| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 00:05 | |
| *** NehaV has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:07 | |
| *** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:12 | |
| *** brents has quit IRC | 00:13 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:13 | |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul-away | 00:14 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:18 | |
| *** brents has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:21 | |
| *** NehaV has quit IRC | 00:23 | |
| *** NehaV has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:27 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 00:27 | |
| *** NehaV has quit IRC | 00:32 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 00:35 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:36 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 00:40 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:41 | |
| *** jamiec has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:42 | |
| *** ryu25 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:42 | |
| *** gokrokve_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:42 | |
| *** jamiec has quit IRC | 00:43 | |
| *** Leo_ has quit IRC | 00:45 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 00:46 | |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:49 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:51 | |
| *** demorris has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:51 | |
| *** ashaikh has quit IRC | 00:55 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 00:56 | |
| *** safchain has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 00:59 | |
| *** safchain has quit IRC | 01:00 | |
| *** brents has quit IRC | 01:01 | |
| *** IlyaE has quit IRC | 01:15 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 01:15 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:16 | |
| *** safchain has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:16 | |
| *** rwsu has quit IRC | 01:18 | |
| *** safchain has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** sacharya has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 01:19 | |
| *** rwsu has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:19 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 01:23 | |
| *** mozawa has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:31 | |
| *** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:38 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:39 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:47 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 01:49 | |
| *** harlowja has quit IRC | 01:51 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 01:52 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 01:55 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 01:55 | |
| *** markvoelker1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 01:56 | |
| *** harlowja has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:03 | |
| *** colinmcnamara has quit IRC | 02:05 | |
| *** arnaud__ has quit IRC | 02:10 | |
| *** arnaud has quit IRC | 02:10 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:12 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:17 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 02:22 | |
| *** zane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:23 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:27 | |
| *** nosnos_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:30 | |
| *** vkmc has quit IRC | 02:32 | |
| *** nosnos has quit IRC | 02:33 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 02:37 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 02:43 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 02:48 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 02:50 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 02:56 | |
| *** balajiiyer has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:08 | |
| *** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:14 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:20 | |
| *** dougshelley66 has quit IRC | 03:22 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 03:25 | |
| *** zane has quit IRC | 03:25 | |
| *** jergerber has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:27 | |
| *** jergerber has quit IRC | 03:30 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:35 | |
| *** jergerber has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:37 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:50 | |
| *** ashaikh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:52 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:54 | |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 03:54 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 03:55 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 03:57 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 03:58 | |
| *** vipul-away is now known as vipul | 04:01 | |
| *** vipul has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:01 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 04:01 | |
| *** balajiiyer has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:05 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 04:11 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:11 | |
| *** yamahata__ has quit IRC | 04:12 | |
| *** yamahata__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:13 | |
| *** yamahata__ has quit IRC | 04:13 | |
| *** yamahata_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:13 | |
| *** balajiiyer1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:14 | |
| *** betsy has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:15 | |
| *** balajiiyer1 has quit IRC | 04:18 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:20 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 04:24 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 04:28 | |
| *** gokrokve_ has quit IRC | 04:28 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:34 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:36 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 04:38 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:39 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:43 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 04:44 | |
| *** coolsvap has quit IRC | 04:45 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:46 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:46 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 04:47 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:48 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:49 | |
| *** zane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:52 | |
| *** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:54 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 04:59 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 04:59 | |
| *** chandankumar has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:02 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 05:04 | |
| *** nosnos_ has quit IRC | 05:06 | |
| *** nosnos has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:07 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:17 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:17 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:18 | |
| *** ativelko_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:19 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 05:22 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 05:23 | |
| *** ativelko_ has quit IRC | 05:24 | |
| *** coolsvap has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:25 | |
| *** coolsvap has quit IRC | 05:29 | |
| *** radix_ has quit IRC | 05:30 | |
| *** harlowja is now known as harlowja_away | 05:40 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:47 | |
| *** ativelko_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:49 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 05:49 | |
| *** ativelko_ has quit IRC | 05:54 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:57 | |
| *** nadya has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 05:57 | |
| *** nadya is now known as Guest62333 | 05:57 | |
| *** harlowja_away is now known as harlowja | 05:59 | |
| *** jergerber has quit IRC | 06:02 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 06:02 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 06:02 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:02 | |
| *** Guest62333 has quit IRC | 06:03 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 06:05 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 06:07 | |
| *** denis_makogon has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:08 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:09 | |
| *** yogesh_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:16 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 06:16 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:18 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:20 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 06:23 | |
| *** yogesh_ has quit IRC | 06:23 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 06:25 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:27 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:27 | |
| *** zz_ajo is now known as ajo | 06:28 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 06:28 | |
| *** ajo is now known as zz_ajo | 06:29 | |
| *** zz_ajo is now known as ajo | 06:29 | |
| *** ajo is now known as zz_ajo | 06:33 | |
| *** dougshelley66 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:34 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:37 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:37 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 06:44 | |
| *** yogesh_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:44 | |
| *** yogesh_ has quit IRC | 06:46 | |
| *** SushilKM has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:47 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 06:50 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 06:54 | |
| *** akuznetsov has quit IRC | 06:59 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:01 | |
| *** SushilKM has quit IRC | 07:02 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:03 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 07:08 | |
| *** ashaikh has quit IRC | 07:11 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:20 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 07:21 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 07:24 | |
| *** zane has quit IRC | 07:27 | |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul-away | 07:34 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:38 | |
| *** SushilKM has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:39 | |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:44 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 07:48 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 07:49 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:49 | |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 07:49 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:50 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 07:50 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 07:54 | |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:54 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 07:55 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 07:57 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:03 | |
| *** SushilKM has quit IRC | 08:04 | |
| *** MarkAtwood has quit IRC | 08:04 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:04 | |
| *** harlowja is now known as harlowja_away | 08:04 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 08:09 | |
| *** amcrn has quit IRC | 08:15 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:18 | |
| *** jcoufal has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:19 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:19 | |
| *** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:22 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 08:23 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 08:25 | |
| *** luQAs has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:27 | |
| *** markvoelker1 has quit IRC | 08:33 | |
| *** flaper87|afk is now known as flaper87 | 08:36 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:36 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 08:41 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:50 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:50 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 08:51 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 08:51 | |
| *** enikanorov has quit IRC | 08:53 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 08:54 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 08:55 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:03 | |
| *** safchain has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:06 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 09:06 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:07 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 09:09 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 09:09 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:09 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 09:12 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:12 | |
| *** katyafervent has quit IRC | 09:18 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:20 | |
| *** ativelko_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:23 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 09:25 | |
| *** akuznetsov has quit IRC | 09:26 | |
| *** luQAs has quit IRC | 09:35 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:38 | |
| *** ativelko_ has quit IRC | 09:39 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:40 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:45 | |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:47 | |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:52 | |
| *** ryu25 has quit IRC | 09:52 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:52 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 09:56 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:57 | |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 09:58 | |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:58 | |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:59 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 09:59 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:03 | |
| *** mozawa has quit IRC | 10:03 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:04 | |
| *** luQAs has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:05 | |
| *** enikanorov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:08 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 10:09 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 10:11 | |
| *** derekh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:15 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 10:15 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:15 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:19 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 10:19 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:23 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:23 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 10:24 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 10:26 | |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC | 10:28 | |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:29 | |
| *** katyafervent has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:31 | |
| *** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:32 | |
| *** rossella_s has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:38 | |
| *** rsblendido has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:38 | |
| *** denis_makogon has quit IRC | 10:40 | |
| *** denis_makogon has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:45 | |
| *** dteselkin has quit IRC | 10:47 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 10:49 | |
| *** aignatov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 10:51 | |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 10:59 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has quit IRC | 10:59 | |
| *** nosnos has quit IRC | 11:00 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:03 | |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:04 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 11:13 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 11:28 | |
| *** aignatov has quit IRC | 11:28 | |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 11:32 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:32 | |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:32 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:34 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:35 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 11:36 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 11:39 | |
| *** aignatov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 11:47 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:03 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 12:04 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:04 | |
| *** mozawa has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:04 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 12:05 | |
| *** ruhe is now known as ruhe_ | 12:05 | |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:06 | |
| *** ruhe_ has quit IRC | 12:06 | |
| *** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:07 | |
| *** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:07 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:14 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 12:15 | |
| *** aignatov has quit IRC | 12:16 | |
| *** aignatov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:20 | |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:20 | |
| *** rongze_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:24 | |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:24 | |
| *** natishalom has quit IRC | 12:24 | |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC | 12:24 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 12:28 | |
| *** luQAs has quit IRC | 12:35 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 12:35 | |
| *** NehaV has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:36 | |
| *** BrianB_ has quit IRC | 12:38 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:44 | |
| *** abramley has quit IRC | 12:46 | |
| *** jdob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:49 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 12:50 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has quit IRC | 12:51 | |
| *** akuznetsov has quit IRC | 12:53 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:57 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 12:57 | |
| *** HenryG has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:00 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:03 | |
| *** pdmars has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:03 | |
| *** eankutse has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:07 | |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:07 | |
| *** eankutse has quit IRC | 13:07 | |
