| yasufum | hi, tacker team | 08:01 |
|---|---|---|
| masaki-ueno | hi | 08:01 |
| ueha | hi | 08:01 |
| manpreetk | hi | 08:01 |
| hirofumi-noguchi | hi | 08:01 |
| takahashi-tsc | hi | 08:01 |
| h_asahina | hi | 08:01 |
| yasufum | #startmeeting tacker | 08:02 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting started Tue Sep 14 08:02:14 2021 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is yasufum. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 08:02 |
| opendevmeet | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 08:02 |
| opendevmeet | The meeting name has been set to 'tacker' | 08:02 |
| yasufum | There are two topic on etherpad today. | 08:02 |
| yasufum | #link https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tacker-meeting | 08:02 |
| yasufum | The first one is my topic | 08:03 |
| yasufum | So, let get start it from the first item. | 08:03 |
| yasufum | As discussed in the previous vPTG, dropping lower-constraints was stopped because it’s still useful sometimes. | 08:05 |
| yasufum | I remember this discussion was only for tacker, right? | 08:06 |
| yasufum | didn’t for tacker-horizon and python-tackerclinet. | 08:06 |
| takahashi-tsc | I think so. | 08:07 |
| ueha | According to the xena ptg etherpad, it doesn't mention the sub project. | 08:08 |
| ueha | https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/tacker-xena-ptg#L193 | 08:08 |
| yasufum | Now, ropping lower constraints test has proposed. | 08:08 |
| yasufum | thx | 08:08 |
| yasufum | So, I would like to know your thinking of about this proposal. | 08:09 |
| yasufum | In my opinion, we don’t need to do so strict tests tacker-horizon and python-tackerclient actually. | 08:09 |
| yasufum | simple and light-weight implementation comparing with tacker. | 08:10 |
| ueha | It is useful to leave the lower-constraints test of the tacker, but not the sub project. right? | 08:11 |
| yasufum | I’m not sure it’s surely useful actually, but may be yes :) | 08:13 |
| ueha | If so, other projects have dropped lower-constraints, so I think we can drop it as well for tacker-horizon and python-tackerclient. | 08:13 |
| takahashi-tsc | +1 | 08:13 |
| yasufum | Any other comment or objection? | 08:15 |
| yasufum | good | 08:15 |
| manpreetk | Just a thought could we check other horizon plugin as well. | 08:15 |
| manpreetk | As horizon still has lower-constraint file. | 08:16 |
| yasufum | Sure, I’ve just found it. | 08:17 |
| yasufum | There are many horizon plugin projects, such as xxx-horizon or xxx-dashboard, and some of them already might dropped lower constraints. | 08:22 |
| yasufum | I think we don’t need to consider the decision of horizon now because it’s not related with tests in tacker-horizon. | 08:25 |
| yasufum | But might need to have a look about other horizon related projects as examples for making our decision. | 08:26 |
| manpreetk | Totally agree with you, considering above points we could drop l-c from tacker-horizon. | 08:26 |
| yasufum | yes. | 08:27 |
| manpreetk | I could check/investigate other plugins and update with opinion. WDYT? | 08:29 |
| yasufum | OK, if you have any other comment, please tell me on the patch review. | 08:29 |
| manpreetk | Ok | 08:29 |
| yasufum | manpreetk: thanks | 08:29 |
| yasufum | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker-horizon/+/789114 | 08:30 |
| manpreetk | Sure, thats from my side. Thanks | 08:31 |
| yasufum | For python-tackerclient, no update for dropping has not suggested yet, but I will do when appropriate. | 08:31 |
| yasufum | Thanks | 08:31 |
| yasufum | OK, go to the next topic. | 08:32 |
| yasufum | h-asahina: could you share your topic? | 08:32 |
| h_asahina | thanks, sure. | 08:33 |
| h_asahina | As I mentioned on the etherpad, I'd like to confirm whether or not the patch https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker/+/799022 supports multi-tenant policy completely in LCM operations. | 08:34 |
| h_asahina | In other words, do we have to do any additional work to support multi-tenancy in LCM operation or we don't have to do anything? | 08:35 |
| h_asahina | Does anyone know the answer? | 08:36 |
| takahashi-tsc | w-juso, do you make the plan as spec. So you can explain the answer base on the spec. | 08:39 |
| yasufum | this one, right? | 08:39 |
| yasufum | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker-specs/+/787135 | 08:39 |
| w-juso | I has implementing the 1 and 2 of proposed change int https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker-specs/+/787135. | 08:39 |
| w-juso | while, there are support still 3 of proposed change. | 08:41 |
| w-juso | These are the only three plans that I am planning. | 08:42 |
