| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 01:17 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 01:18 | |
| *** angdraug has quit IRC | 01:20 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 01:23 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 01:27 | |
| *** dims_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 01:37 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 01:38 | |
| *** dims_ has quit IRC | 01:41 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 01:49 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 02:34 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 03:12 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 03:27 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 03:31 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 04:22 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 04:23 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 04:24 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 04:43 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 05:03 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 05:48 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 06:04 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 06:34 | |
| *** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 06:53 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:31 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 07:33 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 07:57 | |
| *** vilobhmm111 has quit IRC | 07:57 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has quit IRC | 08:26 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 09:31 | |
| *** sheeprine has quit IRC | 09:33 | |
| *** sheeprine has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 09:35 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 09:36 | |
| *** reed_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:03 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 10:48 | |
| *** reed_ has quit IRC | 11:15 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 11:32 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 11:37 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 12:33 | |
| *** markvoelker has quit IRC | 12:37 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 12:40 | |
| *** sheel has quit IRC | 12:57 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:20 | |
| *** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:23 | |
| *** ninag has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 13:55 | |
| *** sheeprine_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:07 | |
| *** sheeprine has quit IRC | 14:08 | |
| *** sheeprine_ is now known as sheeprine | 14:09 | |
| *** sheeprine has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:09 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:49 | |
| *** cdent has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 14:57 | |
| sdague | #startmeeting service-catalog-tng | 15:02 |
|---|---|---|
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Feb 11 15:02:40 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sdague. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:02 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:02 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: service-catalog-tng)" | 15:02 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'service_catalog_tng' | 15:02 |
| cdent | o/ | 15:02 |
| sdague | who is about? | 15:02 |
| bknudson_ | what's up? | 15:03 |
| sdague | #link Agenda https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/ServiceCatalogTNG | 15:03 |
| sdague | #topic Nova project_id optional | 15:03 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Nova project_id optional (Meeting topic: service-catalog-tng)" | 15:03 | |
| sdague | #status still waiting on test removes - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/086218.html | 15:04 |
| openstackstatus | sdague: unknown command | 15:04 |
| sdague | #info still waiting on test removes - http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-February/086218.html | 15:04 |
| sdague | #topic Service Catalog Names | 15:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Service Catalog Names (Meeting topic: service-catalog-tng)" | 15:04 | |
| sdague | that conversation on the list seems to have resolved, and I proposed a dedicated repository for this work | 15:05 |
| cdent | good outcome, I think | 15:05 |
| sdague | yep | 15:05 |
| cdent | practical, actionable, forward moving and thinking | 15:05 |