| *** eankutse has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:08 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 13:10 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:10 | |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 13:13 | |
| *** rsblendido has quit IRC | 13:14 | |
| *** rossella_s has quit IRC | 13:14 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 13:14 | |
| *** pdmars has quit IRC | 13:18 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:25 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 13:27 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 13:28 | |
| *** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:28 | |
| *** heyongli has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:31 | |
| *** colinmcnamara has quit IRC | 13:32 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 13:33 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:36 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 13:36 | |
| *** rossella_s has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:38 | |
| *** rsblendido has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:38 | |
| *** ativelko_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:40 | |
| *** ativelko_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:41 | |
| *** abramley has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:42 | |
| *** pdmars has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:44 | |
| *** chandankumar_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:44 | |
| *** ativelko_ has quit IRC | 13:44 | |
| *** chandankumar_ has quit IRC | 13:44 | |
| *** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:47 | |
| *** bugsduggan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:49 | |
| *** dprince has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:50 | |
| *** heyongli has quit IRC | 13:54 | |
| *** matty_dubs|gone has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:57 | |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:58 | |
| *** akuznetsov has quit IRC | 13:58 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 13:58 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 13:59 | |
| *** derekh has quit IRC | 14:00 | |
| markwash | good morning/afternoon/evening | 14:00 |
|---|---|---|
| markwash | #startmeeting glance | 14:00 |
| openstack | markwash: Error: Can't start another meeting, one is in progress. Use #endmeeting first. | 14:00 |
| markwash | oh no! | 14:01 |
| markwash | endmeeting | 14:01 |
| markwash | #endmeeting | 14:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Initial discussion of a possible solution to several issues raised during the Blueprint Hangout (Meeting topic: Designate)" | 14:01 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Dec 19 14:01:08 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 14:01 |
| *** zhiyan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:01 | |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/trove/2013/trove.2013-12-18-18.13.html | 14:01 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/trove/2013/trove.2013-12-18-18.13.txt | 14:01 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/trove/2013/trove.2013-12-18-18.13.log.html | 14:01 |
| markwash | #startmeeting glance | 14:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 19 14:01:21 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is markwash. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 14:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 14:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: glance)" | 14:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'glance' | 14:01 |
| zhiyan | hi | 14:01 |
| flaper87 | o/ | 14:01 |
| flaper87 | o/ | 14:01 |
| markwash | |o/ | 14:02 |
| zhiyan | flaper87: \o | 14:02 |
| zhiyan | markwash: o/ | 14:02 |
| flaper87 | zhiyan: yo | 14:02 |
| markwash | just the three of us? (we can make it if we try) | 14:02 |
| flaper87 | markwash: lets do it | 14:03 |
| flaper87 | I've a couple of things I'd like to get your thoughts on | 14:03 |
| flaper87 | :D | 14:03 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:03 | |
| markwash | okay | 14:03 |
| rosmaita | o/ | 14:04 |
| flaper87 | rosmaita: good morning | 14:04 |
| zhiyan | markwash: if we have time, i have a little question | 14:04 |
| markwash | zhiyan: it looks like we might have lots of time | 14:04 |
| rosmaita | flaper87: good afternoon! | 14:04 |
| markwash | todays agenda: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-team-meeting-agenda | 14:04 |
| zhiyan | markwash: ok. actually it's a question for my location-status bp implementation. i believe we can talk it offline also. | 14:05 |
| markwash | so first item, we won't have a meeting next week | 14:06 |
| zhiyan | rosmaita: hello | 14:06 |
| markwash | do folks here want to meet on Jan 2nd? I think it probably works for me | 14:06 |
| *** chandankumar has quit IRC | 14:06 | |
| *** luQAs has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:07 | |
| flaper87 | markwash: I'd say 9th | 14:07 |
| rosmaita | zhiyan: howdy | 14:07 |
| rosmaita | i will be offline jan 2 | 14:07 |
| flaper87 | it'll probably work for me too but I'm not sure yet | 14:07 |
| markwash | okay, seems fine then, the 9th | 14:07 |
| flaper87 | kk | 14:07 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 14:08 | |
| markwash | Next meeting will be at 2000 UTC on Jan 9 | 14:08 |
| markwash | #topic reviews | 14:08 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "reviews (Meeting topic: glance)" | 14:08 | |
| zhiyan | markwash: cool | 14:08 |
| markwash | Just briefly wanted to mention that we still have a fair amount of work to do on our review queue | 14:08 |
| flaper87 | #info Next meeting will be at 2000 UTC on Jan 9 | 14:09 |
| *** demorris has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:09 | |
| markwash | and I'm going to be free from the bonds of the day job for the next chunk of time, so I'll be putting in a near daily effort on it despite the holidays | 14:09 |
| markwash | so if you have a bit of time, be sure to check the queue for things that just need one more +2 | 14:09 |
| markwash | flaper87: want to share your thoughts next? | 14:11 |
| flaper87 | markwash: yup | 14:11 |
| *** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:11 | |
| markwash | #topic flaper87's thoughts | 14:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "flaper87's thoughts (Meeting topic: glance)" | 14:11 | |
| markwash | :-) | 14:11 |
| flaper87 | LOL | 14:11 |
| flaper87 | the first thing I'd like to get your thoughts on is this review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59150/ | 14:11 |
| flaper87 | I really don't think we should be enabling all the stores by default, instead that should be an explicit action | 14:12 |
| *** mclaren has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:12 | |
| flaper87 | Most of the stores - besides http + file - need lot of configs that are not there by default | 14:12 |
| zhiyan | flaper87: agreed | 14:12 |
| flaper87 | and will confuse users when glance starts | 14:12 |
| flaper87 | now, the tests there fail because we need this patch in: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59177/ | 14:13 |
| zhiyan | flaper87: but i just meaning we need change others to make it work well | 14:13 |
| flaper87 | which is a devstack patch | 14:13 |
| flaper87 | I talked with sdague today and I'd also need your thoughts there as a consensus of this change | 14:14 |
| flaper87 | zhiyan: not sure what you mean | 14:14 |
| markwash | flaper87: okay, I've starred the reviews | 14:14 |
| markwash | In general I think this change in default makes sense but I'm still processing the concerns I see raised there | 14:14 |
| zhiyan | flaper87: hum..i'm trying explaining my comments in https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59150/1/glance/store/__init__.py | 14:14 |
| zhiyan | especially last one | 14:15 |
| flaper87 | markwash: agreed. I put some thoughts there | 14:15 |
| flaper87 | so, distros don't override config files - and if there's a distro doing that, it's not a good one - which means that users will notice the change | 14:16 |
| flaper87 | and if they're upgrading from H to I they'll have to look into those files | 14:16 |
| flaper87 | that said, I doubt there's an environment with all those stores enabled | 14:16 |
| flaper87 | I really doubt it | 14:16 |
| flaper87 | and if there's one, I want to know why :D | 14:16 |
| flaper87 | (that was a joke( | 14:17 |
| flaper87 | ) | 14:17 |
| markwash | zhiyan: I think you're especially asking for some better error handling when an unsupported store is accessed? | 14:17 |
| iccha | o/ | 14:17 |
| flaper87 | this change will bring benefits to glance and to the users of it | 14:17 |
| flaper87 | I agree there should be a better error handling | 14:17 |
| flaper87 | but I don't think that's the solution for this issue | 14:17 |
| flaper87 | stores *have* to yell when they're not configured correctly | 14:17 |
| flaper87 | and that's what they do now | 14:17 |
| zhiyan | markwash: part of. you when user finish upgrade, then error is not make sense. | 14:18 |
| flaper87 | we could improve the messages being printed | 14:18 |
| flaper87 | but still, I think it's not worth it to enabled them all | 14:18 |
| markwash | flaper87: I was imagining the error handling was about reporting errors *with* your patch, not instead of it | 14:18 |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:18 | |
| markwash | but still not sure | 14:18 |
| markwash | iccha: o/ | 14:18 |
| flaper87 | markwash: yeah, I think I misread zhiyan comment maybe | 14:19 |
| flaper87 | but anyway, I think both should happen | 14:19 |
| iccha | hey markwash :) | 14:19 |
| flaper87 | iccha: heyyyy | 14:19 |
| flaper87 | :D | 14:19 |
| iccha | hey flaper87 | 14:19 |
| markwash | I've got those reviews starred now which means I think I can effectivlye prioritize following up | 14:19 |
| flaper87 | awesome I think at least 2 other cores should chime in in both patches | 14:20 |
| flaper87 | to show consensus | 14:20 |
| flaper87 | I explicitly asked not to approve the devstack patch until we agree that's the way to go | 14:20 |
| markwash | okay, flaper87 other thoughts? | 14:20 |
| flaper87 | yup | 14:20 |
| flaper87 | just one more | 14:20 |
| *** ativelko_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:20 | |
| flaper87 | I've been thinking that other projects (nova, glanceclient (?) ) could benefit from the glance.stores code. The API there seems pretty stable. I would like to know what you guys think about pulling that could out of glance into its own lib | 14:21 |
| flaper87 | we could move it into oslo | 14:21 |
| flaper87 | and then use it somewhere else | 14:22 |
| flaper87 | I think it's not that tight to glance | 14:22 |
| flaper87 | and it exposes useful methods to interact with stores | 14:22 |
| flaper87 | either they are remote or local | 14:22 |
| iccha | flaper87: just curious what other components talk directly to the stores? | 14:22 |
| markwash | hmm interesting idea | 14:23 |
| flaper87 | none yet but, if we want to improve nova and let it interact with the store we could use it | 14:23 |
| flaper87 | zhiyan: and myself are working on zero-copy for nova | 14:23 |
| flaper87 | one of the things we'd like add there is multi-locations | 14:23 |
| markwash | making it easier for nova and cinder to talk direclty to stores would be nice | 14:23 |
| flaper87 | and it'd be cool to let nova access the remote location | 14:24 |
| markwash | though I was wondering if code like that might better live in someplace accessible through glanceclient | 14:24 |
| iccha | and making it so all projects talk the same way would be good for the stores | 14:24 |
| iccha | we could reduce technical debt | 14:24 |
| zhiyan | flaper87: probably we need rethink a little for store's interface. | 14:24 |
| flaper87 | I thought about a library because I think it could be useful for other scenarios outside openstack | 14:24 |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:25 | |
| zhiyan | and btw, i think this is a little related with John's bp | 14:25 |
| flaper87 | I first thought about pulling it into glanceclient then I thought about having a glance.stores lib | 14:25 |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:25 | |
| *** natishalom has quit IRC | 14:25 | |
| zhiyan | store plugin (or something like that) | 14:25 |
| markwash | zhiyan: ++ | 14:25 |
| flaper87 | and my last thought was moving it into oslo first | 14:25 |
| flaper87 | zhiyan: yeah | 14:25 |
| flaper87 | that most likely will need to happen | 14:25 |
| flaper87 | but before getting there, I wanted to know your thoughts about that | 14:25 |
| markwash | I think a stores lib could work nicely. . and it wouldn't prevent us from reusing logic through glanceclient | 14:26 |
| zhiyan | i'm thinking can we merge those two ideas to one? | 14:26 |
| flaper87 | markwash: exactly | 14:26 |
| flaper87 | zhiyan: yup, all that will happen as part of the lib creation | 14:26 |
| markwash | there's some logic zhiyan has been working on that is somewhat related, essentially applying selection strategies for dealing with multiple locations. . I guess that would *not* be in the stores lib but would be reused through the glanceclient. . do you agree? | 14:26 |
| iccha | is there a patch? | 14:27 |
| *** sergmelikyan has quit IRC | 14:27 | |
| zhiyan | markwash: agree | 14:27 |
| flaper87 | yeah | 14:27 |
| iccha | curious why client needs store logic. sorry been lil outta sync | 14:27 |
| zhiyan | just is what i want to say | 14:27 |
| *** esker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:27 | |
| markwash | iccha: the idea is for any client to be able to talk directly to the store | 14:27 |
| zhiyan | glance client lib can also include api discovery part. iiuc | 14:28 |
| markwash | not just nova | 14:28 |
| zhiyan | iccha: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/glance/+spec/image-location-selection-strategy | 14:28 |
| iccha | interesting, then the client lib can be used in any project | 14:28 |
| iccha | thanks zhiyan | 14:28 |
| markwash | zhiyan: sorry I have not given you any reviews yet! | 14:28 |
| zhiyan | iccha: :) happy can get your comments btw | 14:29 |
| zhiyan | markwash: hehe | 14:29 |
| flaper87 | Agreed | 14:29 |
| zhiyan | markwash: i really hope tbh | 14:29 |
| flaper87 | also, location selection should also be done based on the glanceclient location | 14:29 |
| rosmaita | i guess this would force us to improve credentials handling for the stores | 14:29 |
| flaper87 | like getting the best / nearest remote location to the client | 14:29 |
| flaper87 | etc | 14:30 |
| flaper87 | rosmaita: yes and no | 14:30 |
| flaper87 | so, the stores currently don't store the location | 14:30 |
| flaper87 | we do it in glance | 14:30 |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:30 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 14:30 | |
| iccha | just one point to keep in mind, when we start encouraging other projects like nova talking directly to stores, is that the number of compute nodes >>> glance nodes | 14:30 |
| flaper87 | which means we need to improve the way we're keeping it in glance. (I may be saying something stupid here) | 14:31 |
| markwash | flaper87: how should we proceed with this idea? are you going to work on it? what kind of spec would you want to see | 14:31 |
| flaper87 | rosmaita: I haven't followed the credentials work very closely | 14:31 |
| markwash | flaper87: I think that's basically correct, depending on how the api for a storage lib is defined | 14:31 |
| rosmaita | flaper87: not at all, the problem I see is glance can tell you where something is, but you need to have your own credentials to actually get it | 14:31 |
| flaper87 | markwash: The first thing we need to do is choose whether to have glance/stores or oslo.stores | 14:31 |
| flaper87 | I vote for the later | 14:31 |
| zhiyan | markwash: agree | 14:31 |
| flaper87 | then create a bp for oslo and I'll pull it out | 14:31 |
| rosmaita | so if you use a glance-owned container for images, then there's a credentials problem | 14:32 |
| mclaren | rosmaita: agreed, not sure we want to spread the swift backend creds more than we need to | 14:32 |
| markwash | hmm, I actually prefer the former. . this seems like a case where we have an established supported api already, or nearly | 14:32 |
| rosmaita | mclaren: +1K | 14:32 |
| mclaren | lol | 14:32 |
| markwash | no need to iterate on it in the copy-paste fashion | 14:32 |
| zhiyan | flaper87: =1 to markwash's | 14:32 |
| zhiyan | +1 | 14:32 |
| flaper87 | markwash: but we could aim to have an oslo.store right away | 14:33 |
| markwash | rosmaita: I think what you're saying is "the stores lib would not be useful until we fix the creds issue" | 14:33 |
| iccha | just ruined mclaren and rosmaita 's slepe for next few days | 14:33 |
| flaper87 | just because we have an established api | 14:33 |
| flaper87 | instead of entering into oslo-incubator | 14:33 |
| markwash | rosmaita: not "the stores lib will make the creds issue worse" | 14:33 |
| flaper87 | I guess we could discuss that in the m-l | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | markwash: exactly, thank you | 14:33 |
| mclaren | (I don't want to highjack this but multi-tenant would help with direct access...) | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | i think this could be an opportunity to get keystone to make some improvements | 14:33 |
| rosmaita | mclaren: i'm not sold on multi-tenant | 14:34 |
| flaper87 | ok, that's it from me | 14:34 |
| markwash | flaper87: perhaps, I guess ml is the best place to figure that out. . seems like it might be something that we could keep under the images program though | 14:34 |
| markwash | flaper87: so yeah if you want to bring that up on the ML that would be great | 14:34 |
| markwash | okay, moving on! | 14:34 |
| flaper87 | rosmaita: mclaren I agree with you | 14:34 |
| flaper87 | markwash: I will | 14:34 |
| flaper87 | thank you guys | 14:34 |
| markwash | we've been going in a slightly roundabout fashion today agenda-wise | 14:34 |
| *** balajiiyer has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:35 | |
| markwash | zhiyan: did you have an item for us before we try to dive in on the domain model? | 14:35 |
| markwash | (not sure we have all the folks that were intended for that conversation | 14:36 |
| markwash | ) | 14:36 |
| iccha | yeah | 14:36 |
| zhiyan | markwash: can we talk this part off line? thanks | 14:36 |
| iccha | lot of ppl seem missin | 14:36 |
| markwash | zhiyan: sure, that's fine | 14:36 |
| zhiyan | markwash: cool. (will ping you) | 14:36 |
| markwash | okay, then I'd like to at least visit the blueprint process notes | 14:37 |
| markwash | #topic blueprint process | 14:37 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "blueprint process (Meeting topic: glance)" | 14:37 | |
| iccha | https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/glance-blueprint-process | 14:37 |
| iccha | so i have been doing some research on blueprint process for openstack and what other projects follow | 14:37 |
| iccha | nova has a really interesting process : they have a separate team called the drivers | 14:38 |
| iccha | every person who submits a blueprint is responsible for assigning to deliver it by a given milestone and a condition stating this blueprint is done when | 14:39 |
