17:01:07 <arosen> #startmeeting CongressTeamMeeting
17:01:07 <openstack> Meeting started Tue Mar 10 17:01:07 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is arosen. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:08 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:01:08 <arosen> hi
17:01:11 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'congressteammeeting'
17:01:11 <bryan_att> hi tim, this is bryan from AT&T
17:01:33 <thinrichs> bryan_att: Hi.  Good to have you here.
17:01:47 <bryan_att> just going to lurk unless I have a chance to ask some basic questions about blueprints we are considering
17:02:00 <thinrichs> bryan_att: sounds good.
17:02:18 <thinrichs> I imagine we may be missing a couple of people b/c of daylight savings.
17:02:32 <thinrichs> But let's get started anyway with status updates.
17:02:44 <thinrichs> arosen: want to start?
17:02:48 <thinrichs> #topic status
17:02:53 <arosen> sure
17:03:20 <arosen> so i've been working on some improvements to the cloudfoundry datasource driver and extending it.
17:03:35 <arosen> i've also been trying to tam the CI so it passes more consistently.
17:04:15 <arosen> been helping out/debugging a lot of internal infrastructure issues. WE're adding some more capacity to our gateway nodes so hopefully that should help.
17:04:31 <arosen> that's it from me unless anyone has questions about that.
17:04:31 <thinrichs> That all sounds great!
17:04:36 <thinrichs> Better CI is good for all.
17:04:48 <thinrichs> More insight into app-level information is always good.
17:05:14 <jwy> arosen: is the ci turned off right now for reviews?
17:05:29 <jwy> it didn't get run for something i pushed yesterday
17:05:34 <arosen> jwy:  yea i'm working on that right now. For some reason zuul seems to stop working randomly.
17:05:41 <jwy> doh
17:06:19 <thinrichs> jwy: want to tell us what you've been working on?
17:06:49 <jwy> had a review of the policy creation ui
17:07:01 <jwy> got a lot of good feedback and suggestion, working on those changes now
17:07:32 <jwy> continuing discussions about policy abstraction for simpler cases with Yali
17:07:42 <jwy> that sums it up
17:07:59 <shivharis> jwy: anything available to play around with?
17:08:18 <jwy> shivharis: nothing public, at the moment
17:08:26 <shivharis> jwy: np
17:08:43 <jwy> reminds me, i should update the func spec
17:09:04 <thinrichs> jwy: do you have an ETA on when you'll have the latest round of changes in place?  I imagine you could push to review at that point and give people something to touch and feel.
17:09:37 <jwy> thinrichs: good point, i had pushed everything i had so far here - https://review.openstack.org/#/c/160722/
17:10:01 <jwy> shivharis: you could cherry pick from that and try it out
17:10:27 <jwy> that'll give a basic idea of what the ui will be like
17:10:33 <thinrichs> jwy: maybe it's worth mentioning a few of the changes you have in mind so if someone pulls that down to look they have an idea where you're headed.
17:10:35 <jwy> making some changes to the workflow, moving some elements around
17:10:37 <shivharis> jwy: I will fiddle around with it. Thanks for the pointer.
17:11:04 <jwy> shivharis: basically, the steps are going to be reversed so that the focus is more on the tables than the columns
17:11:25 <jwy> more guidance to the user on what conditions need to be supplied if the user wants certain output
17:12:02 <jwy> shivharis: of course, let me know if you have suggestions!
17:12:04 <shivharis> jwy: i'll ask when i get stuck
17:12:13 <shivharis> jwy: will do
17:12:44 <thinrichs> alexsyip: want to give a status report?
17:13:08 <alexsyip> I have continued work on an HA plan.
17:13:40 <alexsyip> I have two plans.  One for the initial HA feature which is pretty bare bones, and one that is more sophisticated that supports scale out better.
17:13:59 <alexsyip> I was working on a test for the barebones version.
17:14:17 <alexsyip> Would it be better to write up a BP for the barebones version first ?
17:15:00 <thinrichs> It depends how complicated it is.  If it's reasonable to describe both in a single spec, that's fine.
17:15:19 <thinrichs> But if you think the 2 designs each deserve their own spec, do that.