| sdague | I guess we'll need to think a bit about file format | 15:05 |
| sdague | the only thing I know we need to support is more than one type allowed per project | 15:06 |
| bknudson_ | use JSONSchema | 15:06 |
| sdague | bknudson_: it's not going to be json | 15:06 |
| bknudson_ | it doesn't have to be JSON | 15:06 |
| sdague | because json doesn't support comments | 15:06 |
| bknudson_ | you can use JSONSchema on YAML (validation takes a dict) | 15:07 |
| sdague | ok, well, I think english might be a better first attempt | 15:07 |
| notmorgan | sdague: i meant to say something on the list, just wanted to be sure we didn't replicate the volumev2 or versioned things. | 15:07 |
| cdent | One thing I think is critical that this file (or whatever it is) is have a definition of terms | 15:08 |
| cdent | until we agree some of those defintions all this is playing with words | 15:08 |
| notmorgan | sdague: i know we have it today, but hopefully we can move away from it. otherwise the ML topic sounded good as proposed. | 15:08 |
| sdague | cdent: can you expand on that? | 15:08 |
| sdague | bknudson_ / cdent - honestly I was kind of thinking something as simple as this - https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/service-registry-format | 15:09 |
| cdent | We don't have a lot of terms, maybe just one, but we need to make sure that "service type" (I think that's the term or art, yes?) is described effectrively: what it is, where it will be used, why it is used for that. | 15:09 |
| sdague | ok, sure, so we need a GLOSSARY | 15:10 |
| sdague | that's fine | 15:10 |
| sdague | do you want to throw any thoughts on that into https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/service-registry-format - and we can seed the first few commits from there? | 15:10 |
| cdent | that format seems reasonable to me, leaves room for comments | 15:10 |
| cdent | sure | 15:10 |
| sdague | notmorgan: my intent is not to codify any of the volumev2 bits | 15:11 |
| sdague | because, I agree, that's all goofy | 15:11 |
| notmorgan | sdague: yay. | 15:11 |
| *** annegentle_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:11 | |
| bknudson_ | didn't we have 2 services where the type was telemetry? | 15:11 |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:11 | |
| sdague | however, I do want to reopen the conversation about explicit version in endpoints, as a structured field | 15:11 |
| sdague | bknudson_: we do, we're going to need to resolve that | 15:11 |
| annegentle_ | o/ sorry I'm late, prior meeting ran over | 15:11 |
| sdague | it will be one of the sticky points | 15:11 |
| notmorgan | i'm ok if we want to encode a version in the catalog as a structured (optional) field - however, i do prefer to encourage folks to use discovery | 15:12 |
| sdague | notmorgan: because I think seeing the catalogs in the wild, it's clear people want explicit versions, they just hacked up service type to get there | 15:12 |
| notmorgan | sdague: yeah we can't eliminate it. just as long as it's not overriding the URL or the service_type | 15:12 |
| notmorgan | or that is must override url/service_type to get there | 15:13 |
| annegentle_ | sdague: but the catalogs in the wild were from devstack right? | 15:13 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: not all. | 15:13 |
| annegentle_ | ok | 15:13 |
| sdague | notmorgan: yeh, agreed. Once this ball gets rolling I'll propose things on the ML about it | 15:13 |
| sdague | trying to keep only so many uncommitted balls in the air at once | 15:13 |
| annegentle_ | sdague: I have a question about the service registry when it's appropriate to ask | 15:14 |
| notmorgan | ideally it shouldn't be needed but it totally should be supported as a structured field. it saves having to ask 20 cinder endpoints if they are v2 | 15:14 |
| sdague | notmorgan: right, and a lot of software only works with 1 major version | 15:14 |
| notmorgan | if you *must* work with a v2 endpoint for example. [future proofing] | 15:14 |
| sdague | so it is nice to just be able to get that, instead of boiler plate a ton of discovery code | 15:14 |
| sdague | in the client side | 15:14 |
| sdague | annegentle_: fire away | 15:14 |
| notmorgan | sdague: in most cases it wont eve rmatter but hey we'll get grumpy people w/o it. might as well make transitioning easyish | 15:15 |
| annegentle_ | I think in the service catalog spec, we said we'd use the projects.yaml as the first test. why does that not work? | 15:15 |
| *** mc_nair has left #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:15 | |