| *** zane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:39 | |
| iccha | and a detailed enough description | 14:39 |
| iccha | this is then reviewed by team of drivers | 14:39 |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:39 | |
| markwash | so drivers are like core except for blueprint review? | 14:39 |
| iccha | and a blueprint is approved only when one or more driver supports the bp | 14:39 |
| iccha | yes markwash | 14:40 |
| *** rraja has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:40 | |
| zhiyan | iccha: can you tell me when they discuss that? and where? | 14:40 |
| iccha | also the importance of the blueprint is decided by how many core members has volunteered to be revieweing that feature | 14:41 |
| zhiyan | ML or irc weekly-meeting | 14:41 |
| markwash | it seemed like they also have some specific rules about what must be provided and guidelines for how blueprints transition through their state-flow | 14:41 |
| iccha | http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-October/017290.html | 14:41 |
| iccha | some of these discussions happened at the summit i believe | 14:42 |
| iccha | zhiyan: the wiki page on blueprints has the nova process too | 14:42 |
| zhiyan | iccha: indeed, thanks. | 14:43 |
| iccha | https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Blueprints | 14:43 |
| markwash | I guess what I'd really love to do with this is to use it to guide an automated review process as well as using the underlying rules to power a dashboard | 14:44 |
| iccha | so if we feel we could pick parts of process or customize it for us | 14:44 |
| iccha | markwash: +1 | 14:44 |
| markwash | even if its just for me, that would be a huge help, but I also like the idea of figuring out if we need something like a drivers team | 14:44 |
| markwash | its possible core == drivers for us | 14:44 |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:45 | |
| markwash | or maybe we can have another group of drivers, and have people who can review blueprints be cores + drivers | 14:45 |
| iccha | i would like the possibility of non core members also to have a change to be part of drivers | 14:45 |
| markwash | yeah | 14:45 |
| markwash | and also perhaps there are some cores that don't want to mess with bp review | 14:45 |
| iccha | if they are going to consistent and have valuable input from glance as a paroduct side | 14:45 |
| markwash | so the action item I really want to take from this is for someone to start playing around with automating this workflow, but I'm not sure we're ready exactly | 14:46 |
| markwash | maybe the right action item is an ML proposal for exactly what our workflow would be? | 14:46 |
| rosmaita | markwash: yes, we need a workflow before we try to automate it! | 14:47 |
| markwash | novas + whatever tweaks I guess | 14:47 |
| markwash | okay, I'll take that on, bp triaging is something I really want us to step up | 14:47 |
| ameade | maybe like theirs but a little lighter weight :) | 14:48 |
| rosmaita | also, +1 to the non-core BP driver idea | 14:48 |
| markwash | rosmaita: ;-) | 14:48 |
| iccha | :) | 14:48 |
| markwash | #action markwash propose bp workflow to ML after more careful review of nova's | 14:48 |
| *** openstack has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:49 | |
| -card.freenode.net- [freenode-info] channel flooding and no channel staff around to help? Please check with freenode support: http://freenode.net/faq.shtml#gettinghelp | 14:49 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o openstack | 14:49 | |
| markwash | any other notes for bp processes at this point? shall we openly discuss? | 14:49 |
| markwash | #topic open discussion | 14:50 |
| mclaren | o/ | 14:50 |
| markwash | mclaren: ahoy! | 14:50 |
| mclaren | :-) | 14:50 |
| mclaren | I've been trying to help with reviewing this: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/34801/ | 14:51 |
| mclaren | (the change to obfuscate swift creds) | 14:51 |
| mclaren | Just wanted to alert folks that there's a new swift location format proposed | 14:51 |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 14:52 | |
| mclaren | in part the motivation here is as follows: | 14:52 |
| mclaren | The arguments for creating a swift client are richer than can be specified in a location. We make up for this by having additional swift parameters in the glance-api.conf. If we wish to support allowing an operator to migrate from one (full?) swift backend to a new swift backend some of those things need to be on a per-swift store basis (eg region/insecure), which is not currently the case. | 14:52 |
| mclaren | so the patch is about creds but has morphed into something bigger... | 14:52 |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:52 | |
| mclaren | I'm interested if folks are ok with this or if its too avant garde or something :-) | 14:53 |
| markwash | its an idea that has some appeal | 14:53 |
| markwash | It makes me worry a bit about expecting clients to know the creds as well but | 14:53 |
| markwash | s/creds/arguments/ | 14:53 |
| mclaren | ok, really just wanted to bring attention to it - thanks | 14:54 |
| flaper87 | mclaren: thanks for the work there | 14:54 |
| *** yportnov_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:54 | |
| markwash | +1 | 14:55 |
| ameade | so there has been a whole lot of discussion around glance becoming a general catalog service for openstack | 14:55 |
| markwash | mclaren: do you think there is any safe way to share public information about what "store1" means? | 14:55 |
| mclaren | sure. If we do go down this road we'd probably have to clean up how we do the configuration | 14:55 |
| ameade | we had a meeting on tuesday and a lot was discussed | 14:55 |
| *** tims has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:55 | |
| flwang | am I missing anything? | 14:55 |
| *** csaba|afk is now known as csaba | 14:56 | |
| mclaren | hmm, what's the use case there? | 14:56 |
| markwash | mclaren: client direct downloads | 14:56 |
| zhiyan | ameade: seems they has not send the summary mail out right? or i miss that .. | 14:56 |
| ameade | some emails are going to be sent out, bps created, and a number of extra people want to come to the mini-summit | 14:56 |
| ameade | zhiyan: i have not seen anything unfortunately | 14:56 |
| zhiyan | ameade: got it | 14:56 |
| markwash | yeah nor have I. . we can possibly send out a little prompt email | 14:56 |
| zhiyan | i have one request here, can i get some thoughts input on https://review.openstack.org/#/c/59630/13/glance/tests/unit/test_migrations.py | 14:56 |
| mclaren | markwash: you mean nova pulling straight from swift for exampl? | 14:56 |
| markwash | mclaren: yes like that | 14:57 |
| ameade | zhiyan, markwash: i will reach out to those folks today | 14:57 |
| mclaren | ah, ok. I didn't consider that (I was working off current functionality rather than future) | 14:57 |
| markwash | mclaren: sure, I think that's fair. . | 14:57 |
| iccha | yes that information should be resifing else where technically speaking instead of in glance config markwash markwash | 14:57 |
| *** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:57 | |
| *** zhaoqin has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:57 | |
| iccha | mclaren: ^ | 14:57 |
| mclaren | I think for nova pulling straight from swift it makes sense to use multi-tenant (sorry rosmaita :-) | 14:57 |
| zhiyan | without that, migration test will be failed due to sqlite db meet deadlock. | 14:58 |
| markwash | mclaren: I'm just noodling on the two feature sets | 14:58 |
| markwash | zhiyan: thanks for the heads up | 14:58 |
| zhiyan | others of the change are all LGTM. i'm just not sure that point is safe enough | 14:58 |
| zhiyan | ameade: thanks, hope to see the final db schema and api def | 14:59 |
| *** bswartz has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:59 | |
| *** achirko has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:59 | |
| zhiyan | ameade: and to me it's a large go glance existing's btw | 14:59 |
| mclaren | markwash: is that problem solved in the single swift store case? | 14:59 |
| zhiyan | ..large change i meaning | 14:59 |
| *** gregsfortytwo has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 14:59 | |
| ameade | zhiyan: yeah this is a big deal | 15:00 |
| markwash | mclaren: maybe? it may require a little re-imagining | 15:00 |
| *** shamail has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:00 | |
| *** akerr1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:00 | |
| markwash | mclaren: there is a potential to just privately share credentials across the client/server boundary through an out-of-band mechanism | 15:00 |
| markwash | i.e. admin puts same config in both places | 15:00 |
| *** jcorbin has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:00 | |
| markwash | ah, we should make way | 15:00 |
| mclaren | markwash: that would 'work' but fill me with fear :-) | 15:00 |
| *** shusya has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:00 | |
| iccha | seeya! | 15:00 |
| *** caitlin56 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:01 | |
| esheffield | I feel like we have a lot of things converging that need careful coordination - generic metadata w/api changes, glanceclient structure reimagining, api autodiscovery, etc. | 15:01 |
| markwash | zhiyan: I'll follow up on that db2 patch | 15:01 |
| zhiyan | markwash: thanks | 15:01 |
| rosmaita | esheffield: +1 | 15:01 |
| markwash | esheffield: +1 | 15:01 |
| markwash | thanks everybody! | 15:01 |
| markwash | #endmeeting | 15:01 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:01 | |
| zhiyan | esheffield: +1 | 15:01 |
| mclaren | thanks :-) | 15:01 |
| markwash | mclaren: yeah I definitely share your fears | 15:02 |
| *** aostapenko has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:02 | |
| bswartz | markwash: the bot seems to be ignoring you :-( | 15:02 |
| markwash | #endmeeting | 15:02 |
| bswartz | is someone else the chair? | 15:02 |
| markwash | bswartz: :-( no, I started it hmm | 15:02 |
| aostapenko | Hi | 15:02 |
| markwash | bswartz: actually can you try ending it? I had to end the trove meeting when I got here | 15:03 |
| bswartz | #endmeeting | 15:03 |
| * bswartz slaps openstack around a bit with a large trout | 15:03 | |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 15:03 | |
| markwash | ah, perhaps if I leave it will yield the chair-ship | 15:03 |
| *** markwash has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:03 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:03 | |
| bswartz | #endmeeting | 15:03 |
| bswartz | openstack: you suck! | 15:04 |
| zhiyan | oh stupid bot | 15:04 |
| flwang | haha | 15:04 |
| *** nadya_ has quit IRC | 15:04 | |
| caitlin56 | Try starting the meeting. | 15:04 |
| *** markwash has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:04 | |
| bswartz | #startmeeting manila | 15:04 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 19 15:04:52 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bswartz. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 15:04 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 15:04 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: manila)" | 15:04 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'manila' | 15:04 |
| bswartz | there we go | 15:05 |
| *** mclaren has quit IRC | 15:05 | |
| bswartz | I don't know what's up w/ the but but hopefully it will record our meeting | 15:05 |
| bswartz | s/but/bot/ | 15:05 |
| markwash | okay, looks like all is well now, have a nice day manila | 15:05 |
| bswartz | ty markwash | 15:05 |
| *** bugsduggan has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:05 | |
| bswartz | #topic holidays | 15:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "holidays (Meeting topic: manila)" | 15:05 | |
| bswartz | okay so before I forget, let's talk about the upcoming meetings | 15:06 |
| bswartz | I'll be on vacation the next 2 weeks and am not able to chair these meetings | 15:06 |
| bswartz | is there any interest in holding them without me? | 15:07 |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:07 | |
| bswartz | would someone like to volunteer to chair them in my absence? | 15:07 |
| akerr1 | wouldn't be the same without you | 15:07 |
| caitlin56 | What's the likelihood of major status updates 2 weeks from now? | 15:07 |
| bswartz | akerr1: The project shouldn't revolve around me though | 15:08 |
| *** xyang1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:08 | |
| *** rnirmal has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:08 | |
| bswartz | well I expect that progress will be relatively modest in the next 2 weeks | 15:08 |
| caitlin56 | Not much point in debating things 2 weeks from now, but we might want some form of progress announcement before 3 weeks go by. | 15:08 |
| bswartz | unless someone tells me that they're not taking time off and they plan to spend all their time working on manila! | 15:08 |
| caitlin56 | How about , "if you make major progress over the next 2 weeks, announce it on the mailing list rather than waiting for the third week." | 15:09 |
| bswartz | okay so the silence tells me there's no appetite for IRC meetings, which is fine by me | 15:10 |
| bswartz | consider the 26 Dec and the 2 Jan meetings cancelled | 15:10 |
| bswartz | we'll meet next on 9 Jan | 15:10 |
| shamail | bswartz: Sounds good | 15:10 |
| bswartz | #topic development status | 15:10 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "development status (Meeting topic: manila)" | 15:10 | |
| bswartz | I've seen lots of activity with the code reviews | 15:11 |
| *** jergerber has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:11 | |
| bswartz | I'll admit that I haven't been able to spend the time I'd like to on code reviews | 15:11 |
| bswartz | yportnova, vponomaryov: any updates from the last week? | 15:12 |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 15:12 | |
| *** vponomaryov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:12 | |
| *** mestery_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:12 | |
| bswartz | vponomaryov: any updates from the last week? | 15:12 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 15:12 | |
| vponomaryov | hi | 15:13 |
| bswartz | erm, maybe they're not here | 15:13 |
| *** bswartz has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:13 | |
| gregsfortytwo | lol | 15:13 |
| *** bswartz has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:13 | |
| *** tims has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:14 | |
| bswartz | doh | 15:14 |
| bswartz | sorry about that | 15:14 |
| gregsfortytwo | switch windows; don't close them ;) | 15:14 |
| bswartz | I think i clicked too many times | 15:14 |
| achirko | bswartz: https://review.openstack.org/62917 and https://review.openstack.org/60241 ready for code review | 15:14 |
| vponomaryov | about netapp driver: it is not finished yet, not so long we got lab with backend in l2 layer | 15:14 |
| bswartz | The neutron plugin went in | 15:15 |
| bswartz | we're close to having a driver that supports the full multitenancy model | 15:15 |
| vponomaryov | about network-api - ready for review | 15:15 |
| *** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:16 | |
| bswartz | thanks achirko, vponomaryov | 15:16 |
| *** mestery has quit IRC | 15:16 | |
| bswartz | just a reminder: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/manila+status:open,n,z | 15:16 |
| * bswartz reminds himself too | 15:16 | |
| vponomaryov | manila client was a little bit enhanced | 15:16 |
| bswartz | okay | 15:17 |
| *** ashaikh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:17 | |
| vponomaryov | https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:stackforge/python-manilaclient,n,z | 15:17 |
| *** kevinconway has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:17 | |
| bswartz | csaba: are you here? | 15:17 |
| csaba | bswartz: hi! | 15:17 |
| bswartz | csaba: what is the state of glusterfs driver? | 15:18 |
| csaba | we are working on unit tests... we got a bit lag with that with the sudden swicth from mox to mocks | 15:18 |
| bswartz | yes | 15:19 |
| bswartz | mock is better though | 15:19 |
| vponomaryov | bswartz: we have one open item - do we expect, that in one tenant can be more that one set of policy data for security services? | 15:19 |
| bswartz | vponomaryov: yes | 15:19 |
| vponomaryov | s/that/than | 15:19 |
| bswartz | vponomaryov: there are valid use cases for 2 different krb5/ldap domains within one tenant network | 15:20 |
| bswartz | or 2 different AD domains within 1 network | 15:20 |
| bswartz | I expect those cases to be rare, but not impossible to create | 15:20 |
| vponomaryov | bswartz: thanks | 15:20 |
| caitlin56 | The hard part is supporting multiple Security Domains, multiple tenants is not much more than that. | 15:20 |
| *** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:21 | |
| bswartz | caitlin56: it comes down to whether backends will be expecte to associate more than 1 "virtual server" with each tenant or not | 15:21 |
| bswartz | I say yes | 15:21 |
| bswartz | although the common cases will be 0 or 1 | 15:21 |
| *** mestery has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:22 | |
| caitlin56 | I suppose in a single tenant environment you could trust the two AD servers to not interfere with each other. | 15:22 |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC | 15:22 | |
| bswartz | caitlin56: it's up to the tenant to not screw up his configuration | 15:22 |
| bswartz | all manila does it what the tenant asks for | 15:23 |
| bswartz | s/it/is/ | 15:23 |
| bswartz | okay enough on status | 15:23 |
| vponomaryov | bswartz: after your answer about amount of policies | 15:23 |
| vponomaryov | appears one more question | 15:24 |
| bswartz | we have a lot of open reviews so I'll try to get stuff that's complete merged before the holidays | 15:24 |
| vponomaryov | policies and network data can be splitted to two entities in that case | 15:24 |
| bswartz | vponomaryov: well each network can have 0 or more policies associated with it, each one will have a UUID associated with it, and the UUID is what matters when you call share-create | 15:25 |
| *** mestery_ has quit IRC | 15:25 | |
| vponomaryov | UUID of network data? | 15:26 |
| bswartz | yes | 15:26 |
| bswartz | err, I think | 15:26 |
| vponomaryov | but two entities should have its own UUIDs, and one can have link to another | 15:27 |
| achirko | bswartz: so as I understand we associate multiple policies with one network, on share-create we specify network_id and policy_id | 15:27 |
| vponomaryov | achirko: +1 | 15:28 |
| bswartz | achirko: no I don't think so | 15:28 |
| achirko | bswartz: and if specified policy is not associated with specified network - its an error | 15:28 |
| bswartz | I'd rather just have 1 UUID passed to share-create, and that should be the ID of the network info | 15:28 |
| bswartz | a given "network" should be able to have more than 1 network info associated with it | 15:28 |
| bswartz | 1 per policy | 15:29 |
| *** rahmu has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:29 | |
