14:00:20 #startmeeting fwaas 14:00:21 Meeting started Tue Sep 19 14:00:20 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is yushiro. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 14:00:22 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:00:24 guys I will join in 5 minutes 14:00:25 The meeting name has been set to 'fwaas' 14:00:32 just came from gym and well... 14:00:42 hello all 14:00:42 o/ 14:00:44 #chair xgerman_ yushiro 14:00:44 Current chairs: xgerman_ yushiro 14:01:07 hi 14:01:17 #chair SridarK 14:01:18 Current chairs: SridarK xgerman_ yushiro 14:01:19 Hi FWaaS folks 14:01:32 OK, let's begin :-) 14:01:33 we should probably give a summary of the PTG 14:01:41 hi 14:01:47 +1 14:02:00 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-queens-ptg 14:02:10 #topic PTG 14:02:20 i thought it was a very productive set of discussions 14:02:25 Thanks xgerman_ for link. 14:02:58 Ok, we had the discussion enhancing SG vs. FWaaS V2 come up again and the community feels we should focus on FWaaS V2 though their patience is getting limited 14:03:09 +1 14:03:25 which means we *really* need to deliver this cycle 14:03:33 i think we should wrap up the L2 support asap 14:03:37 +1 14:03:46 +100 14:03:51 yeah. 14:03:53 :) 14:03:54 and we are in a good position to do so 14:04:25 i believe we closed out on any outstanding issues 14:04:36 we also chatted with the CCF person and SridarK offered to write a spec how we integrate with common classifiers 14:05:05 yes Thomas Morin was the contact 14:05:35 although it was our opinion that this is still at an early stage 14:06:06 yes, they are looking for people adapring it 14:06:07 and we have a plan on how to effect this - i will start putting that in a writeup that can become a RFE 14:06:15 +1 14:06:53 we also decided to submit documentation alongside code where feasible 14:07:16 back 14:07:17 #action create doc directory structure in FWaaS project 14:07:37 SridarK : I would like to assist u in the CCF part 14:07:42 xgerman_, will do it ASAP!! 14:07:56 thanks yushiro 14:08:14 reedip_: sure but this is probab more towards the end of the cycle - we will wait on things to be completed on the CCF side 14:08:20 but surely thx reedip_ 14:08:32 Yes, I will be working a bit there as well to sync things up 14:08:47 reedip_: ok thats grt 14:08:55 we also went over the “state machine” for L2 aka PENDING->… etc. 14:09:03 So, writing document is helpful for reviewer. 14:09:10 +1 14:09:17 +1 14:09:22 Yes, I took a snapshot of it , I think 14:09:57 and i think there are some subtleties there too with multiple ports - but lets not confuse that part yet so we can get the support in 14:10:10 +1 14:10:18 Each patch should be added document. L2-agent, default FWG, ... 14:10:35 essentially - on events intiated from the agent - we question the need for a PENDING_ state - we can skip that 14:10:35 +1 14:10:58 i think that was a good discussion to go thru the workflows 14:11:11 agent restart we were considering throwing the system in 503 until we have recovered 14:11:35 SridarK +1 good discussion 14:11:37 i think that unblocks issues around L2 agent patch 14:11:55 Ah, OK. 14:13:16 Then we had some issues sorted out on handling the L2 agent restart - thanks to amotoki and iwamoto 14:13:17 hmm .. 14:13:30 the use of cookies to flush out stale entries 14:13:31 yes, the cookies :) 14:13:40 :-) 14:13:58 So, let me explain about remaining v2 patches detail TODO. 14:14:07 After v2 topic. 14:14:12 yushiro: yes perfect 14:14:12 yushiro : please also mention the person responsible 14:14:14 one sec 14:14:14 s/After/During. 