16:00:12 <vkozhukalov> #startmeeting Fuel
16:00:13 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Aug 14 16:00:12 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is vkozhukalov. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:14 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:00:16 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'fuel'
16:00:21 <vkozhukalov> #chair vkozhukalov
16:00:22 <openstack> Current chairs: vkozhukalov
16:00:32 <vkozhukalov> agenda as usual
16:00:42 <vkozhukalov> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-weekly-meeting-agenda
16:00:50 <vkozhukalov> #topic greetings
16:00:59 <mihgen> hi
16:01:18 <dpyzhov> hi
16:01:28 <mihgen> we were so close to release 5.0.1 .. :(
16:01:30 <vkozhukalov> anybody else is here?
16:01:38 <akasatkin> hi
16:01:38 <Tatyanka_Leontov> hi
16:01:40 <akislitsky_> hi
16:01:41 <ikalnitsky> o/
16:01:42 <christopheraedo> hello
16:01:53 <aglarendil> hi
16:01:58 <xarses> o/
16:02:01 <vkozhukalov> #topic 5.0.1 release status
16:02:20 <vkozhukalov> angdraug: around?
16:02:41 <mihgen> angdraug: I can share what was found MSK day today with 5.0.1
16:02:41 <meow-nofer> hi
16:02:43 <mattymo> hi boys and girls
16:02:54 <agordeev> hi
16:02:55 <angdraug> mihgen: please do
16:03:05 <vkozhukalov> mihgen: it would be great
16:03:09 <mihgen> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1353497
16:03:10 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1353497 in fuel/5.0.x "[Fuel Upgrade] Can't re-deploy environment after upgrade - failed with ceph-deploy --overwrite-conf config pull node-16 returned 1 instead of one of [0]" [Critical,Confirmed]
16:03:25 <mihgen> this bug was closed as incomplete/invalid…. it appeared to be a real issue
16:03:46 <mihgen> when you upgrade 5.0 -> 5.0.1, your astute container gets rebuild and you lose all ssh keys of old envs
16:04:04 <mihgen> so when you add node to the existing env, astute has to generate new jekeys
16:04:26 <mihgen> so your new node is not completely operational when you use compute or ceph roles, which rely on ssh connectivity to other nodes
16:04:56 <mihgen> it affects only if you upgrade 5.0 -> 5.0.1, and doesn't if you use directly 5.0.1...
16:05:15 <mihgen> so fix is committed, but we have to spend 24 more hours to test
16:05:42 <mihgen> that is it. Also we need to work on mistakes to improve workflow
16:05:58 <mihgen> so such issues resolved earlier / treated better
16:06:03 <angdraug> 24h means we can release tomorrow? or is it next week?
16:06:15 <mihgen> we can release tomorrow according to nurla
16:06:18 <mihgen> nurla: can we?
16:06:34 <mihgen> it's matter of updated upgrade scripts to preserve keys from old envs when you do upgrade.
16:06:35 <nurla> i hope we can do it tomorrow
16:06:52 <mihgen> so we don't need to respin the whole acceptance cycle
16:07:08 <mihgen> ikalnitsky: actually can you fix status of https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1353497
16:07:08 <mihgen> it
16:07:09 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1353497 in fuel/5.0.x "[Fuel Upgrade] Can't re-deploy environment after upgrade - failed with ceph-deploy --overwrite-conf config pull node-16 returned 1 instead of one of [0]" [Critical,Confirmed]
16:07:17 <mihgen> still says Confirmed incorrectly
16:07:22 <mihgen> while it's actually merged
16:07:26 <angdraug> which build is RC2?
16:07:34 <nurla> yep, we just runs systests and check related issues around bug
16:07:53 <nurla> migration and adding new nodes to 5.0 envs
16:07:56 <mihgen> angdraug: #170
16:08:00 <mihgen> expected to be
16:08:17 <mihgen> angdraug: what's the status on release notes readiness ?
