05.log.html | 18:01 |
| blogan | bye everyone | 18:01 |
| *** nlahouti has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:01 | |
| blogan | back to vacation | 18:01 |
| blogan | ! | 18:01 |
| s3wong | bye | 18:01 |
| ivar-lazzaro | adieuu | 18:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | thanks all for the spirited discussion ;-) | 18:01 |
| _sunil | bye | 18:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | we are all passionate about this! | 18:01 |
| SumitNaiksatam | bye | 18:01 |
| *** _sunil has quit IRC | 18:01 | |
| s3wong | mestery just commented that the spec should NOT be about governance | 18:01 |
| *** _sunil has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:02 | |
| banix | bye | 18:02 |
| s3wong | (good way to close the meeting :-) ) | 18:02 |
| xgerman_ | bye | 18:02 |
| *** _sunil has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:02 | |
| hareeshp | bye! | 18:02 |
| SridarK | bye | 18:02 |
| *** xgerman_ has left #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:02 | |
| *** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:03 | |
| *** hareeshp has quit IRC | 18:05 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 18:06 | |
| *** SridarK has quit IRC | 18:11 | |
| *** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC | 18:12 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:12 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:14 | |
| *** vjay-ns has quit IRC | 18:20 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:32 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:32 | |
| *** shwetaap1 has quit IRC | 18:32 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 18:32 | |
| *** vishwan__ has quit IRC | 18:33 | |
| *** jamiem has quit IRC | 18:36 | |
| *** vishwan__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:49 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 18:52 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 18:58 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:58 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:59 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 18:59 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 18:59 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 19:00 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:00 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:01 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| *** vishwan__ has quit IRC | 19:04 | |
| *** ivar-laz_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:04 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has quit IRC | 19:08 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:09 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 19:20 | |
| *** ivar-laz_ has quit IRC | 19:31 | |
| *** ivar-lazzaro has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:32 | |
| *** sbalukoff has quit IRC | 19:34 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 19:40 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:43 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:56 | |
| *** vishwan__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 19:59 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 19:59 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
| *** ChuckC has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:01 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:02 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 20:02 | |
| *** vishwan__ has quit IRC | 20:09 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:10 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 20:15 | |
| *** ChuckC_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:28 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:31 | |
| *** ChuckC has quit IRC | 20:32 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 20:32 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:32 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 20:35 | |
| *** igordcard has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:40 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 20:54 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 20:55 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 20:56 | |
| *** nikhil_k|vacay is now known as nikhil_k | 21:01 | |
| *** vishwana_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:07 | |
| *** vishwan__ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:11 | |
| *** vishwana_ has quit IRC | 21:14 | |
| *** sbalukoff has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 21:31 | |
| *** nikhil_k is now known as nikhil_k|vacay | 21:56 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:00 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:09 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 22:18 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 22:22 | |
| *** dboik_ has quit IRC | 22:22 | |
| *** SridharRamaswam1 has quit IRC | 22:41 | |
| *** vishwan__ has quit IRC | 22:54 | |
| *** SridharRamaswamy has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:01 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:02 | |
| *** neatherweb has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:08 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 23:08 | |
| *** dboik has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:41 | |
| *** dboik_ has joined #openstack-meeting-4 | 23:42 | |
| *** dboik has quit IRC | 23:46 | |
| *** igordcard has quit IRC | 23:46 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!