14:14:29 so that we can ghave multiple people working on things together without conflicts :) 14:14:43 lets do a quick wrap up of PTG and then maye u can get it into this each as a topic 14:14:52 +1 14:15:05 reedip_, +1 14:15:06 any questions about the PTG? 14:15:07 i think one more thing that xgerman_ added on appliances 14:15:18 and LBaaS use cases 14:15:26 yes, LBaaS 14:15:29 i think this is important to look at as well 14:16:02 since xgerman_ had some usecases in mind and we can work with the LBaaS team to come up with some solutions 14:16:43 yes, I can help guide… 14:16:47 SridarK, xgerman_ ah, 1 missed thing about PTG. Please let me talk after that. 14:17:01 k 14:17:28 xgerman_: there was some early discussion on how to use. neutron port 14:17:38 but we can add some material on that 14:18:06 yep, we really need to understand which ports work with our system and which ones don’t (and fix that). 14:18:26 one more thing - i ran into a vendor (Netronome) who also had interest in some parts of it - they said they will try to attend our mtgs 14:18:28 In LBaaS hardware vendors where wondering how to integrate with FWaaS 14:18:51 or better leverage 14:18:55 +1 14:19:08 also we need to add more tests 14:19:22 +1 14:19:45 i think that in itself is a full plate 14:20:19 but i think we cannot state enough the need to stay focussed to wrap up the L2 support 14:20:31 the summit is just abt 6 weeks away 14:20:35 +1 users are waiting for those features 14:20:39 we should get that done before that 14:20:55 oh, anybody going to the summit? 14:21:07 so far looks like i will be able to go 14:21:12 fingers crossed 14:21:34 sweet - there was an e-mail and deadline ywo weeks ago about project update talks 14:22:03 xgerman_: hmm - i defn missed that 14:22:17 ok will look for that 14:22:33 yeah, maybe they still have slots + forum 14:22:54 xgerman_: ok will sync up with u on tht offline 14:23:07 i think that was a PTG dump - i dont have anything more to add 14:23:14 questions? 14:23:22 hi, just got home. 14:23:32 looks like PTG wrapup 14:23:34 amotoki: hi 14:23:39 hi 14:23:40 amotoki: yes :-) 14:23:44 :-) 14:23:54 amotoki, hi 14:24:28 yushiro: if nothing else - can u go to individual topics - we can discuss action items and owners 14:24:34 I think PTG discussion on FWaaS almost focused on L2 stuff but it was useful 14:24:42 move on please 14:24:56 amotoki: yes indeed the Fri discussion was very useful - thx 14:25:01 Aha, so let me talk about PTG topic regarding for wekly meeting. 14:25:08 yes 14:25:25 Currently, our meeting is weekly on Tuesday at 1400 UTC. On the other hand, 14:25:26 CCF and neutron meeting will be held at same time. 14:25:53 yushiro: ah yes 14:25:53 I'd like to suggest to shift our meeting time except CCF and neutron. 14:26:17 bbzhao: what is ur local time now ? 14:26:40 SridarK,: It's 22:26 now. 14:26:43 eezhova, Could you tell me your timezone. If you know, plz tell me Inessa's one. 14:26:47 ah ok 14:27:26 because any later will be very late for Japan 14:27:26 This time is OK now. :-) 14:27:28 yushiro, 17-26 local time now TZ UTC+3 14:27:53 ivasilevskaya1, Thanks. 14:28:06 I'm always wake up, so it's OK :-) hahaha 14:28:14 :- 14:28:16 ) 14:28:18 we can also try a different day - same time 14:28:22 to summarize: UTC+9 for yushiro and me, UTC+8 for bbzhao, UTC+3 for ivasilevskaya1 14:28:24 maybe 14:28:28 xgerman_: exactly 14:28:35 UTC+4 for eezhova 14:28:42 amotoki, yep. :-) 14:28:52 amotoki, Thanks. Can I send e-mail into openstack-ml for voting? 14:29:02 absolutely 14:29:15 folks, please reply my e-mail for meeting time !!! 14:29:20 yushiro: you should be another person for "When do you sleep" award :) 14:29:26 :-) 14:29:32 #action yushiro sends an e-mail for FWaaS meeting time 14:29:40 yushiro: i think same time diff day will be easier 14:30:06 SridarK, xgerman_ OK, i'll suggest it. 14:30:10 UTC + 530 for me 14:30:10 lets have a quick discussion to close that here - so we find the best day for the usual attendeed 14:30:21 reedip_, thanks 14:30:39 I think it is worth mentioned why in the mail of call for meeting time. 14:30:48 I think we can have it same time tomorrow ? 14:30:57 amotoki, OK, will add :) 14:31:04 reedip_: yes that works 14:31:16 how about others ? 