16:08:41 <nurla> ywe checked Meg's review
16:08:45 <angdraug> aside from one entry that I've posted a question about (network verification), it's all done
16:09:05 <angdraug> all I need is team leads to confirm that we didn't miss any important bugs
16:09:34 <angdraug> after that I'll need 30 mins to 1 hour to go over most recent changes done since yesterday and it will be ready to merge
16:09:52 <angdraug> bookwar: merges to stable/5.0 still go straight to docs.mirantis.com, right?
16:10:10 <bookwar> angdraug: yes
16:10:17 <mihgen> angdraug: ok. So dpyzhov, aglarendil, nurla, you would need to take a look
16:10:27 <aglarendil> ok
16:10:41 <mihgen> Tomas is on vacation, can't see Lukasz around
16:10:41 <nurla> ok
16:10:51 <vkozhukalov> do I need to give them an action?
16:10:57 <mihgen> rvyalov: you too for release notes check
16:11:02 <mihgen> vkozhukalov: pls do :)
16:11:07 <angdraug> also need someone from mos, probably Ruslan
16:11:19 <nurla> or Dima
16:11:39 <rvyalov> ok
16:11:46 <vkozhukalov> #action rvyalov nurla aglarendil dpyzhov  take a look on rc2
16:11:54 <vkozhukalov> moving?
16:12:19 <vkozhukalov> #topic 5.1 CI status
16:12:22 <angdraug> action was to review bugs in 5.0.x and confirm nothing important is missing from release notes...
16:12:34 <mihgen> angdraug: we need to do it for sure
16:12:58 <mihgen> also, nurla promised to come up with HA issues description in terms of probability
16:12:58 <angdraug> we had a lot of CI failures with 5.1 recently, what's the current situation?
16:13:06 <vkozhukalov> #action rvyalov nurla aglarendil dpyzhov  to review bugs in 5.0.x and confirm nothing important is missing from release notes
16:13:16 <mihgen> angdraug: what failures exactly?
16:13:23 <teran> guys do you mean Fuel CI failures or nightly tests?
16:13:32 <angdraug> nightlies
16:13:40 <xarses> mihgen: one or the other bvt fails frequently
16:13:43 <mihgen> ))) let's provide status of all
16:14:03 <mihgen> nurla: we need your team to look into sporadical ubuntu BVT failures
16:14:07 <angdraug> I refuse to make distinction between gerrit triggered jobs and cron triggered jobs when saying "CI" :)
16:14:15 <mihgen> torrent failures were fixed thanks to teran
16:14:52 <mihgen> #action nurla to file bug about Ubuntu sporadic failures (BVT)
16:15:00 <nurla> okay
16:15:17 <vkozhukalov> #action nurla to file bug about Ubuntu sporadic failures (BVT)
16:15:30 <mihgen> aglarendil: if we speak about CI, can you say about astute issues you found?
16:15:39 <mihgen> which make Fuel CI putting -1 now ?
16:15:40 <aglarendil> yep
16:15:53 <aglarendil> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1356954
16:15:54 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1356954 in fuel "successful deployment failed by astute" [Critical,Confirmed]
16:16:09 <aglarendil> I found a bug that despite there are no puppet errors
16:16:16 <aglarendil> astute sets deployment as failed
16:16:20 <mihgen> how can it affect CI though?
16:16:26 <mihgen> we use stable astute there, don't we?
16:16:31 <aglarendil> CI marks good requests with -1
16:16:38 <aglarendil> may be there was a floating bug
16:16:45 <mihgen> do you mean those requests in fuel-library?
16:16:48 <aglarendil> devops guys are going to update ISO on CI nodes
16:16:55 <aglarendil> yep, fuel-library ones
16:17:07 <mihgen> why do we want to update ISO, when did we update it last time?
16:17:18 <mihgen> if it was stable, how comes it is not anymore?
16:17:21 <mihgen> bookwar: ^^^
16:17:22 <angdraug> is there a plan to automatically update ISO as soon as new one passes bvts?
16:18:11 <bookwar> andreaf: there was a plan
16:18:29 <bookwar> oops
16:18:34 <teran> angdraug: ^^^
16:18:42 <angdraug> got it )
16:18:48 <angdraug> what happened to that plan?
16:18:52 <bookwar> but now it takes manual work to decide if iso fits fro ci or not
16:19:03 <angdraug> mihgen: why would we not want to run fuel-library CI on most recent ISO?