| notmorgan | btw i am here for ~20mins then off to the dentist so.. just figured i'd drop in for the meeting :) | 15:15 |
| annegentle_ | ah, the dentist, good times :) | 15:15 |
| bknudson_ | the reason for the separate repo from projects.yaml was just so a separate group could merge? | 15:15 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: ++ | 15:15 |
| sdague | bknudson_: yes, pretty much | 15:16 |
| annegentle_ | ah, for governance | 15:16 |
| annegentle_ | sorta | 15:16 |
| notmorgan | while this is under the purview of the TC [obviously], API-WG owns [according to the RFC] the repo | 15:16 |
| annegentle_ | I'd prefer we make the TC do it, but that's me. | 15:16 |
| notmorgan | which i like | 15:16 |
| sdague | as exposed in the thread, most people were fine for this being an API WG governed thing, with the TC only handling edge cases | 15:16 |
| sdague | right, it's delegation | 15:16 |
| bknudson_ | who do you think is the consumer for the service registry? | 15:16 |
| annegentle_ | I wanted to talk more about it at this week's API WG meeting | 15:16 |
| *** sdake_ is now known as sdake | 15:16 | |
| annegentle_ | for example, this service registry is only for services | 15:17 |
| cdent | annegentle_: yeah, I put it on the agenda there | 15:17 |
| annegentle_ | do we need to get into resources and where would that happen? | 15:17 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: two people: developers [ i have a new thing ], and deployers [i deployed a thing] | 15:17 |
| annegentle_ | What's nagging at the back of my mind is this is something that can be solved with a lookup, and the lookup should be the docs as source of truth. | 15:17 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: and end users can reference it if they want, but ideally it should be mostly transparent to them. | 15:17 |
| annegentle_ | cdent: yeah Everett and I talked about it too and said we'd discuss at the API WG meeting too | 15:18 |
| annegentle_ | cdent: so might be all of the agenda ha ha | 15:18 |
| sdague | annegentle_: honestly, right now, we're trying to create a source of truth. And it seemed a bit simpler to do that in a dedicated space where it's clear this is all it is. Like IANAL port numbers | 15:18 |
| annegentle_ | "In a world where every service has to have API docs complete, we can all look for collisions before they happen." | 15:19 |
| annegentle_ | (that should be read in that movie guy's voice) | 15:19 |
| sdague | heh | 15:19 |
| bknudson_ | he he | 15:19 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: hehe | 15:19 |
| cdent | we'll sell you the whole seat, but you'll only need the edge | 15:19 |
| annegentle_ | so that's what I was thinking of -- not a new repo or effort but a further focus for API WG | 15:19 |
| annegentle_ | cdent: LOL omg | 15:19 |
| notmorgan | cdent: oh is it going to be in 70mm too? | 15:19 |
| notmorgan | cause i'll buy that ticket! | 15:20 |
| sdague | annegentle_: the proposal is api-wg + this wg as the approval team | 15:20 |
| cdent | So, yeah: I get the sense that the goals of the api-wg are very closely tied or even dependent on the success of the sctng | 15:20 |
| sdague | so I don't see how this is in conflict with it being follow on api wg mission | 15:21 |
| annegentle_ | sdague: okay, still, if teams met higher expectations for dev experience earlier, would we be better off? | 15:21 |
| *** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:21 | |
| bknudson_ | once we get the data we can reformat it or move it around | 15:21 |
| annegentle_ | yeah, I think the blended teams are the ones who can get stuff done | 15:21 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: sure, but i don't think that is going to change this need really. | 15:21 |
| sdague | annegentle_: that seems like an obvious yes, but I'm not sure how that's in conflict with a repo and a yaml file | 15:21 |
| annegentle_ | it's not | 15:21 |
| sdague | ok | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | and I'm not arguing against it, believe me | 15:22 |
| sdague | ok | 15:22 |
| cdent | violent agreement! | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | I'm just asking if ... | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | wait. | 15:22 |
| sdague | cool, I'm just saying we start moving forward, do all the easy bits like 'compute' => nova | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | I'm asking if the API docs were further along if we'd have these struggles. | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | probably not. | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | but wondering aloud | 15:22 |