14:31:17 fwaas meeting conflicted with neutron biweekly, but in Queens we plan to explore CCF integration as neutorn stadium effort 14:31:20 xgerman_: and i are in Pacific 14:31:37 so it now means full conflict (weekly) with neutorn and CCF 14:32:18 even if we move it forward by 24 hrs would that work for all here 14:32:19 this is the background of this discussion (for folks who could not be at Denver) 14:32:37 amotoki , bbzhao , yushiro , ivasilevskaya1 : moving the meeting to Wednesday same time ? 14:33:03 reedip_, SridarK +1 So, I'll send ML for 'why' ( amotoki mentioned above ) and altenative day (tomorrow same time ) as a candidate. 14:33:04 reedip_, : OK. sounds good for me. :-) 14:33:15 yushiro: +1 14:33:39 +1 14:33:45 i think it took a lot to come up with this time when we last discussed - so just moving the day will be easier 14:33:49 to me, it works and does not. we usually have local meetups on Wed and Fri, so late night of Wed/Fri soemtimes does not work for me 14:33:56 ^ for Wed option 14:33:59 ah 14:34:21 so what about Thursday ??? The time I think is best suited to everyone, the date needs vote 14:34:28 that's my case. I am not sure it applies to yushiro 14:34:32 s/date/day/ 14:35:08 lets see if we can converge on a day that works for all 14:35:15 OK, so, I'll add more candidate days (Thursday or ...) 14:35:27 How abt Mon ? 14:35:35 +1! 14:35:42 SridarK : Lets have a vote on this in the ML 14:35:51 too many options.... 14:35:52 we can avoid Fri since it will late Fri eve in Asia 14:36:01 http://doodle.com/ is an easy tool for meeting time poll 14:36:07 people can vote for Monday, Wed and Fri 14:36:10 so other than Tue or Fri 14:36:19 hehe 14:36:31 Mon, Wed, Thu 14:36:36 sorry :) 14:36:46 ok lets move on 14:36:58 interestingly enough, Mon/Tue is different depending on your timezone 14:37:00 yushiro: can u pls go to topics and action items 14:37:06 OK. 14:37:07 :-) 14:37:27 #topic Queens 14:37:53 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-queens-ptg again 14:38:25 Let me talk about L2-agent 14:38:45 In PTG, we decided some TODOs. Let me explain step by step. 14:39:07 #link L2agent https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323971/ 14:40:05 1. We don't need to have 'enable_l2' option for enable/disable functionality. Because L2 functionality is NECESSARY feature and shouldn't be disabled. 14:40:41 +1 it will be disabled if the driver is not set 14:41:01 and we conform to SG 14:41:16 +1 14:41:46 Sorry, guys. I have to leave for home, now. I will trace the log, or if there is any problem, I will send u email. Sorry. 14:41:50 2. We should have 'noop' driver for some reason. readability and developer ... 14:42:16 noop is to allow disabling L2 option 14:42:18 3. There are 'TODO' messages from paddu and need to clean up: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323971/54/neutron_fwaas/services/firewall/agents/l2/fwaas_v2.py 14:42:26 bbzhao: ok no worries 14:42:28 without the enable_l2 feature 14:43:01 yushiro: i will sync with paddu on the TODO msgs 14:43:13 SridarK, thanks! 14:43:21 SridarK, : :-) 14:43:55 4. If an error occurred in agent-side, we should change a state 'ERROR' for firewall_group. Because we cannot handle during 'PENDING_xxxx' state. 14:44:30 5. We should add tempest test for L2 agent functionality 14:45:42 yushiro : and fullstack as well ? 14:45:46 6. We should add in-tree 'document' for each patches. 14:45:49 reedip_, ah, yes. 14:46:06 yushiro, by in-tree document you mean an updated spec? 14:46:19 "Because we cannot handle during 'PENDING_xxxx' state" can be rephrased to "because we cannot apply desired state and handle 'PENDING_xxx' state any more" ? 14:46:59 ivasilevskaya1, Correct. Totally same. It is better for you, eezhova and other reviewers/users. 