16:19:07 <mihgen> bookwar: so question when did you update last time?
16:19:14 <bookwar> bvt doesn't check that iso is suitable for ci
16:19:25 <bookwar> latest iso is 423
16:19:50 <mihgen> aglarendil: so astute should not be a reason of failure in theory
16:19:59 <mihgen> as there is still old version of astute
16:20:07 <mihgen> ok anyway we need to triage it
16:20:08 <aglarendil> mihgen: may be it had this bug
16:20:12 <bookwar> i put info about iso updates on jenkins main page, btw
16:20:21 <aglarendil> mihgen: I saw one, but could not find it in launchpad
16:20:25 <mihgen> I think we should move on and someone should take it
16:20:50 <vkozhukalov> ok
16:21:04 <vkozhukalov> #topic 5.1 bugs status
16:21:16 <bookwar> mihgen: the diagnostic snapshot in this astute launchpad issue is exactly 423, so iso update might help
16:21:39 <angdraug> action for bookwar to update ISO?
16:21:47 <mihgen> please do not update
16:21:54 <mihgen> without proper investigation first
16:21:57 <angdraug> ok, lets take it to ML
16:22:24 <vkozhukalov> current topic is 5.1 bugs
16:22:26 <mihgen> as I say, it was working fine. Now it is not. Nothing changed. Let's find root cause, what still changed
16:22:35 <mihgen> aglarendil: you go with the status ;)
16:22:54 <aglarendil> okay
16:23:09 <aglarendil> we have not yet reached the status good enough to call Hard Code Freeze
16:23:22 <aglarendil> we have a bunch of issues unresolved
16:23:42 <aglarendil> oslo.messaging bug is not yet completely fixed in 5.1 branch
16:23:49 <aglarendil> we still have fuel-library fixes on review
16:24:12 <mihgen> dmitryme: can you comment on oslo.messaging in 5.1 ?
16:24:16 <aglarendil> #link https://launchpad.net/bugs/856764
16:24:20 <angdraug> do we have the fix for 20 nodes bug? python /dev/log? rabbitmq 3.3.5?
16:24:22 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 856764 in oslo.messaging "RabbitMQ connections lack heartbeat or TCP keepalives" [Critical,In progress]
16:24:40 <dmitryme> afaik it is not merged
16:24:53 <mihgen> dmitryme: what do we need to do it?
16:24:54 <aglarendil> python code was merged
16:25:03 <aglarendil> we have two fixes on review
16:25:14 <aglarendil> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/112677/
16:25:15 <aglarendil> and
16:25:25 <aglarendil> #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114282/
16:25:41 <aglarendil> the former depends on the latter one
16:26:00 <aglarendil> keystone bug is here: #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1340657
16:26:01 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1340657 in fuel "[library] 'keystone' delays lead to unstable MOS operations" [High,In progress]
16:26:07 <aglarendil> we are waiting for keystone support
16:26:13 <aglarendil> puppet part is ready
16:26:42 <aglarendil> also we have rsync tuning issue on review
16:26:57 <aglarendil> #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1322577
16:26:59 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1322577 in fuel/5.0.x "rsync puppet modules partial failure breaks deployment" [High,In progress]
16:27:17 <angdraug> mattymo: https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1355347 should be Fix Committed?
16:27:18 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1355347 in fuel "20 nodes, not all are able to get provisioning info from cobbler" [High,In progress]
16:28:28 <mihgen> rabbitmq was mentioned here
16:28:35 <mihgen> as I know msemenov has it ready to go
16:28:36 <vkozhukalov> looks like mattymo isn't here
16:29:07 <aglarendil> mattymo: is here
16:29:09 <mattymo> sorry I was distracted
16:29:28 <angdraug> mattymo: can you confirm that the 20 nodes bug has all the commits that are needed merged?
16:29:32 <mattymo> it is not fix committted. aglarendil asked us to stall merging this fix to astute until MOS hardening team looked at it
16:29:45 <mattymo> I confirm it is good and so does Vladimir Sharshov, but aglarendil blocked the last bit
16:29:47 <mattymo> for astute
16:29:50 <angdraug> it was merged an hour ago
16:29:50 <aglarendil> that's right
16:29:59 <aglarendil> MOS team should verify it
16:30:28 <angdraug> aglarendil: why?