| caitlin56 | bswartz: with single tenant, multiple security domains, the tenant domain can export *anything* to any security domain. Correct? With multi-tenant we have to add the restriction that a tenant admin can only export their own stuff. | 15:29 |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:30 | |
| bswartz | caitlin56: don't get create and export mixed up | 15:31 |
| bswartz | caitlin56: the create is what cares about the security domain | 15:31 |
| bswartz | caitlin56: the export just modifies the security rules around the created thing | 15:31 |
| achirko | bswartz: ok, so when I say 'network' and 'network-info' i mean neutron subnet. So if we associate many policies with this 'network' and then pass only uuid of 'network', we can't tell which policy to use | 15:31 |
| *** jmontemayor has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:31 | |
| shamail | bswartz: Are you saying that we should be able to define the same network address space to multiple network IDs and the network ID contains a single policy? | 15:32 |
| *** jjmb1 has quit IRC | 15:33 | |
| bswartz | okay so we need to get a bit clearer about terms | 15:33 |
| *** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:33 | |
| *** Sackmann has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:33 | |
| bswartz | we have one document here: | 15:33 |
| bswartz | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Manila/docs/API-roadmap | 15:34 |
| bswartz | I should probably add something to this though because it still doesn't clearly communicate what we're talking about | 15:34 |
| bswartz | we have neutron subnets, which are defined outside of manila | 15:34 |
| bswartz | manila can associate 0 or more policies with each neutron subnet | 15:34 |
| bswartz | each of those subnet+policy pairings forms a "network-info" | 15:35 |
| bswartz | and that network info has a UUID | 15:35 |
| caitlin56 | bswartz: you can form a "policy" (what I think of as a "Security Domain") using just export control, you only need neutron networks for multi-tenant. Is that correct? | 15:36 |
| bswartz | shamail: I think that it will be clear once we have an implementationg working | 15:36 |
| achirko | bswartz: this wiki is outdated - we split 'policy' and 'network' into different APIs | 15:36 |
| bswartz | achirko: we may need to follow up on this offline | 15:36 |
| bswartz | achirko: do you have any document that's more up to date? | 15:36 |
| achirko | bswartz: so docs yes, but we have code | 15:37 |
| bswartz | I think a diagram would be worth a thousand words here | 15:37 |
| caitlin56 | achirko: year-long low on inside-company meeting over the next two weeks -- great opportunity to get doc read. | 15:38 |
| bswartz | let's get together and build one | 15:38 |
| jcorbin | bswartz: +1 | 15:38 |
| shamail | I like archirko's suggestion since it sounds more dynamic then pre-configured neutron subnet/policy mappings (e.g. 'Network-info'), but either option seems to achieve similar goals... A) creation of policy and neutron network are split B) binding the two together at same layer | 15:39 |
| shamail | doh, IRC was lagging... Discussion has moved on. Sorry. | 15:39 |
| bswartz | speaking of diagrams, I still need to make one that illustrates the multitenancy design, regarding the split between drivers that directly join tenant networks, and drivers that use a bridge/gateway to provide shares to tenants | 15:39 |
| bswartz | shamail: IRC lag could explain the bot's odd behaviour earlier | 15:40 |
| bswartz | #topic multitenancy | 15:40 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "multitenancy (Meeting topic: manila)" | 15:40 | |
| bswartz | so as I was saying the document here is still out of date (no change from last week) | 15:41 |
| bswartz | anyone tried some experiments in this area? either with virtfs or ganesha? | 15:41 |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:42 | |
| bswartz | I think I'll start drawing on my whiteboard and taking photographs to create a rough draft of a diagram | 15:42 |
| * bswartz is not good with graphics authoring tools | 15:42 | |
| shamail | FS | 15:43 |
| * caitlin56 volunteers to translate a picture of a whiteboard into a google diagram. | 15:43 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:44 | |
| bswartz | ooh does google have a decent SVG drawing program? | 15:44 |
| caitlin56 | I don't think it is svg, but same functionality. | 15:44 |
| bswartz | very well | 15:44 |
| *** jjmb has quit IRC | 15:44 | |
| caitlin56 | short of what you can do with visio, but without the licensing issues. | 15:45 |
| *** rongze_ has quit IRC | 15:45 | |
| bswartz | okay so this remains a difficult area -- I'd love to see a proof of concept design working | 15:45 |
| bswartz | but in the mean time I'll keep working on trying to communicate the design/plan clearly | 15:45 |
| bswartz | #topic open discussion | 15:45 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: manila)" | 15:45 | |
| bswartz | anything else this week? | 15:45 |
| bswartz | reminder for those who joined late: meeting is cancelled next 2 weeks, we reconvene on 9 Jan | 15:46 |
| bswartz | I will update the wiki | 15:46 |
| vponomaryov | bswartz: will you be available via email? | 15:46 |
| bswartz | achirko: if you have time on Monday I'd like to finalize the design for network/policy/networkinfo | 15:47 |
| *** akerr1 is now known as akerr | 15:47 | |
| bswartz | vponomaryov: off and on -- I will be travelling but I will have my notebook | 15:47 |
| achirko | bswartz: ok | 15:47 |
| bswartz | okay we'll end a bit early today | 15:48 |
| vponomaryov | bswartz; got it, if we have urgent questions, we write | 15:48 |
| shamail | Take care everyone, see you after the new year! | 15:48 |
| bswartz | thanks everyone | 15:48 |
| vponomaryov | thanks | 15:48 |
| bswartz | have a safe and happy holiday | 15:48 |
| *** shamail has quit IRC | 15:48 | |
| *** shusya has quit IRC | 15:48 | |
| aostapenko | thanks, bye | 15:48 |
| achirko | bye | 15:48 |
| caitlin56 | bswartz: just checked, google draw can export as svg. | 15:48 |
| *** zhaoqin has quit IRC | 15:49 | |
| *** achirko has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:49 | |
| bswartz | #endmeeting | 15:49 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "blueprint process (Meeting topic: glance)" | 15:49 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Dec 19 15:49:22 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 15:49 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/manila/2013/manila.2013-12-19-15.04.html | 15:49 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/manila/2013/manila.2013-12-19-15.04.txt | 15:49 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/manila/2013/manila.2013-12-19-15.04.log.html | 15:49 |
| *** jcorbin has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:49 | |
| *** caitlin56 has quit IRC | 15:50 | |
| *** thinrichs has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:53 | |
| *** gregsfortytwo has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:54 | |
| *** bswartz has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:54 | |
| *** rossella_s has quit IRC | 15:54 | |
| *** NikitaKonovalov has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** rsblendido has quit IRC | 15:55 | |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:55 | |
| *** aostapenko has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:56 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 15:56 | |
| *** songole has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:56 | |
| *** prasadv has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:56 | |
| *** rraja has quit IRC | 15:59 | |
| *** yportnov_ has quit IRC | 15:59 | |
| *** tedross has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:59 | |
| *** michsmit has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 15:59 | |
| mestery | hi | 16:00 |
| *** s3wong has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:00 | |
| *** akerr has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:00 | |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:00 | |
| banix | hi | 16:00 |
| thinrichs | Hi | 16:00 |
| ashaikh | hey guys | 16:00 |
| s3wong | hello | 16:00 |
| mestery | #startmeeting networking_policy | 16:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 19 16:00:44 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mestery. 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: networking_policy)" | 16:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_policy' | 16:00 |
| mestery | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy Agenda | 16:00 |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 16:01 | |
| mestery | Looks like a short agenda today, driven by an email sent to the list by banix last night. | 16:01 |
| mestery | #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2013-December/022677.html | 16:01 |
| mestery | Lets first go over action items from last week. | 16:01 |
| mestery | alagalah: You around today? | 16:01 |
| banix | The taxonomy is already merged. | 16:02 |
| mestery | banix: Awesome, thanks for confirming! | 16:02 |
| *** julim has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:02 | |
| *** pballand has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:02 | |
| mestery | banix: Do you want to lead the discussion to get consensus on the points you sent out? | 16:02 |
| mestery | I think we should focus on that today per your email. | 16:02 |
| banix | mestery: yes, sure. | 16:02 |
| mestery | banix: thanks | 16:02 |
| banix | Following up from the meeting last week and a few email threads, I thought we should close on a few preliminary things: | 16:03 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:03 | |
| banix | Two models namely, source/destination and producer/consumer were discussed | 16:04 |
| *** flwang has quit IRC | 16:04 | |
| banix | The proposed solution to merge these models was to modify the model to allow a list of endpoints (rather than single endpoint) in src and dest groups in the policy | 16:04 |
| *** SushilKM__ has quit IRC | 16:05 | |
| banix | I think we may want to change the name of these two attributes of Policy but other than that would that work for everyone? | 16:05 |
| michsmit | In the past, we talked about having a bidirectional flag in the policy | 16:05 |
| michsmit | Not sure if source and dest group are the right terms | 16:06 |
| banix | michsmith: yes, we have that in the attributes table. | 16:06 |
| banix | michsmith: Do you have suggestions for new names? | 16:06 |
| michsmit | not yet ;-) | 16:07 |
| mestery | Should we use those temporarily then for the names? | 16:07 |
| banix | mestery: makes sense | 16:07 |
| mestery | michsmit: You ok with that as well? | 16:07 |
| michsmit | sure, until we come up with something better | 16:07 |
| songole | How about left and right, if that makes sense? | 16:07 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 16:07 | |
| banix | we can change them when we come up with better names | 16:07 |
| *** colinmcnamara has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:07 | |
| s3wong | banix: so if we have directionality in the policy (namely what endpoint groups are associated with what direction), do we still need a flag on policy itself? | 16:07 |
| *** alexpec has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:08 | |
| *** Barker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:08 | |
| s3wong | I guess if it is for both direction | 16:08 |
| ashaikh | banix: advantage of src/dest naming is clarity in where the policy is applied and directionality | 16:08 |
| banix | s3wong: I think by default, there is directionality in one direction. The flag allows to make it bidirectional, if that makes sense for a given policy. | 16:09 |
| mestery | ashaikh: Makes sense to me as well. | 16:09 |
| mestery | OK, that was an easy one to converge on. Thanks banix! | 16:10 |
| banix | great. | 16:10 |
| mestery | Next on your list was a minimum set of actions to support, right banix? | 16:11 |
| banix | the next issue is the list of actions | 16:11 |
| *** nadya_ has quit IRC | 16:11 | |
| banix | mestery: yes | 16:11 |
| prasadv | for bidirectional, what does classifier mean? Will the same classifier apply in reverse direction? | 16:11 |
| banix | prasadv: yes | 16:11 |
| s3wong | prasadv: yeah, that would be what it means | 16:11 |
| ashaikh | prasadv: if it doesn't, it will be very confusing :-) | 16:11 |
| banix | I think for minimum set of actions we have three candidates | 16:12 |
| banix | security, redirect and qos | 16:12 |
| *** slagle has quit IRC | 16:12 | |
| banix | I think we have a good handle on the first two; do we feel the same about qos? | 16:12 |
| prasadv | redirect requires a little bit of clarity too | 16:12 |
| s3wong | I guess 'security' is a given - at least 'allow' and 'drop' needs to be supported | 16:12 |
| mestery | For qos, we should make sure to loop in sc68cal, as he's doing work in this area and wanted to be involved. | 16:13 |
| banix | s3wong: Yes | 16:13 |
| prasadv | if there is a group does it mean the traffic is sent to all the ones in the group | 16:13 |
| mestery | banix: Lets discuss qos on openstack-dev so sc68cal can chime in there. | 16:13 |
| ashaikh | what do folks think about really minimizing the "required" supported policies, e.g., just to security | 16:13 |
| michsmit | Does redirect include the service insertion work ? | 16:13 |
| mestery | ashaikh: For the POC, it would help with implementation time. | 16:13 |
| s3wong | 'redirect' action generated a lot of opinions from the email thread - though the definition now is very generic | 16:13 |
| ashaikh | mestery: right, and i would expect a lot more variation on implementations for the other two | 16:14 |
| banix | michsmith: potentially, yes. | 16:14 |
| s3wong | but prasadv and others want more clarity | 16:14 |
| * mestery nods in agreement with ashaikh. | 16:14 | |
| banix | so are we suggesting to have "security" as the only action for now? | 16:14 |
| s3wong | I am good with just 'security' as required action for now | 16:14 |
| banix | to start with? | 16:15 |
| *** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:15 | |
| s3wong | sure makes reference implementation simpler | 16:15 |
| ashaikh | banix: while we try to sort out a model and api for the other two | 16:15 |
| banix | and we can clarify any other action, namely redirect and qos and possibly others | 16:15 |
| banix | as we continue this work | 16:15 |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 16:15 | |
| ashaikh | also would give us a chance to solidify connection with things like service chaining/insertion | 16:15 |
| banix | ashaikh: yes | 16:15 |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:16 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 16:16 | |
| mestery | So is everyone ok with security as the main action for step one then? | 16:16 |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:16 | |
| s3wong | banix: let's settle on it then - just 'security': 'allow' | 'drop' as the only required action | 16:16 |
| banix | Sounds good, mastery, s3wong | 16:17 |
| mestery | #action Initial action supported will be security action. | 16:17 |
| s3wong | I will update the document | 16:17 |
| ashaikh | s3wong: we could still list the other two as optional action types, right? (and keep working on their defn) | 16:17 |
| mestery | #undo | 16:17 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Action object at 0x390e850> | 16:17 |
| banix | s3wong: You wrote theta part of the doc, would you be willing to convert what we have from the attributes table to | 16:17 |
| mestery | #info Initial action supported will be security. | 16:17 |
| *** hemanthravi has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:17 | |
| banix | something that does not suggest these are Neutron objects | 16:18 |
| *** jjmb has quit IRC | 16:18 | |
| s3wong | ashaikh: of course, and the example are already in the doc, I will update that with more clarity as well | 16:18 |
| michsmit | do we need drop or can that be implicit ? | 16:18 |
| s3wong | banix: certainly | 16:18 |
| banix | s3wong: Thank you. | 16:18 |
| s3wong | michsmit: good point, should we make 'drop' be the default? | 16:18 |
| *** SushilKM__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:18 | |
| mestery | #action s3wong to update attributes table | 16:19 |
| banix | mestery: Do you know the status of service chaining? Is it being incorporated as an extension? I didn't see it in the Icehouse list? | 16:19 |
| ashaikh | michsmit: i think it makes sense to have drop be the default, i.e., explicitly allow specified traffic | 16:20 |
| thinrichs | s3wong, michsmit: I think we're starting to talk about conflict resolution within a policy. | 16:20 |
| mestery | banix: Service chaining discussions are mostly on hold due to focus on stability in Icehouse. I expect in "J" for them to come alive again. | 16:20 |
| s3wong | OK - 'drop' as default settled - will update the doc accordingly | 16:20 |
| banix | mestery: thanks | 16:20 |
| thinrichs | If we have both 'allow' and 'drop' and a policy uses both actions, we need to decide which one takes precedence (in some way). | 16:21 |
| s3wong | I guess we have 40 minutes for conflict resolution :-) | 16:21 |
| thinrichs | If we don't have both 'allow' and 'deny' then we're implicitly assuming conflicts are not allowed within the policy. | 16:21 |
| *** flwang has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:21 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 16:22 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:22 | |
| michsmit | thinrichs: it would also allow the policy to be order independent | 16:23 |
| banix | Let me try to understand the conflict within the policy issue better | 16:23 |
| banix | Would this arise only with overlapping classifiers? | 16:23 |
| s3wong | thinrichs: there are several levels of this. Obviously we shouldn't allow two 'security' actions within the list of action in a single policy-rule | 16:23 |
| thinrichs | michsmit: we could still be order independent IF we did conflict resolution at the level of the actions themselves, instead of at the level of policy statements, e.g. Allow takes precedence over Deny. | 16:24 |
| s3wong | the problem would be when we have multiple policy-rules with conflicting 'security' actions | 16:24 |
| thinrichs | So if you write a bunch of allow statements and you write a bunch of deny statements, it could so happen that your policy (sometimes) says to both allow and deny. When that happens, the conflict resolution scheme deems that 'allow' wins. | 16:24 |
| thinrichs | banix: yes--if two classifiers both apply then those rules could dictate different actions. | 16:25 |
| s3wong | thinrichs: should the one with more specific classifier match wins? | 16:25 |
| thinrichs | banix: it's typically hard to ensure classifiers do not overlap (both for people and for machines) | 16:25 |
| *** vipul-away is now known as vipul | 16:26 | |
| thinrichs | s3wong: that's an idea. I wonder how easy it is, though, to modify a large policy to meet some new demand. | 16:26 |
| banix | Two suggested solutions: 1) 'allow; wins 2) more specific classifier wins | 16:26 |
| mestery | thinrichs: Seems like your proposal simplifies things a bit, I like resolving this at the higher level. | 16:26 |
| s3wong | for example, port 80 match on {min:10, max:100} classifier and {port==80} classifier should take the action of the latter | 16:27 |
