*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:01 | |
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:04 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 00:05 | |
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:06 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:06 | |
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:13 | |
*** jmasud has quit IRC | 00:36 | |
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 00:49 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 01:01 | |
*** gary_perkins has quit IRC | 01:02 | |
*** diurnalist has quit IRC | 01:03 | |
*** gary_perkins has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:04 | |
*** mhen has quit IRC | 01:06 | |
*** mhen has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:07 | |
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC | 01:14 | |
*** ricolin has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:15 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:15 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:16 | |
*** Liang__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:19 | |
*** lbragstad has quit IRC | 01:24 | |
*** Liang__ has quit IRC | 01:28 | |
*** Liang__ has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:29 | |
*** eharney has quit IRC | 01:37 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 01:38 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 01:42 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 01:43 | |
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:14 | |
*** rcernin has quit IRC | 02:26 | |
*** masahito has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:32 | |
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:35 | |
*** rf0lc0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 02:47 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 02:54 | |
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC | 02:56 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:02 | |
*** rcernin has quit IRC | 03:04 | |
*** armax has quit IRC | 03:09 | |
*** rh-jlabarre has quit IRC | 03:15 | |
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:16 | |
*** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 03:19 | |
*** rcernin has quit IRC | 03:19 | |
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:19 | |
*** dklyle has quit IRC | 03:33 | |
*** dklyle has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:33 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 03:35 | |
*** psachin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:36 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:39 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:40 | |
*** masahito has quit IRC | 03:42 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 03:43 | |
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:50 | |
*** rcernin has quit IRC | 03:55 | |
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting | 03:56 | |
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:02 | |
*** viks____ has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:25 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:26 | |
*** evrardjp has quit IRC | 04:33 | |
*** evrardjp has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:33 | |
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:42 | |
*** apetrich has quit IRC | 04:43 | |
*** rcernin has quit IRC | 04:45 | |
*** ircuser-1 has quit IRC | 04:46 | |
*** rcernin has joined #openstack-meeting | 04:47 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 05:03 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:05 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:23 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 05:27 | |
*** diurnalist has quit IRC | 05:32 | |
*** links has joined #openstack-meeting | 05:39 | |
*** psahoo has quit IRC | 05:54 | |
*** armax has quit IRC | 05:57 | |
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting | 06:05 | |
*** mnasiadka_ is now known as mnasiadka | 06:42 | |
*** ykatabam has quit IRC | 07:09 | |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:15 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 07:17 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:17 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:18 | |
*** slaweq has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:18 | |
*** tetsuro has quit IRC | 07:22 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 07:23 | |
*** rcernin has quit IRC | 07:24 | |
*** ralonsoh has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:31 | |
*** moguimar has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:37 | |
*** dklyle has quit IRC | 07:37 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:40 | |
*** psahoo has quit IRC | 07:43 | |
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:43 | |
*** ircuser-1 has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:45 | |
*** tetsuro has quit IRC | 07:46 | |
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting | 07:57 | |
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:00 | |