16:30:39 <msemenov> rabbitmq update: we built an ISO with update for ubuntu and centos. Now fuel QA is running tests against it
16:30:40 <msemenov> http://jenkins-product.srt.mirantis.net:8080/view/custom_iso/job/custom_master_iso/31/
16:30:40 <aglarendil> angdraug: because MOS team is responsible for this testing
16:30:41 <angdraug> I thought they were the ones that asked for this patch?
16:30:52 <aglarendil> angdraug: nope. it is release feature
16:31:26 <mattymo> msemenov, you are from the hardening team. can you please take a look at my mail I sent earlier about this?
16:31:30 <angdraug> aglarendil: https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1355347/comments/8
16:31:31 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1355347 in fuel "20 nodes, not all are able to get provisioning info from cobbler" [High,In progress]
16:32:13 <angdraug> fix confirmed to resolve the issue for the original reporter
16:32:15 <dmitryme> angdraug, aglarendil re 20 nodes deployment: we will do it eventually (I think soon) for 5.1
16:32:37 <aglarendil> angdraug: I am waiting for sign off from the ones who are responsible
16:32:41 <aglarendil> angdraug: not from aleksandr_null
16:32:56 <mihgen> dmitryme is responsible for MOS
16:32:57 <angdraug> are you saying aleksandr_null is irresponsible? :p
16:33:14 <msemenov> mattymo, can't found such email from you( can you please resend?
16:33:16 <mihgen> dmitryme: should we close this bug now?
16:33:25 <mihgen> or how do you want to proceed with it?
16:33:36 <mihgen> you can open another if you find issues during testing
16:34:07 <mihgen> aleksandr_null: are you here? if it's fixed for aleksandr_null , then should be fine to close..
16:34:22 <dmitryme> alexander is the original bug filer, if he says it is fixed, I trust him
16:34:46 <mihgen> Folks, we also have a number of issues, criticals basically, with patching
16:34:47 <angdraug> I'll recheck with him later today and reopen if it's still a probelm
16:35:05 <mihgen> like around 5 were reported by Tatyanka_Leontov today..
16:35:09 <angdraug> ouch
16:35:16 <aglarendil> not five
16:35:23 <mihgen> nurla: Tatyanka_Leontov do you think we are in really bad status there ?
16:35:27 <aglarendil> okay, if you want to merge it - just merge
16:35:36 <mihgen> what are your feelings on where we are with the feature?
16:35:53 <mihgen> aglarendil: merge what?
16:36:01 <aglarendil> merge 20-nodes fix
16:36:15 <nurla> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/114247/1
16:37:06 <mihgen> aglarendil: 20-nodes fix merged, nurla - it's another bug
16:37:29 <mihgen> 20-nodes fixes: https://review.openstack.org/113924, https://review.openstack.org/113920
16:37:32 <aglarendil> there are several issues with 20-nodes
16:38:05 <msemenov> mattymo: got it. Actually we in mos-linux don't have even 3 baremetal nodes in the lab (lend it from moscow devops)
16:38:07 <mihgen> well let's clarify tickets / statuses / patches then. I see that bug https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1355347/ should be closed, as it has merged patches
16:38:07 <angdraug> can we please move on to status of patching?
16:38:08 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1355347 in fuel "20 nodes, not all are able to get provisioning info from cobbler" [High,In progress]
16:38:15 <mattymo> still https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113867/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113942/
16:38:21 <mattymo> both unmerged
16:38:33 <vkozhukalov> yes, we still have a lot of stuff to discuss
16:38:37 <vkozhukalov> moving
16:38:43 <mattymo> ok sorry. moving on
16:38:44 <mihgen> msemenov: you can easily request nodes from fuel-devops folks, teran
16:38:56 <vkozhukalov> #topic 5.0.2 - taking 5.1 as a base
16:38:59 <msemenov> mattymo: in future we will have a bigger lab, but now this process is in conversation state
16:39:01 <Tatyanka_Leontov> mihgen: patching status can be found here : https://docs.google.com/a/mirantis.com/spreadsheets/d/1njLJt_fO4zSgZf9JskJZ6JitYawObI8p_iEz5FQ9YBA/edit#gid=0
16:39:16 <vkozhukalov> what this topic is about?