14:47:05 ivasilevskaya1: it is not about neutron-spec. it is about doc/source in neutron-fwaas repo 14:47:28 ivasilevskaya1: yushiro: it depends on what "spec" means 14:48:27 I meant a spec as in spec :) I know there is one for newton but it doesn't fully match the current implementation 14:49:09 This is really a problem for "people from the outside" (like me and eezhova) who want to help but are blocked by this 14:49:43 ivasilevskaya1 : As per friday's discussion, we considered that its better NOT to rewrite the spec but create the actual doc. That would work as a spec as well as a document for new developers 14:49:51 ivasilevskaya1: good point, neutron-spec also needs to be updated if it is different from what is actually implemented. 14:50:11 ivasilevskaya1, yes, that' why I suggested to add doc as in-tree doc. 14:50:18 ivasilevskaya1: as a first step we took an action to review the variations 14:50:24 I don't insist on a spec, but on any actual doc that can answer my tricky questions when they appear 14:50:55 ivasilevskaya1: and we will track the "deltas" in an etherpad - so there is no ambiguity 14:50:58 ivasilevskaya1 : why dont you write it, so that you can answer your own question .... 14:51:06 ivasilevskaya1: as my hat of neutron-drivers team, it is nice if an actual impl is different from what a spec proposes. it decreases confusion from operators/users 14:51:20 ivasilevskaya1: then we can look into overhaul of the spec 14:52:30 let’s see how big the delta is before we overhaul the spec 14:52:43 a spec does not need to match a coresponding impl exactly, but if the direction or the scope is different (e.g., impl lands as partial) it would be nice to update it :) 14:52:43 my concern is to keep the focus on the L2 and Horizon patches at this stage 14:52:44 some variation is expected and normal 14:53:01 ok, that sounds fine 14:53:38 At least we should show for ivasilevskaya1 for latest DB/API, L2-agent behavior and default fwg. 14:53:50 IIRC we have stuck to the broad themes - i think the deviations are due to some things we discovered durig implementation or with more discussion 14:54:02 SridarK : yep 14:54:06 +1 14:54:31 so let’s rather do docs at this stage… 14:54:36 AH!!! 5 minutes left... 14:54:39 we have FWaaS v2 in newton at http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/neutron-specs/ 14:54:45 yes 14:54:47 yes 14:54:54 it is confusing. it might be better to move it to somewhere. 14:55:01 it is at least what we need to do 14:55:14 amotoki: what is ur guidance on this ? 14:55:27 ivasilevskaya1, reedip_ chandanc , could you have 10 minutes after this meeting? I'd like to continue l2 and ovs driver TODO. 14:55:30 yeah, I am always confused if specs get rolled over or stay in the branch they have been proposed 14:55:36 hi guys, just FYI : http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2017-September/122285.html is the email for voting the Timing change for FWaaS. 14:55:51 reedip_, Wow, Thanks!!! so quick. 14:55:58 SridarK: my suggestion is to propose a patch to move FWaaS v2 from newton to queens 14:55:58 yushiro, sure 14:56:12 I was bored :P 14:56:12 amotoki: ah ok 14:56:17 in my understanding, it did not land in newton - pike 14:56:37 amotoki : so can we change the spec in this stage ? 14:56:47 the L2 portions of the spec 14:57:04 reedip_: IMHO it can. 14:57:18 OK, let's take care of it. 14:57:22 SridarK : I think we can propose and then see what Neutron Cores have to say 14:57:29 #topic Horizon support 14:57:30 reedip_: we haven't discussed such thing so far, but IMHO it is okay if the reality is different 14:57:31 at max it would be abandoned, but we will still have the doc 14:58:10 amotoki: ok lets discuss more so we have clarity on it offline 14:58:16 sorry yushiro go on 14:58:25 +1 14:58:29 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/475840/ We should fix firewall-rule selection for fw_policy creation. 14:58:33 i think we only have a few things to close out on Horizon 14:58:47 But root cause is maybe horizon side. 14:58:52 SarathMekala is not here 14:59:02 I and amotoki discussed in PTG about this bug. 14:59:23 should we wait on that fix 14:59:26 I will update it. https://review.openstack.org/#/c/475840/ 14:59:38 aha! it's time. 14:59:45 yes 14:59:48 #endmeeting