17:15:36 <alexsyip> ok, I’ll write up the basic spec today
17:15:41 <masahito> Hello
17:15:51 <thinrichs> Sounds good.  The sooner we get it up there, the sooner we get feedback.
17:15:54 <masahito> Is this meeting for congress?
17:15:56 <thinrichs> masahito: hi!  Welcome.
17:16:00 <thinrichs> masahito: yep.
17:16:19 <thinrichs> masahito: we're giving status reports, letting newcomers listen in for a bit.
17:16:37 <masahito> thinrichs: I see
17:16:39 <thinrichs> masahito: Then we'll ask newcomers to say a few words about why they're here.
17:17:06 <thinrichs> alexsyip: anything else to report?
17:17:40 <alexsyip> No, that’s all.
17:17:55 <thinrichs> sarob: You available to give a status report?
17:18:20 <sarob> give me 15
17:18:39 <thinrichs> sarob: ok.  Pipe up when you're ready.
17:19:11 <thinrichs> Just this morning I started working on the policy-engine-trigger blueprint, which is part of the blueprint series to enable reactive enforcement.
17:19:17 <thinrichs> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/congress/+spec/policy-engine-trigger
17:19:35 <thinrichs> Originally it was assigned to Zhenzan, but he asked me to get things started.
17:20:51 <thinrichs> Anyone else have a status update?  (Attendance has been spotty of late.)
17:20:59 <stevenldt> i can go next
17:21:29 <thinrichs> Great!
17:21:44 <stevenldt> I start working on the action execution BP
17:22:02 <stevenldt> I'm with Kishan's team btw
17:22:03 <thinrichs> stevenldt: Excellent!
17:22:40 <thinrichs> stevenldt: How's it going?
17:23:04 <stevenldt> I understand what need to be done.  I just have a couple of questions for some details. And I can ask you offline
17:23:32 <thinrichs> stevenldt: sure.  Is IRC good, or should we set up a voice-call?
17:23:57 <stevenldt> I can go to #congress after this meeting
17:24:03 <thinrichs> Good plan.
17:24:27 <thinrichs> Anyone else have a status update for us?
17:25:19 <thinrichs> Ok.  Let's hear from the newcomers then.
17:25:21 <bryan_att> when you get to AOB I can intro our work in OPNFV
17:25:31 <thinrichs> #topic newcomers
17:25:40 <thinrichs> bryan_att: let's do that after we hear from the new people.
17:25:49 <masahito> Hi
17:25:49 <bryan_att> ok
17:26:15 <thinrichs> masahito: Hi.  Want to tell us what brought you to the meeting today?
17:26:43 <masahito> ok
17:28:04 <masahito> I'm interested in Congress, so I want to contribute for the code but I can't find IRC channel of Congress in the list: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/IRC
17:28:20 <masahito> That's why I am here.
17:29:12 <arosen> masahito:  it's #congress
17:29:20 <arosen> we'll update that wiki
17:29:22 <thinrichs> masahito: Didn't know about that page.  I'm trying to add #congress now.
17:30:24 <thinrichs> masahito: Do you have any use cases in mind for Congress?  Or are you just generally interested?
17:30:30 <shivharis> i can go next when masahito is done
17:31:07 <masahito> I just generally interested now.
17:31:22 <thinrichs> masahito: sounds good.  We'll look for you on #congress!
17:31:29 <thinrichs> shivharis: I didn't forget.  :)
17:31:37 <thinrichs> shivharis: what brought you here today?
17:31:48 <shivharis> i am new here. wanted to implement policy framework for brocade devices.
17:32:05 <shivharis> but i will take on anything for now to get my feet wet
17:32:13 <thinrichs> shivharis: do you work with Ramki?
17:32:24 <masahito> but from now, I try to use congress in our Cloud so I think I will get some usecase in the future.
17:32:46 <shivharis> not directly, but will if need be. i know him well
17:33:15 <thinrichs> masahito: that'd be great!  Real deployments help us a ton!  We'd be happy to help you get it set up and running, if you like.