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:02 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 08:04 | |
*** tetsuro has quit IRC | 08:05 | |
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:09 | |
*** priteau has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:14 | |
*** bcafarel has quit IRC | 08:15 | |
*** tetsuro has quit IRC | 08:18 | |
*** tetsuro has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:19 | |
*** psahoo has quit IRC | 08:31 | |
*** tetsuro has quit IRC | 08:32 | |
*** psahoo has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:47 | |
*** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:52 | |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 08:57 | |
*** apetrich has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:58 | |
*** bcafarel has joined #openstack-meeting | 08:59 | |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:02 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 09:04 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:04 | |
*** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 09:05 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 09:05 | |
*** Lucas_Gray has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:09 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 09:19 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:19 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:19 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:21 | |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 09:23 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 09:24 | |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:25 | |
*** ricolin has quit IRC | 09:33 | |
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:43 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 09:45 | |
*** ttsiouts_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 09:54 | |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 09:57 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:20 | |
*** ttsiouts_ has quit IRC | 10:27 | |
*** Liang__ has quit IRC | 10:32 | |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:35 | |
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:44 | |
*** ykatabam has quit IRC | 10:48 | |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 10:55 | |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 10:57 | |
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:09 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 11:17 | |
*** priteau has quit IRC | 11:19 | |
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:29 | |
*** diurnalist has quit IRC | 11:33 | |
*** ykatabam has quit IRC | 11:51 | |
*** rf0lc0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:56 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 11:58 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 12:03 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:04 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 12:21 | |
*** e0ne_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:25 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 12:25 | |
*** JangwonLee_ has quit IRC | 12:27 | |
*** hyunsikyang__ has quit IRC | 12:40 | |
*** bbowen has quit IRC | 12:47 | |
*** bbowen has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:48 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 12:52 | |
*** moguimar has quit IRC | 12:53 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 13:02 | |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 13:15 | |
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:36 | |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:36 | |
*** sluna has quit IRC | 13:39 | |
*** sluna has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:40 | |
*** ykatabam has quit IRC | 13:44 | |
*** abhishek has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:44 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:53 | |
*** rafaelweingartne has joined #openstack-meeting | 13:57 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 13:58 | |
rafaelweingartne | Hello guys, is this the channel where the Neutron_drivers_Meeting will take place? | 13:58 |
---|---|---|
*** rafaelweingartne has quit IRC | 14:00 | |
slaweq | #startmeeting neutron_drivers | 14:00 |
openstack | Meeting started Fri Jul 3 14:00:26 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is slaweq. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:00 |
slaweq | hi | 14:00 |
openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:00 |
*** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron_drivers)" | 14:00 | |
openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_drivers' | 14:00 |
*** rafaelweingartne has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:00 | |
slaweq | rafaelweingartne: hi, yes we now have neutron drivers meeting | 14:01 |
rafaelweingartne | Awesome, thanks. | 14:01 |
amotoki | hi | 14:01 |
ralonsoh | hi | 14:01 |
slaweq | but I'm not sure if we will have quorum today as many people in US have got holiday today | 14:01 |