| thinrichs | How hard is it for someone to figure out what the most-specific classifier is across all rules and then write a rule that is even more specific than it? | 16:27 |
| michsmit | thinrichs: depends on the size of the policy, could be difficult | 16:28 |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 16:28 | |
| *** aignatov has quit IRC | 16:28 | |
| ashaikh | thinrichs: that's my worry too -- maybe we should try to restrict with an eye toward simplifying the imple in the first version | 16:28 |
| thinrichs | And I suppose there's the question of how we define "more specific". This has to be something that the algorithm decides. Maybe it's just the number of tests in the classifier? But then what if there's a tie? | 16:28 |
| s3wong | thinrichs: may not be easy if we expect to have many policy-rule within a policy | 16:28 |
| ashaikh | e.g., just allow explicit allow actions for now ? i.e., default-off model | 16:29 |
| *** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:29 | |
| thinrichs | The nice thing about 'allow over deny' is that once we add additional actions (qos, etc.) we can use the same scheme and enable multiple actions to be applied as long as they don't conflict. | 16:29 |
| *** jjmb has quit IRC | 16:30 | |
| thinrichs | Though perhaps the same could be said for the 'more specific' resolution strategy if we only applied it to groups of actions that are non-conflicting. | 16:30 |
| banix | ashaikh: then the first solution (allow over deny) seems simple enough | 16:30 |
| s3wong | thinrichs: well there are action types where multiple actions can be defined per classifier match: for example, 'qos' | 16:31 |
| *** csaba is now known as csaba|afk | 16:31 | |
| thinrichs | ashaikh: we could do that and punt on conflict resolution for now, but I think eventually we'll need a conflict resolution scheme. | 16:31 |
| thinrichs | s3wong: absolutely--we've just been talking about qos as a single action today. I did the same. | 16:31 |
| thinrichs | s3wong: sorry--missed your point. | 16:31 |
| michsmit | thinrichs: 'allow over deny' makes more sense to me if the only deny is the implicit deny all at the end | 16:31 |
| thinrichs | s3wong: What if the actions defined are conflicting? I don't see that having multiple-actions in a single rule changes things. | 16:32 |
| ashaikh | thinrichs: yes, definitely | 16:32 |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:33 | |
| s3wong | thinrichs: no, the point is - some action_type is a singleton within an action_list, while others are not (both 'qos' and 'redirect' can have multiple instances in an action list) | 16:33 |
| ashaikh | michsmit: i agree, it seems more intuitive to me as well | 16:33 |
| banix | OK, are we punting or taking the field goal :) | 16:33 |
| thinrichs | michsmit: Or we could have 'deny over allow' and make 'allow' implicit. I don't think it actually matters that much. And I think of the default as a 'policy completion' strategy, which is analogous to the conflict resolution strategy except that instead of dealing with a policy that has too much information (conflicts) it deals with the problem of having too little information (where the policy doesn't say anything). | 16:34 |
| banix | "allow over deny" for conflict resolution? | 16:34 |
| s3wong | banix: let's settle on that for reference implementation purpose | 16:34 |
| *** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:34 | |
| s3wong | just 'allow' over implicit 'deny' - so a single 'allow' action over overlapping classifiers will win | 16:34 |
| songole | banix: Defining exceptions to a generic allow might be an issue | 16:35 |
| thinrichs | songole: Conceptually we can suggest writing generic 'deny' statements and then using 'allow' to make exceptions. | 16:35 |
| *** sacharya has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:35 | |
| mestery | Are we concluding on the default deny with allow taking precedence, or the reverse? | 16:35 |
| banix | songole: Please elaborate? Are you referring to thinrichs's implicit allow? | 16:35 |
| s3wong | songole: please elaborate | 16:36 |
| songole | Generic allow port 80 and deny a specific source or dest | 16:36 |
| michsmit | mestery: I think the default deny makes more sense | 16:36 |
| banix | mestery: default deny with allow taking precedence | 16:36 |
| mestery | michsmit banix: I agree with both of you. | 16:37 |
| thinrichs | songole: I'm sure there will always be cases where we need to do surgery on the existing policy to say what we want (for any conflict resolution strategy). | 16:37 |
| banix | songole: src/dest are fixed in the policy | 16:37 |
| s3wong | songole: wouldn't that be a different policy for specific endpoint groups? | 16:38 |
| banix | I think this is a good first step for conflict resolution | 16:38 |
| *** HenryG_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:38 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:38 | |
| songole | Does the endpoint define src/dst? | 16:39 |
| banix | If we agree on that (default deny, allow taking precedence), should we move on to net topic? | 16:39 |
| prasadv | we do need to also talk about classifier | 16:39 |
| s3wong | OK - with consensus, I will also update the doc with allow over deny on action section | 16:39 |
| banix | prasadv: go ahead please | 16:39 |
| prasadv | i think songole meant that classifier can have src/dest fields different from src/dst groups | 16:40 |
| s3wong | prasadv: yes, now we are talking about adding the IP address fields in classifier | 16:40 |
| *** nadya_ has quit IRC | 16:40 | |
| songole | prasadv: yes | 16:40 |
| s3wong | hence 'next topic' :-) | 16:40 |
| *** HenryG has quit IRC | 16:41 | |
| mestery | #action s3wong to update document to note "allow over deny" in action section. | 16:41 |
| michsmit | s3wong: I would think we would try to avoid IP addresses in the classifiers | 16:41 |
| banix | yeah, I remember you guys talking about this. DO we need to have this in the first cut? | 16:41 |
| prasadv | michsmit: how can we avoid them, if some use cases need them | 16:41 |
| s3wong | michsmit: I am for that. prasadv and Dimitri both want it - so I am open for discussion | 16:42 |
| *** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:42 | |
| ashaikh | once we start to add more headers, won't we essentially end up with an openflow match-like list (as thinrichs pointed out in email) | 16:42 |
| *** jcoufal has quit IRC | 16:42 | |
| michsmit | IP addresses for subnets outside of Neutron control makes sense, but for VMs I would think that the group membership is the way to classify IP addresses | 16:43 |
| *** ativelko_ has quit IRC | 16:43 | |
| michsmit | By subnets outside of Neutron control, I mean WAN, etc. | 16:43 |
| banix | I think for now, we should keep the classifier simple (that is as is). | 16:43 |
| thinrichs | We're talking about the *possible* matching fields, right? So just because some rules match on IP source doesn't mean all rules must. | 16:44 |
| songole | what is allowed in a classifier - default? | 16:44 |
| s3wong | songole: protocol field + L4 port number | 16:44 |
| *** natishalom has quit IRC | 16:44 | |
| prasadv | michsmit: for group membership it is ok. but I thought we are talking about traffic passing through them right? | 16:44 |
| banix | sonogole: and a type. Please refer to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZbOFxAoibZbJmDWx1oOrOsDcov6Cuom5aaBIrupCD9E/edit#heading=h.6j822g6556qq | 16:45 |
| prasadv | and traffic can be independent of the src/dest group IP | 16:45 |
| michsmit | prasadv: I'm not sure I understand what you mean by 'traffic passing through them' | 16:46 |
| prasadv | michsmit: currently we are deriving the IP addresses to match that of src and dst group right | 16:47 |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:47 | |
| banix | prasadv: I think you may be referring to what we are saying would be in the action, e.g, a service chain | 16:47 |
| prasadv | banix:yes | 16:47 |
| *** natishalom has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:48 | |
| prasadv | if we were to have L2 firewall inserted, | 16:48 |
| banix | prasadv: so that would not affect the classifier as we have it in the current model | 16:48 |
| prasadv | it does not depend on the src and dest group IP | 16:48 |
| prasadv | banix:yes | 16:48 |
| *** zane has quit IRC | 16:49 | |
| *** zane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:49 | |
| banix | prasadv: I meant that would not require having new fields in the classifier. Do you agree? | 16:49 |
| prasadv | or I can say send traffic that matches the following classifier from these set of ports to a VM that is analysing traffic | 16:49 |
| s3wong | prasadv: so the use case is if only a selected set of traffic from src group or to dst group should subject to a particular action, how can we do it with the current model? | 16:49 |
| prasadv | banix: we cannot define such a classifier with the current model | 16:50 |
| prasadv | s3wong:yes | 16:51 |
| ashaikh | prasadv: i think michsmit was suggesting to "classify" IP subnets for policy by putting them in their own group (if i understood correctly) as an alternative | 16:51 |
| *** aignatov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:51 | |
| ashaikh | (them = endpoints belonging to the subnet) | 16:51 |
| banix | prasadv: I think Inow I understand what you say. Slow day :) | 16:51 |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 16:52 | |
| *** alexpec has quit IRC | 16:52 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 16:52 | |
| michsmit | ashaikh: yes | 16:52 |
| banix | so we can have the prts/vms in a group but | 16:52 |
| banix | then we are limited if we want to apply a policy rule on a subset of traffic between such groups | 16:53 |
| s3wong | banix: yes - I think that's what prasadv was referring to | 16:53 |
| banix | I think we can keep this as something we discuss more and leave the model as is for now | 16:53 |
| prasadv | ashaikh, michsmit: but it may not be just subnets right? Maybe I donot understand how michsmit is suggesting to do | 16:53 |
| michsmit | banix: I would think that is the purpose of the classifier in the policy | 16:53 |
| *** jjmb has quit IRC | 16:54 | |
| s3wong | sounds like it would be nice to be able to tag endpoints to subject to a set of actions directly (or matching tag) - can get complicated | 16:54 |
| banix | michsmit: I think the issue is that if groups are made up of ports for example, then the classifier we have won't be able to classify traffic into different groups properly | 16:54 |
| michsmit | banix: by ports, you mean Neutron ports, not L4 ports, correct ? | 16:55 |
| banix | michsmith: in other words, port number, etc won't be enough | 16:55 |
| *** jtomasek has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:55 | |
| banix | michsmith: yes | 16:55 |
| *** jjmb has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:55 | |
| *** mozawa has quit IRC | 16:55 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:55 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:55 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 16:56 | |
| s3wong | 5 minutes left - should we move this to ML again? | 16:56 |
| banix | As we are approaching the top of hour should we keep the model as is for now but continue the discussion | 16:56 |
| mestery | +1 to moving to ML. | 16:56 |
| banix | s3wong: agree | 16:56 |
| ashaikh | banix: yeah, makes sense | 16:56 |
| michsmit | +1 | 16:56 |
| mestery | We're almost out of time, as s3wong indicates. | 16:56 |
| prasadv | +1 ML | 16:56 |
| *** SushilKM__ has quit IRC | 16:56 | |
| s3wong | I am also guessing we won't have meetings over the next two weeks, right? | 16:56 |
| banix | there is one thing i want to ask and that is about the PoC? | 16:56 |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 16:56 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 16:57 | |
| s3wong | banix: yes? | 16:57 |
| banix | are we planning to do this within the ML2 framework (which makes sense) and if yes, would this be done by …. | 16:57 |
| mestery | banix: Lets converge on the PoC at the next meeting perhaps? | 16:57 |
| banix | using a framework similar to how Router extension is done for ML2? | 16:57 |
| mestery | Any takers to canceling the next week's meetings? | 16:57 |
| mestery | banix: +1 to that idea in general. | 16:58 |
| banix | ok | 16:58 |
| thinrichs | I won't be here next week. | 16:58 |
| banix | +1 for canceling | 16:58 |
| s3wong | banix: that would be the plan, I think | 16:58 |
| s3wong | mestery: so we will reconvene on Jan 2nd? | 16:58 |
| mestery | OK, lets cancel this one, but how about if we meet next on January 2? | 16:58 |
| mestery | Woudl that work? | 16:58 |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 16:58 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 16:58 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 16:58 | |
| s3wong | mestery: Jan 2nd works for me | 16:58 |
| prasadv | Yes for Jan 2 | 16:58 |
| banix | mestery: that would work for me | 16:59 |
| michsmit | +1 Jan 2 | 16:59 |
| songole | Yes for jan 2 | 16:59 |
| mestery | #action mestery to send email canceling next week's meeting and noting we'll reconvene on January 2 | 16:59 |
| mestery | OK, thanks eveyrone! | 16:59 |
| mestery | Lets continue the discussions on the ML. | 16:59 |
| banix | Happy holidays :) | 16:59 |
| mestery | Happy holidays! | 16:59 |
| mestery | #endmeeting | 16:59 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "blueprint process (Meeting topic: glance)" | 16:59 | |
| songole | thanks | 16:59 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Dec 19 16:59:38 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 16:59 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_policy/2013/networking_policy.2013-12-19-16.00.html | 16:59 |
| prasadv | thanks | 16:59 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_policy/2013/networking_policy.2013-12-19-16.00.txt | 16:59 |
| s3wong | Thanks, guys! | 16:59 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_policy/2013/networking_policy.2013-12-19-16.00.log.html | 16:59 |
| *** prasadv has quit IRC | 16:59 | |
| *** hemanthravi has quit IRC | 16:59 | |
| *** thinrichs has quit IRC | 16:59 | |
| *** songole has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:00 | |
| *** glucas_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:00 | |
| *** natishalom has quit IRC | 17:01 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:02 | |
| *** glucas has quit IRC | 17:03 | |
| *** glucas_ is now known as glucas | 17:03 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov is now known as _SergeyLukjanov | 17:03 | |
| *** jmontemayor has quit IRC | 17:04 | |
| *** NehaV1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:04 | |
| *** NehaV1 has quit IRC | 17:04 | |
| *** _SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 17:04 | |
| *** NehaV1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:04 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:04 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:04 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:04 | |
| *** card.freenode.net changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 17:04 | |
| *** NehaV has quit IRC | 17:06 | |
| *** jmontemayor has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:07 | |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:07 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 17:09 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 17:09 | |
| *** amotoki has quit IRC | 17:09 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:09 | |
| *** amotoki has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:12 | |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:15 | |
| *** zane1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:15 | |
| *** michsmit has quit IRC | 17:15 | |
| *** eankutse has quit IRC | 17:16 | |
| *** aignatov has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
| *** markmcclain has quit IRC | 17:17 | |
| *** zane has quit IRC | 17:18 | |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 17:18 | |
| *** jcooley_ has quit IRC | 17:22 | |
| *** yidclare has quit IRC | 17:23 | |
| *** jtomasek has quit IRC | 17:25 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 17:26 | |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:26 | |
| *** GheRivero has quit IRC | 17:28 | |
| *** Barker has quit IRC | 17:30 | |
| *** michsmit has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:33 | |
| *** Barker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:34 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:37 | |
| *** SushilKM__ has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:39 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 17:39 | |
| *** slagle has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:39 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:40 | |
| *** amytron has quit IRC | 17:40 | |
| *** slagle has quit IRC | 17:41 | |
| *** slagle has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:41 | |
| *** luQAs has quit IRC | 17:43 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 17:44 | |
| *** eankutse has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:47 | |
| *** sreshetnyak has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:47 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 17:49 | |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:50 | |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:50 | |
| *** zane1 has quit IRC | 17:53 | |
| *** arnaud has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:55 | |
| *** michsmit has quit IRC | 17:55 | |
| *** arnaud__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:55 | |
| *** s3wong has quit IRC | 17:55 | |
| *** kevinconway has quit IRC | 17:56 | |
| *** eankutse has quit IRC | 17:57 | |
| *** zhiyan has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:57 | |
| *** dmitryme has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 17:58 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 17:59 | |
| *** crobertsrh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:00 | |
| *** chris_m has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:01 | |
| *** mattf has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:02 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | savanna tem will be here in several mins | 18:02 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:03 | |
| *** aignatov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:03 | |
| *** balajiiyer has quit IRC | 18:03 | |
| *** nadya has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:04 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | savanna guys are you around? | 18:04 |
| *** harlowja_away is now known as harlowja | 18:04 | |
| dmitryme | yep | 18:05 |
| ruhe | hi | 18:05 |
| *** nadya is now known as Guest74889 | 18:05 | |
| mattf | o/ | 18:05 |
| aignatov | o/ | 18:05 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #startmeeting savanna | 18:05 |
| *** alazarev has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:05 | |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 19 18:05:25 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SergeyLukjanov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 18:05 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 18:05 |