17:33:41 <shivharis> i will listen for some time before i jump in - familiarize with the happenings first
17:33:45 <thinrichs> shivharis: he's working on the Delegation stuff we're doing.  I just wondered if you were eventually interested in that line of work.
17:33:54 * sarob can discuss incubation when ready
17:33:56 <thinrichs> shivharis: sounds good.
17:34:12 <shivharis> i do have a general idea, will talk to ramki and find out more
17:34:19 <shivharis> that all from me.
17:34:21 <thinrichs> sarob: got 1 or 2 more things in the queue before you.
17:34:30 <sarob> no prob
17:34:35 <masahito> Thank you for having time for me during weekly meeting!!
17:35:13 <thinrichs> shivharis and masahito: Thanks!  We're more than happy to help you get things set up, find a starter project, etc.
17:35:24 <thinrichs> You can always reach us at the openstack-dev mailing list or on #congress.
17:35:39 <thinrichs> Looking forward to working with you both!
17:35:39 <shivharis> thinrichs: thanks
17:35:58 <masahito> I'll contact you in #congress if I have questions.
17:36:10 <thinrichs> bryan_att: want to give us an overview of what you're working on?
17:36:41 <bryan_att> OK, thanks.
17:36:47 <bryan_att> We had an intro meeting with Tim and team at the LF Collaboration Summit recently, where OPNFV held a meetup. I lead a team of experienced standards types, with aspirations to pivot from sole reliance upon traditional standards toward open-source-driven standards e.g. through OPNFV.
17:37:06 <bryan_att> We are leading work e.g. in ETSI NFV and projects in OPNFV (Policy, IPv6). Use cases for "Deployment Policy" are at https://wiki.opnfv.org/copper/use_cases. Other types of policy related functions in development at OPNFV include Fault Mgmt and Resource Reservation.
17:37:37 <bryan_att> that's the intro - I have some topics for discussion  but they might take some time - I would like to intro them at least...
17:38:06 <bryan_att> I have been testing against Congress on Devstack and am currently working to integrate Congress in a SaltStack based deployment environment. I have some questions e.g. whether the "Standalone" install (https://github.com/stackforge/congress) is what I should base the SaltStack scripts upon. We will also include Congress in our Foreman-based installer
17:38:06 <bryan_att> development (the front-runner  installer in the OPNFV currently).
17:38:53 <bryan_att> So the 1st question is whether the readme.md includes the actions to install Congress on Openstack (vs Devstack)?
17:39:44 <thinrichs> arosen: you still here?
17:39:46 <arosen> bryan_att:  for getting started i'd definitely recommend taking the devstack approach
17:40:07 <bryan_att> I'm past that now - need to use real installers rather than Devstack
17:40:40 <arosen> what error are you hitting?
17:40:53 <arosen> the all in one install should also work
17:41:02 <arosen> i mean the install without devstack
17:41:04 <thinrichs> arosen: he's asking if the current Standalone instructions are the REAL instructions for OpenStack?
17:41:14 <thinrichs> That wasn't a question.
17:41:15 <bryan_att> I'm not hitting errors just looking for basic confirmation that the readme.md includes all the actions to install on Openstack
17:41:41 <bryan_att> so I can add it into the SaltStack scripts and Foreman etc
17:41:44 <thinrichs> arosen: I don't see things like saying the logs should be put into /var/log (so that logs get rotated)
17:41:45 <arosen> bryan_att:  they should be
17:42:03 <arosen> thinrichs:  right we'll that's up to who ever builds the packages per say
17:42:15 <arosen> you can git clone our repo and install and run the code
17:42:22 <bryan_att> OK, I will start with the instructions and submit any issues I encounter
17:42:24 <arosen> but it doesn't come with init scripts or anythinglike that.
17:42:32 <arosen> bryan_att:  sounds good!
17:42:41 <arosen> I'm usually always around in #congress or email if you hit anything
17:42:50 <bryan_att> second is blueprint ideas from OPNFV
17:43:00 <bryan_att> We are forming blueprint ideas at https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/copper_bps. While currently very high level, intend by mid-April to have concrete input on what we think is needed.