rafaelweingartne | I see | 14:01 |
slaweq | I know that haleyb and mlavalle will not be here today | 14:01 |
amotoki | sorry for missing the last two meetings. I was too sleepy and felt asleep..... | 14:02 |
slaweq | amotoki: np | 14:02 |
ralonsoh | neither njohnston I think... | 14:02 |
slaweq | ahh, ok | 14:02 |
slaweq | so lets wait few minutes for yamamoto | 14:02 |
slaweq | if he will not show up, we will not have quorum | 14:02 |
slaweq | btw. please welcome our new driver: ralonsoh :) | 14:03 |
rafaelweingartne | I worked with Pedro, in the port-range extension for Neutron floating IPs, and I came here to see if you guys will have questions for us during the meeting | 14:03 |
slaweq | welcome in the team | 14:03 |
ralonsoh | thanks !! | 14:03 |
amotoki | ralonsoh: welcome :) | 14:03 |
ralonsoh | amotoki, thanks a lot | 14:03 |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:06 | |
slaweq | I think we will have yamamoto on the meeting :) | 14:08 |
slaweq | he just joined channel | 14:08 |
yamamoto | hi | 14:08 |
slaweq | hi | 14:08 |
slaweq | ok, so we have 4 of us which is quorum | 14:08 |
slaweq | I think we can move on | 14:08 |
slaweq | #topic RFEs | 14:09 |
*** openstack changes topic to "RFEs (Meeting topic: neutron_drivers)" | 14:09 | |
slaweq | we have 1 rfe for today | 14:09 |
slaweq | https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1885921 | 14:09 |
openstack | Launchpad bug 1885921 in neutron "[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add port ranges" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins) | 14:09 |
slaweq | and we have rafaelweingartne who is knows this rfe :) | 14:09 |
rafaelweingartne | exactly, we implemented it internally on top of rocky, and now we would like to contribute back to the community | 14:10 |
*** abhishek has quit IRC | 14:10 | |
slaweq | my question is: what is the real problem which You are trying to solve? is number of port forwarding entries now such big issue? | 14:11 |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 14:12 | |
rafaelweingartne | we would like to be able to create/use ranges | 14:12 |
rafaelweingartne | for instance right now (without that PR), we are only able to create NAT mappings one by one | 14:12 |
rafaelweingartne | however, that is cumbersome if we need to map ranges | 14:13 |
rafaelweingartne | such as all ten ports from 80-90 from a public IP to an internal IP | 14:13 |
rafaelweingartne | iptables already accepts ranges, and we would just expose such feature | 14:14 |
rafaelweingartne | network operators are very used to this use case | 14:14 |
amotoki | What is a real usecase of using a port range? | 14:14 |
amotoki | I think it is not so common to use a consecutive range of listened ports. | 14:15 |
amotoki | I might be missing something though | 14:15 |
slaweq | amotoki: that is exactly what I think also | 14:15 |
slaweq | that's why I asked about real problem here | 14:15 |
rafaelweingartne | I am not a network guy myself, but for instance, we already have that in PROD, and there are people using | 14:16 |
rafaelweingartne | externalizing ports by range | 14:16 |
rafaelweingartne | the network engineers came with this requirement | 14:16 |
rafaelweingartne | it seems that for some use cases they have, this facilitate things | 14:16 |
rafaelweingartne | I do not see a problem to be flexible with that | 14:17 |
*** ttsiouts has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:18 | |
rafaelweingartne | for instance, for passive FTP | 14:19 |
rafaelweingartne | we would normally use a port range | 14:19 |
amotoki | we am not necessarily against the proposal. we can do it but we just would like to know real usecase where this is needed. | 14:19 |
rafaelweingartne | 55536-55635, without that proposal, we would need to enter 100 API calls to open all of these ports | 14:19 |
rafaelweingartne | Basically, all appliation that needs a range of ports to be open, we would need to open this range with one rule for each port, which is not ideal | 14:20 |
ralonsoh | I would agree with this proposal if, in case of being approved, the port range could be defined in a flexible way | 14:22 |
ralonsoh | for example, "10-23,31-50,100-120" | 14:22 |
rafaelweingartne | I am not sure what you mean by flexible | 14:22 |
rafaelweingartne | but that is exactly what we did | 14:22 |
rafaelweingartne | an internal range, and an external range | 14:23 |
ralonsoh | I only saw one interval in the examples | 14:23 |
rafaelweingartne | and the ranges do not need to be the same | 14:23 |
slaweq | ralonsoh: I'm not sure if that isn't too much | 14:23 |
rafaelweingartne | they only need to match in size | 14:23 |
ralonsoh | slaweq, but that's the case you were talking about | 14:23 |
ralonsoh | the port ranges could not be sequential | 14:24 |
ralonsoh | just my opinion | 14:24 |
rafaelweingartne | what do you mean by that? | 14:24 |
ralonsoh | nevermind | 14:24 |
rafaelweingartne | I mean, we see a range as [x-y] | 14:24 |