16:39:41 <mihgen> mattymo: oh thanks did not see those. Let's get aleksandr_null and others to review, I think we need those patches
16:40:06 <mihgen> vkozhukalov: dmitryme will provide a status on 5.0.2
16:40:18 <dmitryme> mihgen, sure, thank you
16:40:26 <mihgen> Tatyanka_Leontov: share with anyone pls
16:40:40 <dmitryme> so, today we checked and found that 5.1 does not have any migrations
16:40:49 <dmitryme> which means that it could be used as a base for 5.0.2
16:40:51 <msemenov> msemenov: ok, I can try to request it from Igor S. But why it's our task instead of fuel-qa team?
16:41:10 <mihgen> Tatyanka_Leontov: looks mature :) with many red cells .. :(
16:41:20 <dmitryme> the idea is to copy 5.1 to 5.0.2 and so we will have similar OpenStack in 5.0.2 and 5.1
16:41:31 <dmitryme> I would say, almost identical
16:41:43 <mattymo> msemenov, I think you meant to address mihgen and aglarendil
16:41:47 <dmitryme> which is our desire actually
16:41:49 <msemenov> mattymo: may be I'm not in context
16:42:05 <mihgen> dmitryme: so this is going to be something between 2014.1.1 & 2014.1.2 ?
16:42:21 <dmitryme> ou, and by the way people, I am speaking of OpenStack compoents only, not Fuel
16:42:27 <dmitryme> mihgen: right
16:42:32 <mihgen> and delta between 5.1 & 5.0.2 will be as minimal as possible (ideally no delta), right?
16:42:41 <dmitryme> mihgen: exactly
16:43:09 <mihgen> dmitryme: excellent. Do we expect to get it done tomorrow?
16:43:19 <mihgen> and start testing tomorrow I hope?
16:43:20 <dmitryme> yep, lets do it
16:43:24 <dmitryme> https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1356817
16:43:25 <uvirtbot> Launchpad bug 1356817 in fuel "[OSCI] New branches for MOS 5.0.2" [High,Won't fix]
16:43:37 <mihgen> rvyalov: what's the status on ^^^ ?
16:43:38 <dmitryme> I am moving this bug to confirmed meaning OSCI team can proceed
16:44:00 <dmitryme> mihgen: it was ‘won’t fix’ so far
16:44:08 <rvyalov> we waiting approved from MOS team
16:44:20 <vkozhukalov> 15 minutes and 5 topics
16:44:21 <dmitryme> meaning we wanted to make sure we want 5.1 in 5.0.2
16:44:31 <mihgen> rvyalov: dmitryme is the approval guy
16:44:43 <dmitryme> rvyalov: I’ve moved it to confirmed
16:44:50 <vkozhukalov> lets move on
16:44:51 <mihgen> vkozhukalov: we will be quick
16:44:51 <dmitryme> rvyalov: please proceed
16:44:55 <rvyalov> ok
16:44:56 <mihgen> thanks dmitryme
16:45:00 <vkozhukalov> #topic Current master Astute issue
16:45:07 <dmitryme> thank you guys, I have to go
16:45:13 <mihgen> vkozhukalov discussed actually
16:45:16 <mihgen> let's move ahead
16:46:10 <vkozhukalov> #topic 6.0 plans
16:46:39 <mihgen> for 6.0, we don't have much time. We have huge thing to do is to consume Juno release and make it reliable being deployed by Fuel
16:47:08 <mihgen> so idea for 6.0 is to concentrate on Juno, and might be do a few minor features, not related to deployment
16:47:23 <mihgen> as any deployment feature would depend on Juno working
16:47:38 <mihgen> so it will stay on critical path, putting itself under high risk
16:47:42 <xarses> when are we going to start getting juno packages?
16:47:50 <xarses> ie from master?