17:43:16 <bryan_att> First, we are looking into how Openstack supports an event-driven policy engine. I hope to find out that there is a consistent design across Openstack projects on how components can subscribe to event notifications.
17:43:52 <bryan_att> This includes the ability to manage the notification system ...
17:44:06 <thinrichs> bryan_att: from what I hear there is a message bus that the projects share for events.  But not all projects put all relevant events on the bus.
17:44:37 <bryan_att> I understand - second is any enhancements to data source drivers to use the pub/sub bus
17:44:54 <bryan_att> Second, the assessment of OPNFV use cases against current supported data sources and attributes may lead us to propose specific data source extensions.
17:45:33 <bryan_att> So I have a two-idea investigation underway: a basic reusable eventing system; and new data source driver patches
17:45:50 <bryan_att> it may take a couple of releases to get there...
17:45:54 <thinrichs> We'd love to have additional datasource drivers.
17:46:28 <thinrichs> And convincing all the OS projects to make events available would be great!
17:46:35 <bryan_att> OK, that's an overview. We can continue on  the congress channel and the list. Openstack - OPNFV interlocks on this would also be useful.
17:47:03 <thinrichs> Sounds good!
17:47:19 <bryan_att> thanks for the time!
17:47:26 <thinrichs> Questions about that before we hear from sarob?
17:48:28 <thinrichs> sarob: what's the story on incubation?
17:49:00 <sarob> thinrichs: so the TC is still working on tagging as the focus
17:49:16 <sarob> i was out of the last TC meeting
17:49:23 <sarob> due to board stuff
17:49:36 <sarob> but it is still the security team
17:49:45 <sarob> as the test case to work
17:50:02 <sarob> out the incubation checklist replacement
17:50:27 <sarob> i will jump into the next TC meet
17:50:44 <sarob> and verify that we are still in the queue
17:50:54 <sarob> alongside a few other projects
17:50:58 <thinrichs> Here's an interesting thread about incubation.
17:50:58 <thinrichs> http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2015-March/058689.html
17:51:49 <sarob> yup, ttx asked that we hold off make new project proposals
17:52:08 <sarob> until sec team has run through the workflow
17:52:27 <thinrichs> Nevertheless, there are a number of projects that have applied.
17:52:41 <sarob> russellb is basically saying the same thing
17:52:42 <thinrichs> I presume they won't be approved until the TC decides to start approving them.
17:53:03 <sarob> thinrichs: that is what ttx told me and others
17:53:23 <thinrichs> But it may be that they take the applications first-come, first-served.
17:53:42 <sarob> i havent made a project proposal
17:53:46 <thinrichs> So we may want to think about applying now, so that we're high in the queue.
17:53:56 <sarob> because they asked everyone to hold off until
17:54:00 <thinrichs> Doug says he's found looking at the apps useful.
17:54:09 <sarob> the sec team beta tests the new workflow
17:54:22 <sarob> hellman?
17:54:49 <sarob> im good with applying now
17:54:58 <thinrichs> Yep.
17:55:11 <sarob> i was following our leader's request
17:55:40 <sarob> ill figure out what ttx wants us to do
17:55:47 <sarob> the updated version ;)
17:55:56 <thinrichs> I'd rather wait to apply as well, but I also don't want to be penalized for trying to do the right thing.
17:56:02 <thinrichs> sarob: sounds good.  Let us know.
17:56:06 <sarob> understand
17:56:09 <sarob> will do
17:56:31 <thinrichs> Just a couple minutes left.  Anything else?
17:56:33 <thinrichs> #topic open discussion
17:57:57 <thinrichs> Ok.  Let's call it then.
17:58:11 <thinrichs> Thanks all!  I'll be in #congress for say 30 more minutes.
17:58:17 <thinrichs> #endmeeting
17:58:22 <sarob> cheers
17:59:01 <thinrichs> I think arosen started the meeting, but he left.  So we'll need to wait til the top of the hour to end it.
18:00:56 <etoews> openstack sdk meeting here and now?
18:01:05 <briancurtin> etoews: not for another hour
18:01:16 <etoews> damn you dst
18:28:39 <thinrichs> #endmeeting