| mattf | Guest74889 isn't here i guest | 18:05 |
| *** balajiiyer has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:05 | |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: savanna)" | 18:05 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'savanna' | 18:05 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #topic Agenda | 18:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Agenda (Meeting topic: savanna)" | 18:05 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/SavannaAgenda | 18:06 |
| *** Guest74889 is now known as nadya_ | 18:06 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | #topic Action items from the last meeting | 18:06 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "Action items from the last meeting (Meeting topic: savanna)" | 18:06 | |
| *** tmckay has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:06 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | my action item is still actual | 18:06 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #action SergeyLukjanov to check that all blueprints created and ping guys to make them if not | 18:06 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #action SergeyLukjanov add links to the blueprints to roadmap | 18:06 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #topic News / updates | 18:07 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "News / updates (Meeting topic: savanna)" | 18:07 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | folks, please | 18:07 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #info next two meetings canceled - Dec 26, Jan 2 | 18:07 |
| dmitryme | I've started a thread in openstack-dev regarding unified guest agent | 18:08 |
| aignatov | ok, as for me, this week I mostly work on heat integration, patch is merged already, it can work with Neutron, now working on adding anti affinity feature | 18:08 |
| dmitryme | that didn't result in consesus | 18:08 |
| mattf | update - erikb and i huddled about plugin policy. we agreed that having a minimum set of features available in a plugin is important to provide consistency across savanna deployments. plugin writers should be keeping that in mind. however, we agreed that until we start seeing more than just an HDP plugin, we don't truly need a firm policy. | 18:08 |
| tmckay | I'm working on the java action addition | 18:08 |
| aignatov | also today I found bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/savanna/+bug/1262783 | 18:08 |
| dmitryme | quite contrary: there were many different opinions | 18:08 |
| SergeyLukjanov | mattf, thx, I was writing the same :) | 18:08 |
| crobertsrh | job-relaunch functionality is under review, should be pretty well set. work to allow "mapReduce" type jobs is underway (UI side). I'll be working on allowing HDFS data sources next (UI side now that api-side has been done). | 18:08 |
| aignatov | fix is ready, testing., will send patch in hours | 18:08 |
| dmitryme | now I implement PoC and hope we will move discussion further having an example on how agent could look like | 18:09 |
| aignatov | tmckay: I saw your draft, will look in to more closer tomorrow, ok? :) | 18:09 |
| *** lblanchard has quit IRC | 18:09 | |
| tmckay | aignatov, no problem it's a work in progress. Still a lot of holes to fill :) | 18:09 |
| tmckay | We talked about changing "Jar" to "MapReduce" last week for EDP job types, that change is merged | 18:10 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 18:10 | |
| alazarev | I have found root cause for #1240511 ([EDP][Vanilla] Oozie process does not start from time to time), fix is commited | 18:10 |
| aignatov | yep, thanks for this patch | 18:10 |
| *** amcrn has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:10 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:11 | |
| tmckay | alazarev, that's great! | 18:11 |
| aignatov | alazarev, good job, I saw your one of your patheds merged into Oozie trunk, well done | 18:11 |
| aignatov | *patches | 18:11 |
| mattf | alazarev, have a pointer to ^^'s jira? | 18:11 |
| aignatov | we'll include this patch into DIB elements, right? because right now we can't work with oozie and we should use stable releases | 18:12 |
| alazarev | yeap, https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-1647 | 18:13 |
| alazarev | it is not a root cause, but it hides real error | 18:13 |
| mattf | alazarev, so that allows us to properly retry on error? | 18:14 |
| *** amytron has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:14 | |
| *** nadya_ has quit IRC | 18:14 | |
| alazarev | it was merged to trunk in 30 minutes, I didn't expect such speed from hadoop eco :) | 18:14 |
| SergeyLukjanov | :) | 18:14 |
| * mattf smiles | 18:14 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 18:15 | |
| aignatov | mattf, actually no, right now andrew implemented workaround you provided at the summit time ;) https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62511/ | 18:15 |
| alazarev | mattf: Savanna doesn't wait until HDFS starts, it expects that "start datanode" is enough | 18:15 |
| mattf | for the record, aignatov provided it, i just recorded it | 18:15 |
| *** nadya_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:15 | |
| alazarev | mattf: I added loop to wait active HDFS | 18:15 |
| mattf | alazarev, ack | 18:16 |
| mattf | alazarev, well done on this! | 18:16 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:16 | |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 18:17 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | I think there are nothing to discuss in roadmap section, it blocked by my action items, will be done in next two weeks ;) | 18:17 |
| SergeyLukjanov | reminder: icehouse-2 will be Jan 23 | 18:17 |
| aignatov | alazarev, don't you think we should add such wait method to catch list of active tasktrakers? | 18:17 |
| alazarev | mattf: regarding swift support in hadoop, it seems that I don't have time to finish backport properly, will put patch as is with note about done and not done work | 18:17 |
| mattf | PSA - i'll be out 24 dec -> 2 jan | 18:17 |
| tmckay | me too ^^ | 18:18 |
| alazarev | mattf: I mean will put to hadoop JIRA | 18:18 |
| mattf | alazarev, thank you, the hwx folks can help there too | 18:18 |
| SergeyLukjanov | I'll be on vacation Dec 29 - Jan 12 | 18:18 |
| SergeyLukjanov | but I'll be available as always ;) | 18:18 |
| SergeyLukjanov | at least each other day | 18:18 |
| mattf | SergeyLukjanov, yeah, i'll probably have my laptop with me too. for shame. | 18:19 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #topic General discussion | 18:19 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "General discussion (Meeting topic: savanna)" | 18:19 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | mattf, :) | 18:19 |
| *** ruhe has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:19 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | mattf, do you have any thoughts about unified agents? | 18:19 |
| *** akuznetsov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:19 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | there always tons of emails in ML :) | 18:20 |
| mattf | SergeyLukjanov, i do, but i'm not caught up on the thread yet. so i'll hold my comments for the thread or #savanna | 18:20 |
| alazarev | also, Mirantis has customer interested in intel plugin to Savanna, I'm going to take care of "IDH plugin basic implementation" patch which appeared in review for two times already | 18:20 |
| SergeyLukjanov | Dmitry, could you please explain us current state of unified agents discussions? | 18:20 |
| *** yidclare has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:20 | |
| mattf | alazarev, will the plugin support EDP? | 18:21 |
| ruhe | SergeyLukjanov, hehe, collapse thread of 100 emails in one message in IRC? :) | 18:21 |
| mattf | ruhe, please! | 18:21 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 18:21 | |
| mattf | actually, make it a tweet | 18:21 |
| dmitryme | SergeyLukjanov: there is huge diversity in opinions on several architectural items | 18:21 |
| *** markmcclain has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:22 | |
| alazarev | mattf: current patch, as I see, doesn't support it | 18:22 |
| dmitryme | that is the summary :-) | 18:22 |
| *** RajeshMohan has quit IRC | 18:22 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:22 | |
| mattf | alazarev, yeah, wondering if you'll make it support EDP | 18:22 |
| mattf | dmitryme, lol | 18:22 |
| alazarev | mattf: let's have something merged at least and will see | 18:22 |
| *** RajeshMohan has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:22 | |
| mattf | alazarev, is it a goal to support EDP in the IDH plugin by the icehouse release? | 18:22 |
| SergeyLukjanov | mattf, I hope yes | 18:23 |
| mattf | (if so, i pipe down and just come back closer to release and bark) | 18:23 |
| alazarev | mattf: the right answer I believe is "it depends" | 18:23 |
| mattf | oh but that makes me ask why it depends on | 18:24 |
| mattf | s/why/what | 18:24 |
| alazarev | one of the conditions is activity of Intel itself | 18:25 |
| mattf | are you signing up to maintain the plugin in savanna? | 18:25 |
| * mattf is happy to take this over to #savanna so we can hit other topics | 18:26 | |
| *** bdpayne has quit IRC | 18:26 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 18:26 | |
| alazarev | they allocated engineer to drive IDH plugin… but he fails to joins this meeting two weeks already | 18:26 |
| mattf | ok | 18:27 |
| alazarev | so, I'm pessimistic on that | 18:27 |
| * mattf nods | 18:27 | |
| mattf | let's take it off to #savanna and free up the meeting | 18:27 |
| *** bdpayne has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:27 | |
| alazarev | ok | 18:28 |
| SergeyLukjanov | anything more to discuss today? | 18:28 |
| *** IlyaE has quit IRC | 18:28 | |
| *** radix_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:29 | |
| *** SlickNik has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:30 | |
| SergeyLukjanov | ok, let's the todays meeting | 18:30 |
| SergeyLukjanov | thank you guys | 18:30 |
| SergeyLukjanov | see you in #savanna | 18:31 |
| SergeyLukjanov | #endmeeting | 18:31 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 18:31 | |
| ruhe | happy holidays!!! | 18:31 |
| aignatov | bye | 18:31 |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Dec 19 18:31:05 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 18:31 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/savanna/2013/savanna.2013-12-19-18.05.html | 18:31 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/savanna/2013/savanna.2013-12-19-18.05.txt | 18:31 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/savanna/2013/savanna.2013-12-19-18.05.log.html | 18:31 |
| mattf | ciao, have a great holiday! | 18:31 |
| dmitryme | bye | 18:31 |
| *** mattf has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:31 | |
| *** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:31 | |
| *** eankutse has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:33 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:34 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:34 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 18:36 | |
| *** eankutse has quit IRC | 18:38 | |
| *** eankutse has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:38 | |
| *** crobertsrh has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:39 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:40 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:41 | |
| *** jdbarry has quit IRC | 18:42 | |
| *** IlyaE has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 18:45 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 18:46 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:46 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:47 | |
| *** aignatov has quit IRC | 18:47 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 18:51 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:53 | |
| *** Barker has quit IRC | 18:56 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 18:58 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 18:58 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:58 | |
| *** Barker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 18:59 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| *** markwash has quit IRC | 19:01 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:01 | |
| *** rnirmal has quit IRC | 19:02 | |
| *** banix has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:03 | |
| *** yogesh_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:04 | |
| *** sarob_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:05 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 19:06 | |
| *** aignatov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:07 | |
| *** sarob_ has quit IRC | 19:09 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:09 | |
| *** demorris has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:10 | |
| *** kevinconway has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:13 | |
| *** ruhe has quit IRC | 19:14 | |
| *** yogesh_ has quit IRC | 19:15 | |
| *** NehaV1 has quit IRC | 19:17 | |
| *** yogesh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:17 | |
| *** Barker has quit IRC | 19:19 | |
| *** akuznetsov has quit IRC | 19:20 | |
| *** jdob_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:21 | |
| *** lsmola_ has quit IRC | 19:25 | |
| *** vkmc has quit IRC | 19:26 | |
| *** demorris_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:27 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 19:28 | |
| *** demorris_ is now known as demorris | 19:28 | |
| *** tedross has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:29 | |
| *** nadya_ has quit IRC | 19:30 | |
| *** sreshetnyak has quit IRC | 19:33 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 19:37 | |
| *** jdob_ has quit IRC | 19:40 | |
| *** jdob has quit IRC | 19:40 | |
| *** jdob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:40 | |
| *** Barker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:40 | |
| *** demorris has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:41 | |
| *** ativelkov has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:43 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 19:44 | |
| *** lblanchard has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:46 | |
| *** ativelkov has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| *** balajiiyer has quit IRC | 19:47 | |
| *** balajiiyer has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 19:48 | |
| *** HenryG_ has quit IRC | 19:49 | |
| *** demorris_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:01 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 20:02 | |
| *** demorris_ is now known as demorris | 20:02 | |
| *** betsy has quit IRC | 20:02 | |
| *** dhellmann has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:06 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:08 | |
| *** banix has quit IRC | 20:14 | |
| *** dmitryme has quit IRC | 20:22 | |
| *** NehaV has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:24 | |
| *** IlyaE has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:28 | |
| *** NehaV has quit IRC | 20:31 | |
| *** NehaV has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:31 | |
| *** balajiiyer has quit IRC | 20:32 | |
| *** zane1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:41 | |
| *** Barker has quit IRC | 20:42 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 20:47 | |
| *** aignatov has quit IRC | 20:48 | |
| *** zane1 has quit IRC | 20:49 | |
| *** zane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:50 | |
| *** boris-42 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:50 | |
| *** boris-42 has quit IRC | 20:52 | |
| *** alazarev has quit IRC | 20:53 | |
| *** alazarev has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:54 | |
| sc68cal | Looks like networking_policy didn't end their meeting? | 20:54 |
| sc68cal | or the topic got stuck | 20:55 |
| *** aveiga has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:57 | |
| *** Randy__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:58 | |
| sc68cal | Hello ipv6'ers | 20:59 |
| Randy__ | Hi Sean | 20:59 |
| aveiga | o/ | 20:59 |
| *** BrianB_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 20:59 | |
| sc68cal | Agenda for today - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron-IPv6-Subteam#Agenda_for_Dec_19_2013 | 20:59 |
| sc68cal | #startmeeting neutron_ipv6 | 21:00 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 19 21:00:01 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sc68cal. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 21:00 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: neutron_ipv6)" | 21:00 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_ipv6' | 21:00 |
| sc68cal | #topic housekeeping | 21:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "housekeeping (Meeting topic: neutron_ipv6)" | 21:00 | |
| *** lblanchard has quit IRC | 21:00 | |
| sc68cal | So next week is a holiday week for some, so we're going to skip next week | 21:00 |
| sc68cal | The other thing is that we're trying to figure out a good time so we can get the people from IBM in China to attend | 21:00 |
| *** shshang has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:01 | |
| sc68cal | So everyone put in your 2c about the UTC time | 21:02 |
| Randy__ | So do we need to move later | 21:02 |
| Randy__ | ? | 21:02 |
| aveiga | if we move later, the Europeans are out | 21:02 |
| sc68cal | either earlier or later, I think our current time has it at like 3AM or 4AM in china | 21:02 |
| Randy__ | yes | 21:02 |
| *** baoli has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:02 | |
| aveiga | what about earlier? | 21:03 |
| sc68cal | I floated the idea of 1500 UTC | 21:03 |
| sc68cal | That at least puts it in the range of approachable for China, although it's pretty late their time I think | 21:03 |
| shshang | 1500 UTC is like 9am EST? | 21:04 |
| Randy__ | yes, still late for them... could try for 1300 UTC?? | 21:04 |
| Randy__ | is that too early for you Sean ;-) | 21:04 |
| sc68cal | Randy__: I'm willing to make sacrificies | 21:04 |
| sc68cal | *sacrifices | 21:04 |
| aveiga | 1300 is 8AM EST, not that bad | 21:04 |
| aveiga | I'll make sure Sean's awake | 21:04 |
| Randy__ | right | 21:04 |
| sc68cal | :) | 21:04 |
| sc68cal | #action sc68cal see if 1300 UTC works for everyone on the ML | 21:05 |
| sc68cal | #topic recap actions from previous meeting | 21:05 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "recap actions from previous meeting (Meeting topic: neutron_ipv6)" | 21:05 | |
| sc68cal | ijw: ping? | 21:05 |
| *** dane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:05 | |
| *** ijw has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:06 | |
| sc68cal | there we go | 21:06 |
| *** dmitryme has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:06 | |
| sc68cal | ijw: you had an action to write up a blueprint for your ideal networking - is that google doc you created sort of part of that? | 21:06 |
| Randy__ | I thought ijw said he might not make this call | 21:06 |
