18:00:24 #startmeeting gluon 18:00:25 Meeting started Wed May 31 18:00:24 2017 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is bh526r. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:26 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:00:28 The meeting name has been set to 'gluon' 18:00:39 #topic Roll Call 18:00:45 #info Bin Hu 18:00:50 hi 18:00:55 #info Paul Carver 18:00:55 Hi Paul 18:01:22 Hi all 18:01:28 #info JinLi 18:01:35 Hi Jin 18:02:10 Paul, I kept on receiving emails regarding ice cream social, pop corn social etc. in New Jersey :) 18:02:30 You guys are cool 18:03:20 Looks like only 3 of us 18:03:26 Yeah, apparently the new organization has an admin who sends that sort of stuff to everyone 18:03:26 #topic Admin Update 18:03:52 I wish she could ship some to me :) 18:04:29 #info No admin update 18:04:54 #topic Pike Release Update 18:05:28 Jin, I tried to merge Version management patch https://review.openstack.org/#/c/459894/ 18:05:39 But failed in Jenkins 18:05:41 yes, I am looking at it 18:05:58 looks like both of my patches fail on the same error 18:06:09 That's right. 18:06:14 Recheck didn't work 18:06:32 NoSuchOptError: no such option api in group [DEFAULT] 18:06:52 Was it because of some sort of deprecated lib in other projects, like oslo? 18:07:01 Very strange error 18:07:14 don't know yet, 18:07:22 need to look more into it 18:07:53 I think it could be deprecated lib 18:08:13 or related to doc utils 18:08:34 Can you also ping Tin and see if he has clue? 18:08:39 yes 18:08:42 I will 18:08:55 Great 18:09:10 I think he also rechecked my patches yesteray 18:09:31 will talk to him later today 18:09:37 Yes, he did. But didn't work 18:09:49 sounds good. 18:09:53 hopefully we can find out whats going on by end of day 18:10:06 that will be awesome :) 18:10:52 Not sure if Ian is here or not 18:11:39 We need his update regarding more details proposal of integrating with Neutron 18:11:58 And Sukhdev 18:12:38 Armando gave some comments on his 2 RFEs regarding Neutron improvement 18:13:04 I still don't really understand Ian's explanation of why we need a network type field that's separate from the already existing network_type field 18:13:04 We need Sukhdev's further action 18:13:45 His explanation is that semantically, we cannot mix 2 types of networks in one field 18:14:05 so existing network_type field is for different types of L2 networks 18:14:18 yeah, I understood the words but don't see what the reason is 18:14:29 And a new network type field for new L3 networks 18:14:34 I don't see where it is stated that network_type can only hold L2 values 18:14:51 other than Ian saying it I mean 18:14:52 It doesn't say, but current usage is for L2 18:15:11 I've hear Ian say it many times, but I haven't heard anyone else say it, nor seen it in any documentation 18:16:20 It is not documented, I guess because it is designed for L2 at the beginning, so I assume it didn't mention it because it was a no-brainer at that time 18:16:58 But the usage, and current values are all for L2 18:17:40 So if we put L3 values there, it could be confusing 18:18:05 So Ian thinks it is a cleaner method to have a new network type field dedicated to L3 networks 18:19:00 Hi, sorry I am late 18:19:12 Hi Kamil, how are you? 18:19:19 Thank you for joining 18:19:23 I was on week vacation 18:19:28 Great, thanks :-) 18:19:33 How is your vacation? 18:19:34 I guess we should find out if any neutron cores are confused. The review comment seemed more confused by why we would want to add an additional network type field. 18:20:12 That's right. 18:20:29 Unless there are actual problems in the code, it would seem simpler to write some documentation that explains what the valid values of the existing field are and document that it can distinguish both L2 and L3 network types 18:21:03 Otherwise we need to write documentation explaining the difference between the two network type fields or that'll cause confusion as well. 18:21:21 Right. 18:21:44 Confusing one way or the other. So documentation is critical here 18:22:04 We need to see more details from Ian and Sukhdev regarding their new thoughts of how to integrate with Neutron. 18:22:27 Then we can revisit those 2 RFEs, and revise our approach 18:23:56 @krenczewski, welcome back, and hope you have had great time on your vacation 18:24:31 What is your plan for next week (after you are back :)? 18:24:36 It was great, I am working now on documenting the whole Contrail installation process 18:24:45 Excellent. 18:24:49 Thank you 18:25:18 It is not so easy to do everything right to deploy contrail so it works 18:25:57 It may be that I forgot about something and need to look into same topic again 18:25:57 That's right, lots of complex configurations to deploy Contrail to make it work. 18:26:14 Anyway I am making constant progress 18:26:24 :) It always happens. So documentation is very important 18:26:26 And I can see the finish line in couple next days 18:26:49 Great, thank you. 18:26:49 I hope I am correct with my estimations 18:26:56 :) 18:27:01 krenczewski: I'll try following your instructions and let you know if anything doesn't work 18:27:34 OK Paul, I'll let you know when I finish 18:27:41 #info Kamil is working documenting the deployment process to make Contrail work with Gluon framework 18:28:26 #info Ian and Sukhdev are working on more details regarding how to integrate with Neutron 18:28:37 #info There are recent comments on 2 RFEs 18:29:14 #info After Ian and Sukhdev finish those details, we will revisit those 2 RFEs, and revise our approach if needed 18:29:34 #info Jin is debugging the Jenkins failure 18:30:17 Anything else from anybody? 18:31:16 If nothing else, we may finish earlier today, and give back everyone 30 minutes 18:31:36 Paul can enjoy ice cream, pop corn, or whatever social :) 18:32:04 #info Meeting adjourned 18:32:20 Thank you everyone, and hope we will have more to share and discuss next week 18:32:28 Thanks 18:32:50 Bye all 18:32:54 #endmeeting