| sdague | annegentle_: maybe, maybe not | 15:22 |
| sdague | we still need the registry | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | for example, if we had a great api docs reference, discoverability of collision is easier | 15:22 |
| annegentle_ | but what I'm asking is whether collision at the resource level matters as much as service level | 15:23 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: i think we still need the registry, it's like an IANA thing as sdague said. | 15:23 |
| annegentle_ | I guess we are going in phases... first is service, then comes resources | 15:23 |
| sdague | annegentle_: oh, right, that question | 15:23 |
| annegentle_ | which is all good | 15:23 |
| notmorgan | oooh | 15:23 |
| annegentle_ | and I don't want to conflate or try to bite off more than chewable. | 15:23 |
| notmorgan | uh the other thing. | 15:23 |
| sdague | so, I had a conversation with jaypipes about that yesterday | 15:23 |
| annegentle_ | oh good do tell | 15:23 |
| sdague | I think he was using 'top level resources' == 'service types' | 15:24 |
| sdague | it was a naming problem | 15:24 |
| notmorgan | sdague: oh that makes a lot more sense now. | 15:24 |
| sdague | because compute/flavors dataprocessing/flavors is not actually confusing | 15:24 |
| notmorgan | but calling it /flavors would be | 15:25 |
| sdague | right, but it's scoped to a service | 15:25 |
| annegentle_ | yeah it's the context that matters, again a good docs site would show this to us. | 15:25 |
| * annegentle_ cries | 15:25 | |
| bknudson_ | it would be great if we could view the whole of openstack as the interface, rather than separate interfaces like identity / compute / networking | 15:25 |
| sdague | yeh, well, let's solve 1 problem first | 15:25 |
| annegentle_ | bknudson_: I think that's how jaypipes tries to get us to think -- and yeah users too | 15:25 |
| cdent | annegentle_: I agree with you, but I also think achieving that kind of docs site in a big tent world is _really_ hard, so we need some granularity. | 15:25 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: i'm trying to slowly move us that way, this wg is def. part of that goal though | 15:25 |
| sdague | and realize there are N more problems to solve | 15:25 |
| annegentle_ | cdent: yeah I agree, and ordering | 15:26 |
| annegentle_ | ordering of priority helps us eat the elephant | 15:26 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: but it is slooooow | 15:26 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: but i want to boil the ocean nowwww! :P | 15:26 |
| annegentle_ | anyway, we can talk more about it at the API Wg :) | 15:26 |
| notmorgan | anyway. | 15:26 |
| sdague | I also think top level service resource policing is a lot of work, for not a huge amount of benefit | 15:26 |
| annegentle_ | heh | 15:26 |
| annegentle_ | sdague: I know what you mean | 15:26 |
| cdent | woot! I was waiting for someone to say "boil the ocean" :) | 15:26 |
| notmorgan | cdent: happy to oblige | 15:26 |
| sdague | structured error documents, for instance, would be so much more helpful to consumers | 15:27 |
| bknudson_ | could also say "rearranging deck chairs on the titanic" | 15:27 |
| notmorgan | sdague: ++ | 15:27 |
| annegentle_ | bknudson_: noooo | 15:27 |
| cdent | bknudson_: slightly different conotation | 15:27 |
| sdague | rearranging deck chairs on the hindenburg | 15:27 |
| notmorgan | sdague: i... the huge manatee? /meme | 15:27 |
| sdague | ok, anything else on service types? | 15:28 |
| bknudson_ | we need a few more cross-project workgroups | 15:28 |
| notmorgan | i think the service_types are a solid starting place | 15:28 |
| cdent | I'd like us to make sure we have some concrete (written down) goals for what we want this thing to enable or accomplish | 15:28 |
| sdague | annegentle_: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/service-registry-format - is the scratch pad | 15:28 |
| cdent | But overall +1, let's get on with it | 15:28 |
| annegentle_ | ok, tahnks | 15:29 |
| sdague | ok | 15:29 |
| annegentle_ | for what it's worth it's way better than tags :) | 15:29 |
| notmorgan | sdague: +1 generally for thawt | 15:29 |
| notmorgan | and pleaseeeee no tags :P | 15:29 |
| annegentle_ | please......... | 15:29 |
| sdague | heh | 15:29 |
| sdague | #topic JSON Schema for SC | 15:29 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "JSON Schema for SC (Meeting topic: service-catalog-tng)" | 15:29 | |