rafaelweingartne | where we take everything in between inclusing the X and Y | 14:25 |
slaweq | what in case if e.g. user define first forwarding for range 10-20 and later he will want to remove port 15 from it and use in in different PF? | 14:26 |
slaweq | with Your proposed change it will be more complicated to do than it is now | 14:27 |
rafaelweingartne | not possible | 14:27 |
rafaelweingartne | ah, yes, but what is the chance of that happening? | 14:27 |
slaweq | idk | 14:27 |
rafaelweingartne | applications normally have pre-defined ranges to work with | 14:28 |
rafaelweingartne | and even if that happens, we implemented an update | 14:28 |
slaweq | and also idk what is the chance that someone will need to define pf for range with e.g. 100 consequtive ports | 14:28 |
rafaelweingartne | so update the first one to be 10-14, | 14:28 |
rafaelweingartne | then you use the 15 to something else | 14:28 |
rafaelweingartne | and then you can create a new one between 16-20 | 14:29 |
amotoki | rafaelweingartne: but the current FIP port forwarding API allows PUT operation. | 14:29 |
rafaelweingartne | for one-one | 14:29 |
rafaelweingartne | the whole problem is only allowing users to create NAT rule with a single port | 14:29 |
rafaelweingartne | if you look at other networking solutions, whenever they deal with NAT, they allow ranges | 14:30 |
rafaelweingartne | I do not see any complications to add such feature | 14:30 |
*** ttsiouts has quit IRC | 14:30 | |
rafaelweingartne | The key here is to allow | 14:31 |
rafaelweingartne | not force users | 14:31 |
rafaelweingartne | if they still want to use 1-1, that is still fine | 14:31 |
rafaelweingartne | however, if the user wants to map a range to another range, why not allow such operation? | 14:31 |
yamamoto | i used to have range configuration like that for one of my routers. i can understand it's sometimes useful. | 14:33 |
rafaelweingartne | it is, our users already use in production | 14:33 |
slaweq | I'm generally fine with this proposal, even if I personally don't have such usecases in mind but others may have :) | 14:34 |
rafaelweingartne | I am a developer, and I see your point guys, I was also skeptical at the begining, but somehow the users do use it | 14:34 |
slaweq | but as it require API and DB schema changes, I would like to have spec for that first | 14:34 |
rafaelweingartne | you mean the pull request? | 14:35 |
rafaelweingartne | or, do we need another spec just for the DB changes? | 14:35 |
ralonsoh | no, for the whole feature | 14:35 |
ralonsoh | explaining the DB changes, API extension, etc | 14:35 |
ralonsoh | slaweq, pforwarding now admits to change the external and internal ports | 14:36 |
rafaelweingartne | inst that what we have here https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1885921? | 14:36 |
openstack | Launchpad bug 1885921 in neutron "[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add port ranges" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins) | 14:36 |
rafaelweingartne | do we need to list something else? | 14:36 |
slaweq | rafaelweingartne: You need to propose spec with details of the change to https://github.com/openstack/neutron-specs | 14:36 |
*** raildo_ is now known as raildo | 14:36 | |
rafaelweingartne | hmm | 14:37 |
slaweq | ralonsoh: yes but is that problem? | 14:37 |
*** psachin has quit IRC | 14:37 | |
amotoki | RFE mainly discusses the need for the feature, and more discussion on implementation around API/DB and so on happens in the spec. | 14:37 |
rafaelweingartne | so besides that document we created in launch pad, we also need to write it down | 14:38 |
rafaelweingartne | so, what do you need? API inputs/output, validations, new DB schema | 14:38 |
amotoki | at least, in the RFE bug description, we have a room to discuss what the API and DB schema should be. | 14:38 |
rafaelweingartne | something else? | 14:38 |
slaweq | rafaelweingartne: maybe some testing plan for this new feature | 14:39 |
rafaelweingartne | we covered the code with unit tests | 14:39 |
amotoki | launchpad bug does not allows us to discuss line-by-line, so we would like to see a spec for detail. doesn't it make sense to you? | 14:39 |
rafaelweingartne | I mean, all of the changes we did | 14:39 |
rafaelweingartne | yes, it does | 14:39 |
rafaelweingartne | do you need some other testing plan? besides unit testing everything? | 14:40 |
slaweq | ok, so I'm personally ok to approve this rfe as an idea and continue discussion about api/db changes in the spec review | 14:40 |
amotoki | I also dropped one small question in https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1885921/comments/2 | 14:40 |
openstack | Launchpad bug 1885921 in neutron "[RFE][floatingip port_forwarding] Add port ranges" [Wishlist,New] - Assigned to Pedro Henrique Pereira Martins (pedrohpmartins) | 14:40 |
slaweq | rafaelweingartne: would be good if You could propose some tempest API/scenario tests also | 14:40 |
rafaelweingartne | ok | 14:40 |
amotoki | I am not sure N-1 port mapping works | 14:40 |