| h_asahina | I suppose those plans include supporting multi-tenant in LCM operations, right? | 08:44 |
| h_asahina | In that spec, the proposed changes is just "Add tenant_id to VnfLcmSubscriptions and VnfLcmOpOccs". So, I can't see if this patch enables multi-tenant operation in actual LCM operations or just adding `tenant_id` field to DB. | 08:47 |
| w-juso | There are three works related to adding this tenant ID. | 08:52 |
| w-juso | the first is filtering of VnfLcmSubscriptions show/list. | 08:53 |
| w-juso | the second is filtering of VnfLcmOpOccs show/list. | 08:53 |
| w-juso | the third is filter of send notification. | 08:54 |
| w-juso | Do you think there is anything else you need to do? | 08:56 |
| h_asahina | How about instantion or termination? | 08:58 |
| h_asahina | instantiation | 08:58 |
| w-juso | I think intantiation and termination are no problem for adding this tenant ID. but, there are exist issue of 3 of proposed change in instantiation. | 09:02 |
| h_asahina | You mean "3) Prohibiting VIM and VNF association created in different tenants"? | 09:04 |
| w-juso | yes | 09:04 |
| h_asahina | is this proposed change included in the patch? | 09:06 |
| w-juso | this proposed change hasn't include in the https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker/+/799022. | 09:08 |
| h_asahina | that means Tacker allows users to create VNF instance on VIM of a different tenant even if the above patch is merged. Am I correct? | 09:10 |
| w-juso | "3) Prohibiting VIM and VNF association created in different tenants" isn't include in the https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker/+/799022. | 09:10 |
| w-juso | yes | 09:10 |
| h_asahina | I got it. so we can't say Tacker supports complete multi-tenant LCM operation yet. | 09:12 |
| h_asahina | Thank you, but one more question. What is the reason that you did't implement the above proposed change to your patch? is there any problem? | 09:15 |
| w-juso | Sorry, just it needed much time. The fix was done in our local but UT/FT is not finished yet. | 09:17 |
| h_asahina | is difficult to include that proposed change to your patch before the relase? | 09:21 |
| w-juso | UT is possible, but FT is hard to implement. | 09:23 |
| w-juso | by RC1-release | 09:24 |
| yasufum | sure | 09:24 |
| h_asahina | ok. anyway you've already enables the proposed change "3) Prohibiting VIM and VNF association created in different tenants" in your local environment. if so, we can wait, can't we? | 09:25 |
| yasufum | w-juso: Do you have any idea for release target? such as mid of yoga or so... | 09:26 |
| w-juso | yes | 09:26 |
| w-juso | I will release FT at Yoga cycle. | 09:28 |
| w-juso | We can finish it by mid of Yoga | 09:29 |
| yasufum | thx | 09:30 |
| w-juso | I'd like to finish this work first at next Yoga cycle. | 09:30 |
| yasufum | I’d appreciate if you share status of your work at the next vPTG so we can discuss more about. | 09:31 |
| w-juso | sure | 09:31 |
| yasufum | Anyway, we’d better to wrap up this meeting... | 09:32 |
| yasufum | Do you have any other topic? | 09:32 |
| yasufum | everyone | 09:32 |
| masaki-ueno | Hi, i have one | 09:32 |
| masaki-ueno | Not a discussion, but a review request. | 09:32 |
| yasufum | OK, please go ahead | 09:32 |
| masaki-ueno | Recently, I've uploaded a patch that fixes document of k8s VIM installation. | 09:33 |
| masaki-ueno | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/tacker/+/807988 | 09:33 |
| yasufum | I’ll check it, thanks. | 09:34 |
| masaki-ueno | I think this needs your review, so I appreciate any comments not only my change, but also any part in this document. | 09:34 |
| masaki-ueno | That's all, thanks :) | 09:34 |
| yasufum | We’ve asked to fix RC1 by 16th, so please help for accelarating to merge propsed patches. | 09:37 |
| yasufum | #link https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/releases/+/808733 | 09:37 |
| yasufum | I’d like to close this meeting if no more comment. | 09:38 |
| yasufum | ok | 09:39 |
| yasufum | Thanks for joining, bye! | 09:39 |
| takahashi-tsc | thanks! | 09:39 |
| masaki-ueno | bye! | 09:39 |
| h_asahina | thanks, bye. | 09:39 |
| ueha | thanks, bye. | 09:40 |
| manpreetk | thanks bye | 09:40 |
| w-juso | thanks! bye | 09:40 |
| yasufum | #endmeeting | 09:40 |
| opendevmeet | Meeting ended Tue Sep 14 09:40:07 2021 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 09:40 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tacker/2021/tacker.2021-09-14-08.02.html | 09:40 |
| opendevmeet | Minutes (text): https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tacker/2021/tacker.2021-09-14-08.02.txt | 09:40 |