| *** angdraug has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 15:29 | |
| notmorgan | sdague: one last thing i want to toss on the pile to think about - no answer needed yet | 15:29 |
| sdague | notmorgan: ok, go for it | 15:30 |
| notmorgan | the concept of the service type being used as the mount-point for a service | 15:30 |
| notmorgan | e.g. /compute /identity | 15:30 |
| notmorgan | etc | 15:30 |
| sdague | yes | 15:30 |
| sdague | that will be recommended | 15:30 |
| notmorgan | just something to mull over as a group while we're pondering this. if we want to codify that or not. | 15:30 |
| notmorgan | great | 15:30 |
| bknudson_ | I started a github project to codify the service catalog schemas: https://github.com/brantlk/service-catalog-schema | 15:31 |
| bknudson_ | not sure if that was the best place, but needed some way to share it | 15:31 |
| notmorgan | gh is goot enough to start imo | 15:31 |
| annegentle_ | oh for sure | 15:31 |
| sdague | notmorgan: I think it's a thing we shouldn't say is required, because we do have this whole service catalog and all, but it does seem like a good recommendation | 15:31 |
| bknudson_ | so here's the v2 schema: https://github.com/brantlk/service-catalog-schema/blob/master/schemas/v2.yaml | 15:31 |
| bknudson_ | and here's the v3 schema: https://github.com/brantlk/service-catalog-schema/blob/master/schemas/v3.yaml | 15:31 |
| bknudson_ | and the next-gen schema: https://github.com/brantlk/service-catalog-schema/blob/master/schemas/ng.yaml (which is just the v3 schema for now) | 15:32 |
| sdague | bknudson_: ok, cool, how do you want to take feedback on this? | 15:32 |
| notmorgan | sdague: i would almost push for it to be the general case even if nova [for example] is the only thing on the host. but e can circle back on that. | 15:32 |
| notmorgan | sdague: i'm 100% ok with "strongly recommended" | 15:32 |
| cdent | notmorgan: (reasonable defaults)++ | 15:32 |
| bknudson_ | sdague: how about for next meeting, take a look at it. | 15:32 |
| * notmorgan yeidls the floor. | 15:32 | |
| annegentle_ | nice bknudson_ | 15:32 |
| sdague | bknudson_: sounds good | 15:32 |
| * notmorgan also type yields right this time. | 15:33 | |
| bknudson_ | so what I did with this repo is I pulled all the sample catalogs from the wiki page | 15:33 |
| annegentle_ | does v2 correspond with v2.0 keystone api? what's the meaning there | 15:33 |
| sdague | #action everyone take a look at bknudson_'s schema for next meeting - https://github.com/brantlk/service-catalog-schema | 15:33 |
| annegentle_ | oh i see, reading | 15:33 |
| cdent | so now is probably as good a time as any to ask this question: why are there both a service type and a service name and can we just kill service name? | 15:33 |
| sdague | we'll make that the frist agend ideam | 15:33 |
| sdague | item | 15:33 |
| bknudson_ | and if you run test_catalog_schema.py it validates all the sample catalogs against the schema | 15:33 |
| sdague | cdent: killing name is probably fine | 15:33 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: oh good, this can actually be used as a template-y thing for another thing i want to do. | 15:34 |
| sdague | I think it was a dolphm original point | 15:34 |
| notmorgan | sdague: we shoiuld kill name, it's not useful. | 15:34 |
| bknudson_ | so one way we can go -- create sample NG catalogs and update the NG schema. | 15:34 |
| notmorgan | service_type is what matters. | 15:34 |
| * cdent is relieved he's not totally stupid | 15:34 | |
| annegentle_ | I think showing examples is helpful | 15:34 |
| sdague | yeh, I can get my head around samples much easier that the schema | 15:34 |
| cdent | me too | 15:35 |
| bknudson_ | annegentle_: yes, the v2.0 catalog is what you get in a v2 token (from v2.0/tokens), and the v3 catalog is what you get in a v3 token (from v3/auth/tokens) | 15:35 |
| annegentle_ | dolphm would know/remember history | 15:35 |
| sdague | the schema is good for machines, less for my brain | 15:35 |
| annegentle_ | ok thanks bknudson_ I think I know enough to review | 15:35 |
| notmorgan | sdague: i believe it, cause even though i know whatthe catalog should be, it's hard to read the schema | 15:35 |
| sdague | but this is looking good | 15:35 |
| bknudson_ | the v2 catalog is not compatible with the v3 catalog | 15:35 |
| notmorgan | i expect the NG catalog to likewise be incompatible, sadly | 15:35 |
| notmorgan | but ... expected and needed | 15:35 |