| ijw | Yeah, the aim was to put that there and see what we already had. I think I've changed my opinion anyway | 21:06 |
| sc68cal | ok - do you have the link handy? | 21:07 |
| ijw | So I was saying that DHCPv6 would be the primary way of doing addressing because it's more general and SLAAC is very specific to /64s | 21:07 |
| ijw | But I grant you with all the feedback (a) SLAAC is going to be easier to implement and (b) we need both anyway | 21:07 |
| sc68cal | #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1rOBOOu_OwixMStm6XJOb5PKkJA6eFbL_XCE7wlTfaPY/edit IPv6 addressing and routing in Openstack | 21:08 |
| ijw | Aside that, the doc lists in the first section the things we need - in terms of features, not implementations - and in the second section the APIs. I've tried to avoid implementation details in there completely. I'm working forward from what we need because it felt like everyone so far had gone with 'here's the code, what's the minimum we can do to make something work' and I wanted to make sure we'd covered everything | 21:08 |
| sc68cal | cool - we'll let people look over it and add feedback | 21:09 |
| Randy__ | sc68cal: I believe some of the subsequent agenda items might address some of these areas | 21:09 |
| ijw | Anyway, my take is that we want RAs from routers (with a degree of configuration) *and* DHCPv6, indepdendently, and in the DHCPv6 namespace as now. And we don't want them to all be tied back to a single config keyword on subnets, necessarily, because even if RAs are doing addressing there may be reasons to have a DHCP server | 21:10 |
| sc68cal | Randy__: agreed - we'll probably cover it in depth when we get to the blueprint topic | 21:10 |
| sc68cal | So for me - I registered two blueprints for the VIF hairpin attribute | 21:10 |
| aveiga | ijw: +1, for cases of no RFC 6106 support in the client but a desire for SLAAC | 21:10 |
| sc68cal | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/nova/+spec/nova-hairpin-vif-attribute Nova VIF hairpin attribute BP | 21:11 |
| ijw | That approach is only a little different from Randy__'s POC - he moved dnsmasq, I'm saying we should duplicate it | 21:11 |
| sc68cal | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/vif-attribute-for-hairpinning Neutron VIF attribute | 21:11 |
| sc68cal | #topic blueprints | 21:11 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "blueprints (Meeting topic: neutron_ipv6)" | 21:11 | |
| sc68cal | Ok - have at it folks :) | 21:11 |
| sc68cal | know people have some stuff to hash out on the v6 modes | 21:12 |
| ijw | Right, let's start with those two - there's nothing controversial there, I think we're just trying to make this easy for the Nova guys to see we're not breaking things | 21:12 |
| aveiga | anyone have any qualms with the VIF hairpinning BPs? | 21:13 |
| aveiga | if not, we could move on | 21:13 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 21:13 | |
| shshang | is this tied to the issue we had before? | 21:13 |
| aveiga | shshang: yes, this is to address the DADFAILED issue | 21:13 |
| shshang | I thought it has been fixed...no? | 21:14 |
| aveiga | well, it was | 21:14 |
| ijw | Yeah, keeps coming up - it's just a problem to commit cos we have to get it past Nova reviewers who like the status quo | 21:14 |
| aveiga | but the patch sc68cal proposed was rejected | 21:14 |
| shshang | I see. | 21:14 |
| aveiga | they wanted it changed per VIF by Neutron | 21:14 |
| shshang | I am fine with that BP | 21:14 |
| aveiga | hence those BPs | 21:14 |
| Randy__ | +1 for me | 21:14 |
| aveiga | sounds like consensus to me | 21:14 |
| ijw | First is sc68cal's and I'll do the second | 21:15 |
| sc68cal | ijw: you want the neutron one or the nova one? | 21:15 |
| ijw | Neutrojn | 21:15 |
| sc68cal | k | 21:15 |
| ijw | You have a patch out in nova, you might as well just tweak it | 21:15 |
| sc68cal | #action sc68cal assign ijw to neutron vif blueprint | 21:15 |
| ijw | The right people are watching it already | 21:15 |
| sc68cal | cool. | 21:15 |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul-away | 21:16 | |
| ijw | Addressing modes? | 21:16 |
| sc68cal | sounds good to me - that's related to the new BPs that were just registered? | 21:17 |
| *** eankutse has quit IRC | 21:17 | |
| sc68cal | #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/dnsmasq-ipv6-dhcpv6-stateful dnsmasq stateful | 21:17 |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 21:17 | |
| shshang | so Randy and I submitted a couple of new BPs | 21:17 |
| shshang | The support of SLAAC mode is not new. | 21:17 |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:18 | |
| shshang | We discussed it before, and we have beta code available | 21:18 |
| ijw | I think shshang and Randy's proposals tend towards using dnsmasq and using one process to do both RA and DHCP, right? | 21:18 |
| shshang | yes | 21:18 |
| Randy__ | yes | 21:18 |
| aveiga | I have a question there | 21:18 |
| aveiga | and note that I'm not arguing that there's anything wrong with using dnsmasq | 21:18 |
| shshang | the next several BP intents to bridge the gap on DHCPv6 side | 21:18 |
| aveiga | but why run dnsmasq if you're only doing slaac? | 21:18 |
| aveiga | (just playing devil's advocate) | 21:19 |
| shshang | For DHCPv6, there are several modes | 21:19 |
| shshang | DHCPv6 stateful, DHCPv6 stateless | 21:19 |
| ijw | Which is basically address-and-info and info-only, right? | 21:20 |
| shshang | the new BPs try to bridge the gap on DHCPv6 side, so eventually, we have complete solution around dnsmasq to support SLAAC, DHCPv6 Stateufl, and DHCPv6 stateless | 21:20 |
| aveiga | ijw: yes | 21:20 |
| shshang | @ijw, yes | 21:20 |
| shshang | any questions? | 21:20 |
| ijw | So I would prefer to break the problem into two, if we could | 21:20 |
| ijw | RAs on the one side and DHCPv6 on the other | 21:20 |
| shshang | nope | 21:21 |
| ijw | I'm a bit concerned that having one dnsmasq in the router namespace has problems | 21:21 |
| shshang | That is the wrong way to look at the problem. | 21:21 |
| ijw | Not least that networks don't always have routers, for starters | 21:21 |
| shshang | All three modes needs RA | 21:21 |
| *** vipul-away is now known as vipul | 21:21 | |
| shshang | I think a lot of people have that confusion | 21:21 |
| aveiga | shshang: don't look at it from that persepctive. Look at it that not all modes need dhcpv6 | 21:21 |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 21:21 | |
| shshang | @aveiga, not sure what you mean | 21:22 |
| aveiga | there's no disagreement that all nodes need an RA | 21:22 |
| aveiga | but a purely slaac mode doesn't need dnsmasq | 21:22 |
| ijw | aveiga: I think from that perspective it's more that dnsmasq does do DHCPv6 but it's often disabled in shshang's model | 21:22 |
| shshang | @aveiga, you mixed several things together | 21:22 |
| shshang | the dnsmasq is just an implementation of IPv6 address assignement | 21:22 |
| shshang | From IPv6 concept perspective, you have 3 modes | 21:23 |
| aveiga | actually, you have 4 | 21:23 |
| shshang | SLAAC, DHCPv6 Stateful, DHCPv6 Stateless | 21:23 |
| aveiga | don't leave out static | 21:23 |
| ijw | Well, in this case, 'off' | 21:23 |
| aveiga | i.e. cloud-init injeceted | 21:23 |
| shshang | yes | 21:23 |
| shshang | static means, no autoconfiguration | 21:23 |
| ijw | Yeah, that's not mutually exclusive with the above, so from a net config perspective it's really just 'off' | 21:23 |
| shshang | yup | 21:24 |
| aveiga | hold on though | 21:24 |
| aveiga | it might still want an RA | 21:24 |
| aveiga | because remember, RAs configure default routes | 21:24 |
| ijw | aveiga: you have a twisty mind | 21:24 |
| aveiga | I've been doing IPv6 for almost 8 years | 21:24 |
| aveiga | it twists you | 21:24 |
| shshang | RA only configures default route in AUTOCONFIGURATION setting | 21:24 |
| aveiga | shadower: not true | 21:24 |
| aveiga | you can have a prefix, marked on-link, with A=0 and M=0 and still inject the route | 21:25 |
| aveiga | sorry shadower, silly autocomplete | 21:25 |
| shshang | I can now configure my ubuntu VM manaully with IPv6 address and default gateway, if that is the "static" mode you refer to | 21:25 |
| aveiga | nope | 21:25 |
| aveiga | I am referring to having neutron pick the VM address, and confuigure the VM via cloud-init on boot | 21:25 |
| shshang | Oh, I see | 21:26 |
| shshang | I misunderstood you | 21:26 |
| aveiga | yeah | 21:26 |
| shshang | That is not what the BPs are for | 21:26 |
| aveiga | that's why you need to decouple RAs and Address assignment | 21:26 |
| ijw | You see, if you divide this down the middle, for any router you want RA+SLAAC, RA without SLAAC and off. And for DHCPv6 you want DHCP+address, DHCP without address, and off. But shshang, you were making a point about RAs being necessary? | 21:26 |
| shshang | For the "static" mode as referred by aveiga, it is not the cases covered by the BPs we submitted | 21:27 |
| shshang | I agree with aveiga, that is another viable way | 21:28 |
| ijw | Indeed, I think it's something we can leave out of the discussion really, short of saying we might want no chatter at all on the network | 21:28 |
| aveiga | shshang: yup, and I guess I should propose a BP for injected and non-configured modes | 21:28 |
| sc68cal | +1 | 21:28 |
| shshang | aveiga, agreed your suggestion | 21:28 |
| aveiga | BUT | 21:28 |
| ijw | You'll find the cloud-init stuff could use a serious rework on addressing actually, there be dragons | 21:28 |
| aveiga | the reason I bring that up is because it really does decouple the RA from address assignment | 21:28 |
| aveiga | ijw: I think it should still be the same algo as the SLAAC addr, but that's another conversation I'd like to avoid today | 21:29 |
| ijw | No, that makes a lot of sense to me | 21:29 |
| *** dmitryme has quit IRC | 21:29 | |
| sc68cal | aveiga: There's already a tempest scenario that is in review for static injection | 21:29 |
| ijw | Configurable addresses, if they are really needed, come last. | 21:29 |
| *** jjmb1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:29 | |
| sc68cal | aveiga: we should probably keep an eye on it | 21:29 |
| aveiga | +1 | 21:29 |
| shshang | so, for the 3 BPs we submitted, our goal is to cover autoconfiguration | 21:29 |
| sc68cal | #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/58721/ IPv6 injection scenario testcase | 21:30 |
| ijw | sc68cal: it sucks as an implementation but it demonstrates you can get hold of the data in the right place and that's what the test needs to do now | 21:30 |
| sc68cal | ijw: agreed | 21:30 |
| shshang | any objections? | 21:30 |
| ijw | yes | 21:30 |
| shshang | reason? | 21:30 |
| aveiga | shshang: I think the thing I'm driving at is why run dnsmasq as an RA daemon | 21:30 |
| *** vkmc has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:30 | |
| shshang | why not? | 21:30 |
| aveiga | it's not a router | 21:31 |
| aveiga | and in cases where you don't want autoconfiguration but still need an RA | 21:31 |
| aveiga | you need something else | 21:31 |
| ijw | And mine is that if you use one daemon in the router namespace for everything then unrouted networks break | 21:31 |
| *** jjmb has quit IRC | 21:31 | |
| shshang | aveiga, would u plz elaborate? | 21:31 |
| aveiga | I think the core is that dnsmasq only has an RA daemon becuase of it's use in OpenWRT and other projects | 21:31 |
| aveiga | where it's also a router | 21:31 |
| aveiga | in the case here where the address assignment is literally decoupled ala namespaces | 21:32 |
| ijw | aveiga: I thought the point here is that dnsmasq can be configured to do RAs and nothing else? | 21:32 |
| shshang | dnsmasq can send RA, and it can act as DHCPv6 server | 21:32 |
| sc68cal | aveiga: ijw: the one thing that we need to be concerned with is that there is no API in Neutron for orchestrating rtadvd - which means more work | 21:32 |
| *** abramley has quit IRC | 21:32 | |
| aveiga | which is true | 21:32 |
| ijw | No, I think we're into implementation without the abstraction | 21:32 |
| shshang | I am still not sure which use case you refer to? | 21:32 |
| ijw | dnsmasq, radvd, seriously don't care | 21:33 |
| aveiga | and I'm not saying that we can't run dnsmasq as RA daemon | 21:33 |
| aveiga | I'm justs driving at the reasons we should do that | 21:33 |
| shshang | aveiga, would u plz give me a use case? | 21:33 |
| aveiga | because you then couple assignment with routing | 21:33 |
| aveiga | shshang: slaac | 21:33 |
| shshang | ? | 21:33 |
| aveiga | besides issuing just an RA | 21:33 |
| aveiga | dnsmasq has no other purpose | 21:34 |
| aveiga | in that use case | 21:34 |
| shshang | what else do you want to issue besides RA in SLAAC mode? | 21:34 |
| aveiga | nothing | 21:34 |
| aveiga | but Ian is poointing out the opposite problem | 21:34 |
| aveiga | a non-routed tenant-only network | 21:34 |
| aveiga | putting dnsmasq on the router namespace there is impossible, because none exists | 21:35 |
| aveiga | there's no router | 21:35 |
| shshang | OK, let me recap what you want | 21:35 |
| shshang | in non-routed tenant-only network, there is no tenant router, and you still want RA, right? | 21:35 |
| ijw | No | 21:35 |
| ijw | DHCP | 21:35 |
| aveiga | that's the tricky part | 21:36 |
| aveiga | how do you start dhcpv6 without an RA? | 21:36 |
| aveiga | you don't | 21:36 |
| shshang | How are about this, tell me the use case, and tell me what you want to achieve | 21:36 |
| shshang | in the concise way | 21:36 |
| shshang | I think you mentioned several scenarios | 21:37 |
| Randy__ | guys. the only reason to really have dnsmasq in the qrouter namespace was to provide a default gateway since qdhcp namespace can't do this. | 21:37 |
| shshang | Don't tell me what you don't want, tell me what you want | 21:37 |
| *** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:37 | |
| *** cody-somerville has quit IRC | 21:37 | |
| *** cody-somerville has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:37 | |
| Randy__ | or it can, but obviously won't work for the tenant | 21:37 |
| ijw | shshang: specifically, I think I would want to have a private network between a webapp server and a DB server with no route to the world | 21:38 |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:38 | |
| shshang | Plus, let us stick to the use case aveiga mentioned: "non-routed tenant-only network w/o tenant router" | 21:38 |
| *** jjmb1 has quit IRC | 21:38 | |
| aveiga | shshang: what ijw just proposed is exactly that use case | 21:38 |
| shshang | OK, in that case, webapp and DB server is in the same subnet, right? | 21:39 |
| baoli | Can you turn on ipv6 on dnsmasq that is runing on the tenant's subnet? | 21:39 |
| shshang | no router, right? | 21:39 |
| aveiga | correct on both | 21:39 |
| Randy__ | so if no router, then no qr-interfaces | 21:39 |
| shshang | ok, if you don't want route to external world, then I assume you don't want RA either, right? | 21:39 |
| aveiga | baoli: we don't run like that in neutron. A separate dnsmasq is spun up per IP pool (ipv4, ipv6, etc) | 21:39 |
| ijw | nope | 21:39 |
| aveiga | but how do you intend to use dhcpv6 without an RA? | 21:40 |
| aveiga | without the M and O bits, nothing sill ever solicit | 21:40 |
| baoli | a separate dnsmasq per network actually. | 21:40 |
| shshang | Answer my question, if you don't want route to external world, do you still need RA? | 21:40 |
| ijw | Nope | 21:40 |
| aveiga | ijw yes, you do | 21:40 |
| ijw | ... | 21:41 |
| aveiga | how do you initiate a solicit? | 21:41 |
| shshang | ijw, and aveiga, can two of you sync up first and get onto the same page? | 21:41 |
| ijw | RIght, I'll correct myself. I don't need a *route*. | 21:41 |
| aveiga | correct | 21:41 |
| ijw | Protocolwise I defer to aveiga | 21:41 |
| aveiga | but you still need the RA message for dhcpv6 to work | 21:41 |
| *** pballand has quit IRC | 21:42 | |
| shshang | So you don't need default route, and you still want DHCPv6, right? | 21:42 |
| aveiga | shshang: to be exactly precise, we need an RA with M and possibly O set, but the RA must not be on-link | 21:42 |
| aveiga | which means tell the host to do dhcpv6, but do not install a route | 21:43 |
| shshang | Oh, I see. | 21:43 |
| aveiga | yeah, so we have to be careful about blanket stating what an RA does | 21:44 |
| aveiga | they aren't 100% decoupled | 21:44 |
| aveiga | so I MOSTLY agree with your 3 mode blueprints | 21:44 |
| shshang | In this case, you just create subnet, and network, but not creating router. Is that correct? | 21:44 |
| aveiga | with the exception that we need to not make it a default to put dnsmasq in the qrouter namespace | 21:45 |
| aveiga | and we should maybe provide some mode where the dnsmasq instances is told "there's no router here" | 21:45 |
| shshang | Yes | 21:45 |
| shshang | Now I see the use case, | 21:45 |
| aveiga | *phew* | 21:45 |
| aveiga | sorry to drive you in circles, but it was a potentially breaking scenario | 21:46 |
| shshang | yes, agree with you, in that case, there won't be qrouter namespace, but qdhcp namespaece still exist | 21:46 |
| ijw | If you're used to routers, having no router is certainly a bit odd | 21:46 |
| *** SergeyLukjanov has quit IRC | 21:46 | |
| *** jdob has quit IRC | 21:46 | |
| shshang | nononon...it is all good | 21:46 |
| aveiga | yup, and we need to issue a non-onlink RA | 21:46 |
| aveiga | in that one specific case | 21:46 |
| aveiga | but remember, that's not an abnormal thing to do | 21:46 |
| shshang | No, it is fine, we can add a simple check to see whether qrouter- namespace even exist | 21:46 |
| ijw | Doesn't work | 21:46 |
| ijw | I can attach a router later | 21:47 |
| shshang | if qrouter- namespace and qg- interface don't exist, then use qdhcp- namespace | 21:47 |
| ijw | (from an API perspective I can. God only knows what it means.) | 21:47 |
| aveiga | ijw: that router should then issue an RA for the subnet though | 21:47 |
| aveiga | assuming an address already exists on the host, it should only install the route | 21:47 |
| aveiga | which it never had before, because no on-link RAs were present | 21:47 |
| sc68cal | yeah they'd need to update the subnet via the API to set a gateway, when you add the router (If it doesn't already do that when you create the router) | 21:48 |
| aveiga | that should, *in theory* still be OK | 21:48 |
| sc68cal | it might do it as part of the router creation op | 21:48 |
| aveiga | if you want to be doubly sure, we could issue a message to cause the dnsmasq config to change | 21:48 |
| shshang | aveiga, I don't want to go into tooo much implementation details now, but I think I get your use case. But if we add a checkpoint, do you think it will work? | 21:48 |
| aveiga | and stop sending RAs | 21:48 |
| aveiga | shshang: I think we need a flag | 21:48 |
| shshang | yes | 21:48 |
| aveiga | boolean, is_router_present | 21:48 |
| shshang | yes | 21:48 |
| shshang | I agree | 21:48 |
| shshang | I will add enhancement to the BP to call out this case | 21:49 |
| ijw | I'm still going to ask, is there any reason to go moving the daemon from the dhcp to the router namespace, or is it simpler to just use two? | 21:49 |
| aveiga | ok | 21:49 |
| shshang | but aveiga, thanks for bringing it up | 21:49 |
| shshang | it is an interesting use case | 21:49 |
| aveiga | and that's exactly why I asked about running an RA from the router, in its own daemon | 21:49 |