| opendevmeet | Log: https://meetings.opendev.org/meetings/tacker/2021/tacker.2021-09-14-08.02.log.html | 09:40 |
| *** pdeore_ is now known as pdeore | 13:37 | |
| *** abhishekk is now known as abhishekk|away | 14:31 | |
| *** abhishekk|away is now known as abhishekk | 15:51 | |
| julianp | Ahoy. Looks like I'm the first one here. | 21:02 |
| julianp | Hi trandles. | 21:04 |
| b1airo | o/ | 21:04 |
| julianp | Hi b1airo. | 21:04 |
| b1airo | hi julianp ! | 21:04 |
| trandles | I'm in the right place! | 21:05 |
| trandles | lucky guess | 21:05 |
| trandles | Hi julianp b1airo | 21:05 |
| b1airo | howdy trandles | 21:05 |
| julianp | Are we waiting for martial? | 21:08 |
| b1airo | Perhaps, I'm in another zoom in parallel :-) | 21:09 |
| julianp | Heh. Gotcha. | 21:09 |
| julianp | I can't stay long, so with your blessing b1airo, I'll drop some Exosphere updates and run. | 21:11 |
| b1airo | sounds great julianp , have been keen for an update | 21:12 |
| julianp | Ok! Thank you. | 21:12 |
| b1airo | we're building our new Cloud/HPC thing at the moment and I'm thinking exosphere could be our default self-service vdesktop option... | 21:12 |
| julianp | Excellent. That fits nicely with our roadmap. | 21:13 |
| julianp | 1. User-friendly, DigitalOcean-esque OpenStack image selection landed recently: https://gitlab.com/exosphere/exosphere/-/merge_requests/497#screenshots | 21:13 |
| julianp | Mappings to OpenStack images is configurable per OpenStack cloud. | 21:13 |
| julianp | 2. Launch Binder-compatible repositories on OpenStack instances: https://gitlab.com/exosphere/exosphere/-/merge_requests/496#screenshots | 21:14 |
| b1airo | oooh nice | 21:15 |
| julianp | Good for workshops I hope. | 21:15 |
| b1airo | yeah, that sounds very interesting. we do a lot of training via JupyterHub at the moment... | 21:15 |
| julianp | That makes sense. | 21:16 |
| julianp | Both of these features are available to on the Jetstream Exosphere for anybody with accounts. Let me know if you don't and I can get you testing credentials. https://exosphere.jetstream-cloud.org/ | 21:17 |
| julianp | I'll be working on making the Binder functionality easier to understand for new users. I'd also like to make it easier for cloud operators to launch their own proxies - so they don't have to use/trust ours to test Exosphere out. | 21:20 |
| b1airo | sounds useful actually | 21:21 |
| julianp | I'd like to know the biggest hurdles are which prevent folks from kicking the tires, and make it easier get going. Feel free to send me a DM for any feedback. | 21:22 |
| julianp | Oy. And my typos. Apologies. I have to run (literally) to the next meeting. Have a great day! o/ | 21:23 |
| b1airo | thanks julian | 21:27 |
| b1airo | how are things your end trandles ? | 21:27 |
| trandles | way way too busy | 21:31 |
| trandles | I'm staring into the abyss and it really does stare back | 21:31 |
| trandles | we've lost some key people and that's not making anything better | 21:31 |
| martial | (Sorry for being late, kids pickup) | 21:32 |
| trandles | Hi martial | 21:33 |
| b1airo | oh dear, sounds a bit dire | 21:36 |
| b1airo | wanna move to NZ ?! :-) | 21:36 |
| trandles | Hrm, not sure moving to NZ is an option, especially during covid ;) | 21:36 |
| b1airo | just takes longer than usual | 21:37 |
| martial | (picking kids from camp, there must be some english-ism I was missing :) ) | 21:38 |
| martial | what did I miss so far? | 21:39 |
| trandles | some exosphere updates from julianp | 21:39 |
| martial | rgr | 21:40 |
| trandles | I think b1airo is multitasking on another meeting at the same time | 21:41 |
| trandles | martial: you still planning to attend SC? | 21:41 |
| martial | no, that got taken off the table a while back | 21:41 |
| martial | basically after we did not get a panel together | 21:41 |
| b1airo | two other discussions now :-) | 21:42 |
| trandles | b1airo is now manytasking | 21:42 |
| b1airo | yeah I'm disappointed in SC organisers, what a cluster ... | 21:42 |
| martial | polymultitasking | 21:43 |
| martial | well hopefully next year | 21:43 |
| trandles | it's a cluster ... for folks already in the US, I can't imagine it would be doable (or worth it) for people coming from overseas | 21:43 |
| b1airo | yeah :-( | 21:44 |
| trandles | gotta drop off and get ready for the next meeting | 21:54 |
| trandles | cheers guys | 21:54 |
| martial | we are reaching the end of the hour anyhow | 21:56 |
| martial | #topic AOB | 21:56 |
| martial | well if nothing else, thanks everyone for joining | 21:57 |
| martial | #endmeeting | 21:57 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.17.2 by Marius Gedminas - find it at https://mg.pov.lt/irclog2html/!