rafaelweingartne | we will do that then | 14:40 |
amotoki | but this can be dsicussed in the spec if we approve it. | 14:41 |
slaweq | N-1? | 14:41 |
slaweq | I thought that we are talking about N-N mapping only | 14:42 |
amotoki | the RFE description says "N(external port[s]) to 1 (internal port)" is allowed. | 14:42 |
slaweq | where I missed this proposal of N-1? | 14:42 |
amotoki | I don't understand how it works. | 14:42 |
slaweq | amotoki: ahh, right | 14:42 |
slaweq | I see it now | 14:42 |
slaweq | in validations part | 14:42 |
slaweq | rafaelweingartne: can You explain that? | 14:42 |
rafaelweingartne | Yes | 14:43 |
rafaelweingartne | so, we can have an application listening in a single port internally, but for some reason, the user/dev/operator wants to expose it via multiple external ports. This might happen for instance, when someone starts exporting something in a port e.g. 8080 | 14:44 |
rafaelweingartne | and then we also want port 80 to expose the same application | 14:44 |
rafaelweingartne | then we have multiple external ports that direct the traffic to the same internal application port | 14:45 |
rafaelweingartne | it was used to maitain compatibility with some legacy system | 14:45 |
amotoki | rafaelweingartne: how does it work when an internal port starts a connection? | 14:46 |
rafaelweingartne | what do you mean? | 14:46 |
amotoki | rafaelweingartne: from the nature of floating IP, both intrenal and external sides can start a connection. | 14:46 |
rafaelweingartne | hmm | 14:47 |
slaweq | amotoki: is it working like that now with PF 1:1? | 14:47 |
amotoki | or is it okay to consider listened port case? | 14:47 |
rafaelweingartne | ports do not actually start connection, but applications | 14:47 |
slaweq | I'm not sure | 14:47 |
amotoki | slaweq: I need to check more detail around iptables behavior | 14:48 |
rafaelweingartne | all that the current NAT configurations do is to create iptables rules to forward packets | 14:48 |
slaweq | amotoki: sure, but I think this can be discussed in the spec review | 14:48 |
rafaelweingartne | the only thing that we are doing is just making it flexible that configurations, similarly to what iptable already allows you to do. | 14:48 |
rafaelweingartne | also, they are forwarding incoming packets | 14:49 |
rafaelweingartne | from what I remember they are not touching the outgoing packets | 14:49 |
rafaelweingartne | unless, of course, the ACLs | 14:49 |
rafaelweingartne | but that is something else | 14:49 |
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting | 14:49 | |
rafaelweingartne | So, to sumarise, we will propose the spect at https://github.com/openstack/neutron-specs. The spec will have the context (problem description), the APIs, APIs' inputs and outputs, validations, new db schemas, and the tempest scenarios. | 14:51 |
rafaelweingartne | Is that what you guys would like to see? | 14:51 |
slaweq | rafaelweingartne: yes | 14:51 |
rafaelweingartne | ok, we will do that then | 14:51 |
slaweq | amotoki: yamamoto ralonsoh any thoughts? are You ok to approve rfe? | 14:51 |
ralonsoh | ok to approve but I have concerns about it | 14:52 |
ralonsoh | so we can discuss it in the spec | 14:52 |
amotoki | I am okay to approve it (while I still don't know the real usecase but yamamoto says he has similar experiences) | 14:52 |
slaweq | amotoki: yes, that is what convinced me too :) | 14:53 |
yamamoto | range thing is fine. N-1 thing is concerning. | 14:53 |
amotoki | I know the port forwarding API is mainly designed for listen ports, but if we add a forwarding rule for a higher port number theoretically it is possible for an internal side to start a connection with the port and we need to check what happens before allowing N-1 thing. | 14:53 |
amotoki | (it can be discussed in the spec of course) | 14:54 |
slaweq | ok, so lets approve rfe as on idea of extending PF API to allow ranges | 14:54 |
slaweq | and lets discuss N-1 mapping in the spec | 14:54 |
slaweq | if that don't make sense we may only go with N-N mapping finally | 14:55 |
yamamoto | +1 | 14:55 |
amotoki | sounds fine | 14:55 |
ralonsoh | ok | 14:55 |
slaweq | ok, thx | 14:55 |
slaweq | so I will mark rfe as approved | 14:56 |
slaweq | thx rafaelweingartne for proposing it and work working on that | 14:56 |
slaweq | and that's all what I had for You today | 14:56 |
yamamoto | amotoki: my usecase was with some weird application. i think it was a game. but i don't remember details. it's long ago. | 14:56 |
amotoki | yamamoto: hehe | 14:56 |
slaweq | thx for attending the meeting | 14:57 |
slaweq | and have a great weekend | 14:57 |
slaweq | o/ | 14:57 |
rafaelweingartne | ok, thanks guys | 14:57 |
ralonsoh | bye | 14:57 |
slaweq | #endmeeting | 14:57 |
yamamoto | good night | 14:57 |
*** openstack changes topic to "OpenStack Meetings || https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/" | 14:57 | |
amotoki | o/ | 14:57 |
openstack | Meeting ended Fri Jul 3 14:57:13 2020 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 14:57 |
openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2020/neutron_drivers.2020-07-03-14.00.html | 14:57 |
openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2020/neutron_drivers.2020-07-03-14.00.txt | 14:57 |
openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2020/neutron_drivers.2020-07-03-14.00.log.html | 14:57 |
rafaelweingartne | have a nice weeked too | 14:57 |
*** rafaelweingartne has quit IRC | 14:59 | |
*** armax has quit IRC | 15:01 | |
*** diurnalist has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
*** markmcclain has quit IRC | 15:06 | |
*** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:08 | |
*** yasufum has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:15 | |
*** jmasud has quit IRC | 15:25 | |
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:26 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 15:36 | |
*** jiaopengju1 has quit IRC | 15:40 | |
*** jiaopengju has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:42 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 15:54 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 15:59 | |
*** yamamoto has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:08 | |
*** dosaboy has quit IRC | 16:12 | |
*** icey has quit IRC | 16:13 | |
*** ociuhandu_ has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:13 | |
*** icey has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:14 | |
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 16:16 | |
*** links has quit IRC | 16:16 | |
*** ociuhandu_ has quit IRC | 16:17 | |
*** dosaboy has joined #openstack-meeting | 16:17 | |
*** yamamoto has quit IRC | 16:20 | |
*** Lucas_Gray has quit IRC | 16:30 | |
*** psahoo has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
*** e0ne_ has quit IRC | 17:21 | |
*** ralonsoh has quit IRC | 17:54 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 17:55 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 18:00 | |
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:09 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:13 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 18:17 | |
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:29 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 18:43 | |
*** diurnalist has quit IRC | 18:46 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 18:48 | |
*** yasufum has quit IRC | 18:51 | |
*** maciejjozefczyk has quit IRC | 19:18 | |
*** jmasud has quit IRC | 19:46 | |
*** jmasud has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:53 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 19:56 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 20:00 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:06 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 20:10 | |
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 20:29 | |
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:29 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:30 | |
*** ociuhandu has quit IRC | 20:34 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 20:35 | |
*** Steap has left #openstack-meeting | 20:40 | |
*** ociuhandu has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:40 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:44 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
*** raildo has quit IRC | 20:54 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 20:55 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 21:00 | |
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC | 21:03 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:09 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:19 | |
*** diurnalist has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:22 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 21:24 | |
*** diurnalist has quit IRC | 21:36 | |
*** rf0lc0 has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:45 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 21:48 | |
*** rf0lc0 has quit IRC | 21:50 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 21:57 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
*** armax has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:32 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:34 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 22:39 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 22:46 | |
*** armax has quit IRC | 22:49 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 22:51 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:10 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 23:15 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:23 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 23:27 | |
*** e0ne has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:35 | |
*** andrebeltrami has quit IRC | 23:36 | |
*** e0ne has quit IRC | 23:40 | |
*** ykatabam has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:45 | |
*** markvoelker has joined #openstack-meeting | 23:49 | |
*** markvoelker has quit IRC | 23:53 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!