| sc68cal | The flag might be able to just do a query to the neutron DB for the presence of a router attached to the subnet or network | 21:49 |
| aveiga | even if said daemon is another copy of dnsmasq | 21:49 |
| sc68cal | or just query out the ports for a network, look for the device owner to be a router | 21:50 |
| Randy__ | ijw: you need the qrouter instance of dnsmasq for cases where you want to provide a default gateway | 21:50 |
| *** xyang1 has quit IRC | 21:50 | |
| aveiga | I think thay should split | 21:50 |
| ijw | Randy__: yup - that's what I mean about two - granted you can't avoid the router daemon | 21:50 |
| aveiga | and the qdhcp instance should only ever issue an RA when a) RA is no on-link and b) the RA is only present when there is no router | 21:51 |
| Randy__ | yes, the qdhcp namespace instance remains intact | 21:51 |
| aveiga | otherwise, the other daemon running in the qrouter namespace runs the RA | 21:51 |
| Randy__ | aveiga: yes | 21:51 |
| *** roeyc has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:51 | |
| sc68cal | #action shshang add a blueprint to cover a tenant network with no router | 21:51 |
| sc68cal | shshang: does that sound right? | 21:51 |
| sc68cal | or should I rope in aveiga and ijw to help | 21:51 |
| shshang | I think aveiga explained it clearly | 21:51 |
| aveiga | I don't want to dictate implementation, but it seems to me that we need the RA to be discrete from the dhcpv6 server | 21:52 |
| *** jbrendel has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:52 | |
| ijw | Actually I think aveiga would be better for this | 21:52 |
| aveiga | except for the no_routers case | 21:52 |
| sc68cal | #undo | 21:52 |
| openstack | Removing item from minutes: <ircmeeting.items.Action object at 0x390fa10> | 21:52 |
| *** hichihara has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:52 | |
| sc68cal | Let me know how to word the action, so we can file it then do open discussion | 21:53 |
| aveiga | also, assign me one to define the RA cases and the desire for a separate RA daemon | 21:53 |
| sc68cal | #action aveiga define RA cases and the desire for a separate RA daemon | 21:53 |
| shshang | the assumption here is, if we have qrouter, then we assume we have default gw, hence RA should be from qrouter- namespace and it should have privilege; if we don't have qrouter, then it is non-router case and dnsmasq in qdhcp namespace should send RA | 21:53 |
| aveiga | uh, is everyone OK with a slight delay here? I'm going on PTO for medical and family reasons starting Saturday | 21:53 |
| shshang | is my statement accurate? | 21:53 |
| shshang | I mean, the assumption here? | 21:54 |
| aveiga | shshang: be specific though, the qrouter has to be on the same subnet | 21:54 |
| sc68cal | sounds correct to me | 21:54 |
| aveiga | as opposed to a shared public network and a private tenant network on the same machine | 21:54 |
| ijw | Yep - the only thing I would add is, does it actually matter where DHCP comes from if we have DHCP or should we just use the DHCP NS for that all the time? | 21:54 |
| aveiga | hence why I think there should be a flag | 21:54 |
| shshang | aveiga, correct | 21:54 |
| aveiga | ijw: for the sake of not breaking ops folks troubleshooting this, reduce disparity with the v4 model where possible | 21:55 |
| aveiga | hence, leave it in qdhcp | 21:55 |
| aveiga | and leave the routing functions in qrouter | 21:55 |
| ijw | Now, the reason I like that is nothing to do with the DHCP one but that we again come down to the nice simple solution 'routers send RAs' - we need a daemon there that respects attached subnets' flags and does very boring things | 21:55 |
| aveiga | yup | 21:56 |
| *** hemanthravi has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:56 | |
| *** shivh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:56 | |
| aveiga | routing routes and addressign assigns addresses | 21:56 |
| aveiga | and we're out of time | 21:56 |
| aveiga | sorry to hijack the meeting | 21:56 |
| shshang | OK, this is good discussion | 21:56 |
| shshang | no no no, aveiga, it is ALL good | 21:56 |
| sc68cal | yeah let's just open it for the last few minutes | 21:56 |
| shshang | I like this kind of brainstomr, | 21:56 |
| sc68cal | #topic open discussion | 21:56 |
| *** openstack changes topic to "open discussion (Meeting topic: neutron_ipv6)" | 21:56 | |
| shshang | Now I can see the use case you are thinking | 21:57 |
| *** Barker has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:57 | |
| ijw | In practice there's only so much work we'll get done in a 'week' and we've just carved some of it off. | 21:57 |
| sc68cal | I apologize for running through the first 15 minutes of the meeking super quick - but I knew this discussion was probably going to take the bulk of the time | 21:57 |
| ijw | So shshang, do you have some code that could do that? Sounds like what you have - using dnsmasq, probably, but who cares - could spit RAs | 21:57 |
| shshang | sorry, ijw, what do you refer to? | 21:58 |
| ijw | RAs from routers per above | 21:58 |
| shshang | yes | 21:58 |
| aveiga | running two dnsmasqs, one for addressing and one for RA | 21:58 |
| ijw | Ignoring DHCP for now, we can add that in a later round | 21:58 |
| ijw | So I would suggest we do the thing we need in the qrouter NS, we leave the old DHCP NS there (for v4 only, for now) and call that a job | 21:59 |
| aveiga | I think we're pretty well wrapped up | 21:59 |
| Randy__ | this is what has been done | 21:59 |
| *** songole has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 21:59 | |
| ijw | Randy__: thought so, but the thing is it has much fewer modes now - RA-slaac, RA-noslaac and off | 21:59 |
| aveiga | sc68cal: I think you should adjourn | 22:00 |
| aveiga | we're over | 22:00 |
| *** luqas has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:00 | |
| sc68cal | hmm - is my clock slow? | 22:00 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:00 | |
| aveiga | I'm reading 2200 | 22:00 |
| sc68cal | same | 22:00 |
| shshang | aveiga, | 22:00 |
| sc68cal | #endmeeting | 22:00 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 22:00 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Dec 19 22:00:34 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:00 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_ipv6/2013/neutron_ipv6.2013-12-19-21.00.html | 22:00 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_ipv6/2013/neutron_ipv6.2013-12-19-21.00.txt | 22:00 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_ipv6/2013/neutron_ipv6.2013-12-19-21.00.log.html | 22:00 |
| ijw | to #openstack-neutron, chaps | 22:00 |
| mestery | Hi! Who's here for the Neutron 3rd party testing meeting? | 22:00 |
| * ijw flees | 22:01 | |
| *** shshang has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| * sc68cal flees too | 22:01 | |
| *** Randy__ has quit IRC | 22:01 | |
| * mestery chases after sc68cal and ijw. | 22:01 | |
| sc68cal | ;) | 22:01 |
| jbrendel | Hi there... | 22:01 |
| luqas | HI, me, I 'm a new qa guy at Midokura | 22:01 |
| mestery | jbrendel: Howdy! | 22:01 |
| aveiga | have fun, folks, and remember to include IPv6 in your testing! | 22:01 |
| mestery | luqas: Welcome! | 22:01 |
| * aveiga ducks | 22:01 | |
| mestery | aveiga: Of course. :) | 22:01 |
| luqas | so I take the place of Rossella :-) | 22:01 |
| *** shivharis has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:01 | |
| mestery | #startmeeting networking_third_party_testing | 22:01 |
| openstack | Meeting started Thu Dec 19 22:01:48 2013 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is mestery. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. | 22:01 |
| openstack | Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. | 22:01 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking_third_party_testing)" | 22:01 | |
| openstack | The meeting name has been set to 'networking_third_party_testing' | 22:01 |
| shivharis | hi all | 22:01 |
| *** aveiga has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:02 | |
| roeyc | Hi | 22:02 |
| hichihara | Hi | 22:02 |
| yamahata | hi | 22:02 |
| mestery | #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/multi-node-neutron-tempest Shared Etherpad for 3rd Party Testing and Multi-Node Tempest Testing | 22:02 |
| *** oda-g has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:02 | |
| mestery | gongysh amotoki, you guys here? | 22:02 |
| mestery | OK, so lets get started, myabe this will be quick this week. | 22:03 |
| mestery | I guess lets just start with the obivous: Where are people at with regards to Neutron 3rd party testing? | 22:03 |
| mestery | Does anyone have a full voting Tempest setup up and (partially) working yet? | 22:04 |
| shivharis | partially working ... | 22:04 |
| luqas | partially too | 22:04 |
| roeyc | same here | 22:04 |
| *** Sourabh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:04 | |
| mestery | Great! What issues have you guys faced in this so far? | 22:04 |
| shivharis | Jenkins seems not too flexible | 22:04 |
| mestery | shivharis: In what way? | 22:04 |
| shivharis | I have issues with patchset ID | 22:05 |
| shivharis | The patchset id is the the code that need to be tested | 22:05 |
| mestery | shivharis: I see you put that on the wiki. Perhaps we can collect those there and ask someone from -qa for help with an email to openstack-dev? | 22:05 |
| * mestery nods. | 22:05 | |
| shivharis | not the one at the top of the branch | 22:05 |
| shivharis | I want to add the broad step there; can some take a look and see if that is what need to be done. (very broad) | 22:06 |
| mestery | So you can get the top of hte branch patchset ID, but not the one from the gerrit review itself? | 22:06 |
| shivharis | The event posted by the patchset Id need to be derived somehow. having toruble with that | 22:07 |
| *** HenryG has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:07 | |
| shivharis | to be precise gerrit posts and event and that event has the patchset id | 22:07 |
| mestery | shivharis: Can you ping someone in -qa or email openstack-dev? Also, whatever you find out, put it in the wiki. | 22:07 |
| *** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:07 | |
| shivharis | Ok willdo. | 22:08 |
| shivharis | can folks see the etherpad and agree on the broad steps, just posted to etherpad | 22:08 |
| mestery | #action shivharis to figure out patchset ID issue and report back on etherpad with fix. | 22:08 |
| mestery | shivharis: At the bottom? | 22:08 |
| shivharis | yes | 22:08 |
| *** pcm_ has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| *** pdmars has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| mestery | shuvharis: How much of what you've put there is covered by these instructions: http://ci.openstack.org/running-your-own.html | 22:09 |
| *** julim has quit IRC | 22:09 | |
| shivharis | not much.. | 22:09 |
| mestery | :) | 22:09 |
| *** pcm_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:10 | |
| mestery | So, I think the general flow of what you're trying to do is right shivharis. | 22:10 |
| shivharis | Do we have to do this with Jenkins, can we do another way? | 22:10 |
| jbrendel | I think you can manually read the Gerrit event stream. | 22:11 |
| mestery | shivharis: You can do this anyway you want, but I was thinking using Jenkins would be easier, perhaps it's not. | 22:11 |
| mestery | jbrendel: Is that what you're doing, skipping some of this infra? | 22:11 |
| jbrendel | I've heard the Jenkins plugin takes care of a lot of issues (such as making test results available to upstream). | 22:11 |
| shivharis | I found jenkins is not flexible enough. Had more success reading the event stream. | 22:11 |
| jbrendel | Haven't implemented that yet, though, so can't be sure. | 22:12 |
| mestery | jbrendel: Agreed, if it takes care of some details, I think it's the way to go quite honestly,. | 22:12 |
| jbrendel | #shivharis: Interesting. Reading the event stream itself shouldn't be too difficult, but are there other benefits to using Jenkins? | 22:12 |
| *** tinoue_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:13 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 22:13 | |
| shivharis | without jenkins, posting results is quite easy as well | 22:14 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:14 | |
| luqas | shivaris: yes but you have to do it manually... | 22:14 |
| shivharis | nothing can be manual. | 22:15 |
| shivharis | it has to run anytime and event is posted. | 22:16 |
| shivharis | s/and/an/ | 22:16 |
| jbrendel | Ok, what does the Jenkins plugin give you? | 22:16 |
| jbrendel | Maybe "manual" here referred to "having to implement some mechanism yourself" vs. "letting the plugin do it"? | 22:16 |
| luqas | the ability to run tests and post the results? | 22:17 |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 22:17 | |
| mestery | luqas: Agreed, I thought that's what it got us, does it not? | 22:17 |
| shivharis | I have limited Jenkins knowledge. need some pointers/folks I can talk to | 22:17 |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:17 | |
| mestery | shivharis: The best place is to talk to folks in #openstack-qa, they can give guidance there, or on the mailing list. | 22:18 |
| mestery | I suspect a lot of people listening here have minimal Jenkins experience as well. | 22:18 |
| *** jcooley_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:19 | |
| shivharis | Actually runnings tests is minor. We need the right code, from the correct branch and them applying patchset, then testing | 22:19 |
| shivharis | branch is "stable/grizzly", ... "master" | 22:19 |
| mestery | Can anyone verify that is what the jenkins plugin actually helps with? | 22:20 |
| mestery | OK, so if people look near hte bottom of the shared etherpad, you can see some info on how hte QA team has suggested we all sedt this up. | 22:22 |
| mestery | The part about "Use Infrastructure for Testing" | 22:23 |
| mestery | I suggest we take a look at that and see how far it gets us, and we can reconvene the week after next, on January 2. | 22:23 |
| mestery | Unless anyone has anything else today? | 22:23 |
| shivharis | I can talk to #openstack-qa and get back | 22:24 |
| mestery | Thanks shivharis. | 22:24 |
| mestery | OK, so lets proceed with this plan then. | 22:24 |
| luqas | i got a question regarding who's responsible for the third party testing of ODP | 22:24 |
| mestery | luqas: OpenDaylight? | 22:24 |
| luqas | if any | 22:25 |
| mestery | luqas: I am working with the Linux Foundation on that, we're stuck getting VMs for that. So I guess you could say I'm sheparding that at the moment. | 22:25 |
| mestery | rosella was interested in helping there, is she still? | 22:25 |
| luqas | ok, so I will talk to you offline :-) | 22:25 |
| *** songole has quit IRC | 22:25 | |
| mestery | ok, thanks. | 22:25 |
| luqas | yes I guess | 22:25 |
| mestery | OK, well happy holidays everyone and we'll see you in the new year! | 22:26 |
| luqas | merry xmas! | 22:26 |
| mestery | Questions or issues before then, please ping -neutron -qa on IRC or send email to openstack-dev with "[neutron] [third-party-testing]" in the subject! | 22:26 |
| mestery | #endmeeting | 22:26 |
| *** openstack changes topic to " (Meeting topic: networking_policy)" | 22:26 | |
| openstack | Meeting ended Thu Dec 19 22:26:27 2013 UTC. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot . (v 0.1.4) | 22:26 |
| openstack | Minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_third_party_testing/2013/networking_third_party_testing.2013-12-19-22.01.html | 22:26 |
| openstack | Minutes (text): http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_third_party_testing/2013/networking_third_party_testing.2013-12-19-22.01.txt | 22:26 |
| openstack | Log: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_third_party_testing/2013/networking_third_party_testing.2013-12-19-22.01.log.html | 22:26 |
| *** jbrendel has quit IRC | 22:26 | |
| shivharis | bye | 22:26 |
| *** shivharis has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| *** dane has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| *** roeyc has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| *** Sourabh has quit IRC | 22:27 | |
| *** esker has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 22:29 | |
| *** hichihara has left #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:29 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:30 | |
| *** luqas has quit IRC | 22:31 | |
| *** oda-g has quit IRC | 22:32 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| *** zane has quit IRC | 22:34 | |
| *** betsy has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:35 | |
| *** yamahata has quit IRC | 22:37 | |
| *** denis_makogon has quit IRC | 22:37 | |
| *** hemanthravi has quit IRC | 22:38 | |
| *** nati_ueno has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:38 | |
| *** glucas has quit IRC | 22:41 | |
| *** zane has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:41 | |
| *** glucas has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:42 | |
| *** tinoue_ has quit IRC | 22:43 | |
| *** baoli has quit IRC | 22:43 | |
| *** safchain has quit IRC | 22:48 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:49 | |
| *** arnaud__ has quit IRC | 22:54 | |
| *** arnaud has quit IRC | 22:54 | |
| *** gokrokve has quit IRC | 22:54 | |
| *** vipul is now known as vipul-away | 22:56 | |
| *** arnaud__ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:56 | |
| *** arnaud has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 22:56 | |
| *** flaper87 is now known as flaper87|afk | 23:00 | |
| *** shivh has quit IRC | 23:03 | |
| *** karthik has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:09 | |
| *** yogesh has quit IRC | 23:10 | |
| *** harlowja is now known as harlowja_away | 23:12 | |
| *** kevinconway has quit IRC | 23:14 | |
| *** karthik has quit IRC | 23:15 | |
| *** jmontemayor has quit IRC | 23:22 | |
| *** markvoelker1 has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:30 | |
| *** sacharya has quit IRC | 23:32 | |
| *** sarob has quit IRC | 23:33 | |
| *** shivh has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:33 | |
| *** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:34 | |
| *** nati_uen_ has quit IRC | 23:34 | |
| *** nati_uen_ has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:35 | |
| *** sarob has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:35 | |
| *** shivh has quit IRC | 23:36 | |
| *** nati_ueno has quit IRC | 23:37 | |
| *** NehaV has quit IRC | 23:41 | |
| *** BrianB_ has quit IRC | 23:43 | |
| *** rongze has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:43 | |
| *** brents has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:47 | |
| *** rongze has quit IRC | 23:48 | |
| *** Barker has quit IRC | 23:49 | |
| *** demorris has quit IRC | 23:55 | |
| *** arnaud__ has quit IRC | 23:55 | |
| *** arnaud has quit IRC | 23:55 | |
| *** harlowja_away is now known as harlowja | 23:57 | |
| *** dprince has quit IRC | 23:59 | |
| *** gokrokve has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:59 | |
| *** yamahata has joined #openstack-meeting-alt | 23:59 | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.14.0 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!