16:47:53 <mihgen> it started
16:47:55 <vkozhukalov> what about nailgun plugins? and image based provision?
16:48:00 <mihgen> rvyalov: dmitryme do you guys know about it?
16:48:15 <mihgen> vkozhukalov: nailgun plugins is fine, as it doesn't touch deployment
16:48:16 <vkozhukalov> are those supposed to be addressed in 6.0?
16:48:24 <rvyalov> we building 90% openstack packages from master
16:48:42 <mihgen> image based provisioning seems to me more risky but should be fine too if we merge only tested things, making sure they work
16:49:14 <mihgen> something like any neutron plugin, NSX, anything like that sounds to me unrealistic
16:49:29 <vkozhukalov> the idea is to merge those review requests about image based right after 5.1 and start to test them
16:49:39 <mihgen> also I think we need to finally put xarses ML2 puppet code
16:49:53 <aglarendil> and merge all left upstream puppet modules
16:49:59 <mihgen> vkozhukalov: let's build custom iso first, test, and fix all blockers first :)
16:50:23 <vkozhukalov> 10 minutes
16:50:30 <mihgen> If we merge all in one day without proper testing, we gonna end up with mess and sleepless nights
16:50:38 <mihgen> so let's do things wisely
16:50:54 <vkozhukalov> moving?
16:51:06 <vkozhukalov> #topic Still open blueprints on 5.1
16:51:16 <mihgen> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/test-patches
16:51:24 <mihgen> Tatyanka_Leontov: it's still deployment?
16:51:31 <mihgen> or can be closed as Implemented?
16:51:33 <mihgen> nurla: ^^^
16:52:08 <nurla> closed
16:52:13 <mihgen> excellent
16:52:17 <mihgen> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/build-packages-for-openstack-master-rpm
16:52:19 <mihgen> rvyalov: ^^^
16:53:05 <rvyalov> yes , it blueprint in progress
16:53:22 <mihgen> when do we expect it finished?
16:53:57 <mihgen> is it still good progress?)
16:54:36 <rvyalov> yes, eta 21 aug
16:54:51 <vkozhukalov> any other un-addressed BPs?
16:54:59 <mihgen> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/vcenter-documentation-update-fuel-5.1
16:55:18 <mihgen> anyone from that area here?
16:55:30 <mihgen> don't know nick of assignee
16:55:56 <mihgen> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/osci-gerrit-to-dmz
16:55:58 <mihgen> rvyalov: ^^
16:56:05 <mihgen> what about this one?
16:56:31 <vkozhukalov> 3 minutes
16:56:35 <dpyzhov> regarding vcenter documentation I know that it is almost done
16:56:52 <rvyalov> yes, new  osci gerrit deploy in public. we synced projects from old gerrit
16:56:56 <mihgen> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/fuel-web-docs-dev-env-restructure -- christopheraedo, yours
16:57:05 <mihgen> rvyalov: so it's done?
16:57:10 <mihgen> or we keep the status
16:57:26 <mihgen> we don't have much time left, so while waiting for responses on bps
16:57:31 <rvyalov> yes its done
16:57:36 <mihgen> on advanced networking in 6.0
16:57:43 <mihgen> frankly I don't think it's doable
16:57:46 <vkozhukalov> lets move our disscussion to #fuel-dev, we still have two other topics
16:57:53 <mihgen> but we should address most annoying bugs
16:58:04 <mihgen> and work on this in parallel track up until 6.1 I think
16:58:17 <akasatkin> we had a discussion on networking in 6.0 on cross-team syncup yesterday. agenda and results are here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/networking-in-6-0-agenda , https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/fuel-us-eu-sync
16:58:37 <mihgen> akasatkin: ok I'll take a look
16:58:42 <akasatkin> Open question from agenda is: pluggable networking. It's moved out of 6.0.
16:59:16 <mihgen> thanks folks
16:59:20 <mihgen> I think we need to write up
16:59:34 <mihgen> left questions - please email to openstack-dev
16:59:56 <vkozhukalov> thanx everyone
17:00:02 <vkozhukalov> closing
17:00:06 <vkozhukalov> #endmeeting