| notmorgan | otherwise we'd carry cruft. | 15:36 |
| sdague | bknudson_: also, are you really using yaml for jsonschema? | 15:36 |
| sdague | that's almost really awesome | 15:36 |
| cdent | I think that's great. so much more redable | 15:36 |
| annegentle_ | easier to write, right? | 15:36 |
| sdague | and it can have comments! | 15:36 |
| notmorgan | sdague: it wouldn't be hard to do it like that. | 15:36 |
| bknudson_ | sdague: yes, I went with YAML for the JSONSchema definition due to JSON not allowing newlines in strings! | 15:36 |
| * cdent sends praises to ingy | 15:36 | |
| bknudson_ | I started with json and got sick of it. | 15:36 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: ++ | 15:36 |
| sdague | crap, I'm going to need to redo bits of nova this way | 15:37 |
| notmorgan | json is GREAT for a wire thing | 15:37 |
| notmorgan | but ends at the wire | 15:37 |
| sdague | this is so much better | 15:37 |
| sdague | bknudson_ gets the cookie for the day | 15:37 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: i think we should re-do keystone's validation like this ;) | 15:37 |
| bknudson_ | mmm cookies | 15:37 |
| annegentle_ | too crumby :) | 15:37 |
| cdent | screw cookies, whole cake | 15:37 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: brownies? | 15:37 |
| notmorgan | ;) | 15:37 |
| annegentle_ | gold star stickers and glitter! | 15:37 |
| annegentle_ | bknudson_ takes it up a notch! | 15:38 |
| bknudson_ | glitter gets everywhere | 15:38 |
| annegentle_ | heeee | 15:38 |
| notmorgan | sdague: blame annegentle_ when someone asks why this channel; is covered in glitter. | 15:38 |
| sdague | heh | 15:38 |
| annegentle_ | ok, you get the velociraptor Valentine's card! | 15:38 |
| * cdent fetches the disco ball | 15:38 | |
| notmorgan | ok anyway | 15:38 |
| notmorgan | this is a good format :) yay | 15:38 |
| bknudson_ | so I think we should consider what we think is the "ideal" catalog | 15:38 |
| sdague | ok, now that we're in full dance party mode | 15:38 |
| annegentle_ | cool | 15:38 |
| annegentle_ | great way to end a standup! | 15:39 |
| bknudson_ | and propose those as samples | 15:39 |
| cdent | bknudson_++ | 15:39 |
| bknudson_ | and, apparently, not even consider backwards-compatibility | 15:39 |
| sdague | bknudson_: agreed, so maybe just throw up some PRs with ideas to rough things up at this point | 15:39 |
| notmorgan | so i have one other question annegentle_, what was the result of the three urls/interfaces convo? | 15:39 |
| notmorgan | since we're talking examples. | 15:39 |
| sdague | notmorgan: we never really got resolution | 15:39 |
| notmorgan | sdague: if at all possible i'd like to propose 2 urls to start then | 15:39 |
| notmorgan | internal/public | 15:40 |
| notmorgan | and if we need to expand back to admin, we can. | 15:40 |
| sdague | I decided to pivot to more tractable problems | 15:40 |
| cdent | the summit-based goal was 1 | 15:40 |
| cdent | was it not? | 15:40 |
| bknudson_ | I think we found that deployments were using them all? | 15:40 |
| sdague | cdent: it was, the ops folks really wanted internal for billing reasons | 15:40 |
| notmorgan | so, lets start with 2 and plan to add admin back in if it turns out really needed | 15:40 |
| notmorgan | i know we can;'t do 1 | 15:40 |
| cdent | reality is such a pain | 15:41 |
| sdague | cdent: heh | 15:41 |
| sdague | ok, so for next week, come with comments on bknudson_'s current work, as well as what else we want in the ideal | 15:41 |
| sdague | #topic Open Discussion | 15:41 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Open Discussion (Meeting topic: service-catalog-tng)" | 15:41 | |
| sdague | any further things today? | 15:41 |
| notmorgan | i was glan i was awake randomly for this. yay | 15:42 |
| notmorgan | now i know when it is so i can be here next week too | 15:42 |
| bknudson_ | it's an early start for some | 15:42 |
| sdague | ok, thanks for coming folks. | 15:43 |
| sdague | #endmeeting | 15:43 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings" | 15:43 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Feb 11 15:43:05 2016 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:43 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/service_catalog_tng/2016/service_catalog_tng.2016-02-11-15.02.html | 15:43 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/service_catalog_tng/2016/service_catalog_tng.2016-02-11-15.02.txt | 15:43 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/service_catalog_tng/2016/service_catalog_tng.2016-02-11-15.02.log.html | 15:43 |
| * notmorgan runs off to dentist... | 15:43 | |
| annegentle_ | notmorgan: right | 15:43 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: day 2 in a row :( sigh | 15:43 |
| cdent | that seemed to go well | 15:43 |
| annegentle_ | notmorgan: I can shop "no adminurl" around here if you like | 15:43 |
| annegentle_ | notmorgan: yuck, I went Tues. for my cleaning | 15:43 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: i'd like that i also think we should just run with it and see what comes out of it | 15:43 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: i doubt most deployments really need "admin". | 15:44 |
| notmorgan | it was a keystone thing and a not-great keystone thing. | 15:44 |
| bknudson_ | apparently bluebox gets by with 1 -- the network routes the traffic correctly | 15:44 |
| sdague | I guess I shouldn't have ended meeting | 15:44 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: that would be my choise | 15:44 |
| notmorgan | sdague: hehe *shrug* | 15:45 |
| bknudson_ | so you put the public URLs in the catalog and if you're in the bb network it goes to private | 15:45 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: but i get that folks don't want to make networking more complex... it means they need to tlak to network eng. | 15:45 |
| sdague | bknudson_: right, the network routes you to the most efficient way to access things | 15:45 |
| notmorgan | heck DNS could do that | 15:45 |
| notmorgan | not even crazy network routes. | 15:46 |
| bknudson_ | right, but then you push it onto the applications -- you always have to tell the application to do internal or public | 15:46 |
| sdague | it's mostly about talking to data heavy services like glance / swift | 15:46 |
| annegentle_ | notmorgan: oh found a big ol email, shall I send it to you bknudson_? | 15:46 |
| sdague | you *really* care about how you get there | 15:46 |
| notmorgan | annegentle_: sure. | 15:46 |
| sdague | but I agree, application having to guess sucks | 15:46 |
| bknudson_ | annegentle_: sure. | 15:46 |
| notmorgan | sdague: DNS can do this easily w/o crazy networking too :) | 15:46 |
| sdague | it's kind of like download(go_fast=True) | 15:46 |
| bknudson_ | it's the turbo button on the old pcs | 15:47 |
| notmorgan | bknudson_: hehehe | 15:47 |
| notmorgan | SLOW DOWN THE CPU CLOCK! | 15:47 |
| bknudson_ | maybe neutron could help us with this | 15:48 |
| *** EmilienM has quit IRC | 15:53 | |
| *** EmilienM has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:07 | |
| EmilienM | kim | 16:08 |
| EmilienM | oops | 16:08 |
| *** nikhil_k has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:38 | |
| *** tpeoples has quit IRC | 16:38 | |
| *** cdent has left #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:38 | |
| *** sheel has quit IRC | 16:39 | |
| *** nikhil has quit IRC | 16:39 | |
| *** tpeoples has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:43 | |
| *** sheel has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 16:43 | |
| *** nikhil_k is now known as nikhil | 16:50 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 17:12 | |
| *** annegentle_ has quit IRC | 17:26 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:31 | |
| *** angdraug has quit IRC | 18:39 | |
| *** vilobhmm11 has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 18:55 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:04 | |
| *** avarner_ has quit IRC | 19:17 | |
| *** avarner_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 19:22 | |
| *** avarner_ has quit IRC | 20:58 | |
| *** notmorgan is now known as morganfainberg | 21:02 | |
| *** morganfainberg is now known as notmorgan | 21:12 | |
| *** ninag has quit IRC | 21:51 | |
| *** avarner_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 21:53 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 21:58 | |
| *** sdake has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:01 | |
| *** sheel has quit IRC | 22:17 | |
| *** dims has quit IRC | 22:23 | |
| *** dims has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:26 | |
| *** diablo_rojo has quit IRC | 22:44 | |
| *** ninag has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:51 | |
| *** sdake_ has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 22:54 | |
| *** ninag has quit IRC | 22:56 | |
| *** sdake has quit IRC | 22:57 | |
| *** ninag has joined #openstack-meeting-cp | 23:16 | |
| *** ninag has quit IRC | 23:16 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!