09:10:11 <aspiers> #startmeeting ha
09:10:12 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Dec  5 09:10:11 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is aspiers. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
09:10:13 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
09:10:15 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'ha'
09:10:21 <ddeja> o/
09:10:28 <aspiers> ddeja, haukebruno: I guess we'll start, maybe others will join in a bit
09:10:40 <aspiers> #topic specs
09:11:03 <aspiers> so I totally forgot to submit that spec after last week's meeting so I submitted it last night
09:11:14 <aspiers> I made some more improvements to it too
09:11:26 * ddeja adds to review queue
09:11:31 <aspiers> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/406659/
09:11:56 <aspiers> however I realised that the template does not quite have the perfect structure for it
09:12:10 <aspiers> and that is causing the tests to fail when run locally
09:12:17 <ddeja> oh
09:12:27 <aspiers> I didn't yet check why the Jenkins check is passing
09:12:44 <aspiers> actually I'm not even sure how to see the build log
09:12:53 <aspiers> since it's not linked from gerrit any more
09:12:59 <aspiers> :-/
09:13:42 <aspiers> oh crap, looks like I uploaded an old version
09:14:11 <ddeja> OK, so I'm waiting with reviewing
09:14:14 <ddeja> :)
09:15:16 <aspiers> uploading a new one now
09:15:22 <ddeja> cool
09:16:26 <aspiers> done
09:16:53 <aspiers> let me know what you think about the new section structure
09:17:04 <ddeja> right now?
09:17:07 <aspiers> no :)
09:17:14 <aspiers> I tried to emphasise the line between the architecture and the actual implementation
09:17:32 <ddeja> that's good
09:17:39 <aspiers> to make sure each component stays compatible whilst remaining independent
09:17:47 <aspiers> no coupling between components
09:17:58 <aspiers> I wasn't too sure about the work items though
09:19:04 <beekhof> oh goody, we;re having a meeting :)
09:19:14 <aspiers> :)
09:19:16 <ddeja> \o/
09:19:21 <aspiers> next spec for me is libvirt OCF RA
09:20:39 <ddeja> it's already in review, isn't it?
09:20:40 <aspiers> beekhof: I took the liberty of giving you the work item around the ha-guide, but I will try to help with that
09:20:58 <beekhof> ok :)
09:21:06 <aspiers> ddeja: I don't think so?
09:21:19 <beekhof> back in 10
09:22:28 <ddeja> aspiers: oh, so I must have confuse it with something else
09:22:34 <aspiers> no problem
09:26:06 <aspiers> sorry, simultaneously in my team's standup meeting
09:26:49 <ddeja> like on IRC or skype?
09:27:00 <aspiers> on VoIP (mumble)
09:27:04 <aspiers> will be finished in a sec
09:27:14 <aspiers> there is one detail missing from the compute node monitoring spec
09:27:33 <ddeja> which is?
09:27:42 <aspiers> getting the link
09:28:23 <aspiers> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/newton-instance-ha line 135
09:28:33 <aspiers> ddeja: this was something discussed in Barcelona
09:28:49 <aspiers> and line 140-141
09:29:33 <ddeja> but this is about host recovery, not monitoring?
09:29:40 <aspiers> so the idea was to make fence_evacuate implement not just the spec but also an extra feature of being able to notify masakari
09:30:05 <aspiers> although now I can't remember why masakari can't just be modified to accept the same format
09:30:25 <aspiers> ddeja: well, it's about the message passed between monitoring and recovery
09:30:34 <ddeja> ok
09:30:46 <ddeja> by fence_evacuate you mean the resource agent?
09:30:57 <aspiers> no the fencing agent you wrote
09:31:05 * ddeja is getting lost in all names...
09:31:08 <aspiers> :)
09:31:08 <ddeja> OK
09:31:43 <ddeja> IMO we should provide minimal script
09:32:11 <ddeja> or separate script for masakari
09:32:18 <ddeja> so we can keep it simple
09:32:32 <aspiers> that's true
09:32:37 <aspiers> although they might have a lot of shared code
09:32:49 <beekhof> back
09:32:51 <aspiers> also I was wondering where is the best home for fence_evacuate.py
09:33:02 <ddeja> python script with shared base class?
09:33:04 <aspiers> beekhof: I added you to this review
09:33:10 <aspiers> ddeja: yeah maybe
09:33:42 <ddeja> I'm just against mixing two mechanisms in one fence agent
09:34:09 <ddeja> that's where my conserns came from
09:34:14 <aspiers> ok
09:36:22 <beekhof> fence what?
09:36:30 <beekhof> what does this agent do?
09:36:40 <aspiers> beekhof: notify the recovery workflow controller
09:36:53 <ddeja> POC agent that sends API call to mistral
09:36:54 <aspiers> beekhof: it's basically fence_evacuate.py
09:37:11 <aspiers> but we want to support notifying masakari too
09:37:55 <ddeja> That's too bad that there is no NTT guys, but I'd like to ask it anyway: Why?
09:38:09 <beekhof> they cant use fence_compute?
09:38:13 <ddeja> I mean, what value is added by Masakari?
09:38:23 <aspiers> ddeja: quite a lot these days, actually
09:38:27 <aspiers> ddeja: it got a lot better
09:38:44 <aspiers> ddeja: if you look in new big tent gerrit repos
09:39:00 <ddeja> OK, so it would be for, hmm, easier transition?
09:39:59 <ddeja> to be well understood: I'm not saying that Masakari is not needed. I just want to better understood what happend in Barcelona :)
09:40:22 <aspiers> ddeja: NTT could probably implement the masakari interface bit
09:41:05 <ddeja> OK
09:41:35 <aspiers> ddeja: the long-term idea would be for masakari to receive the notification and then optionally pass it on to mistral
09:41:50 <aspiers> sorry, VoIP meeting is distracting again
09:42:25 <aspiers> ddeja: so mistral would be used to implement the recovery, and masakari would implement the policy
09:42:33 <ddeja> oh, OK
09:42:41 <ddeja> what happend to congress?
09:42:47 <ddeja> as a policy engine?
09:43:00 <aspiers> that could happen in the longer term
09:43:15 <ddeja> OK
09:43:36 * ddeja starts to understand it
09:47:31 <aspiers> #topic meeting time
09:47:44 <aspiers> would people be ok with moving the meeting to another day?
09:47:50 <aspiers> Monday's are really difficult for me
09:47:58 <beekhof> yes
09:48:13 <aspiers> and it would be nice to have some time to prepare for the meeting which is not Sunday
09:48:26 <aspiers> I guess we need to keep the same time due to timezones
09:48:27 <ddeja> every day except Friday fits me (if it stays around morning in UTC)
09:48:48 <aspiers> ddeja: ok thanks
09:49:03 <aspiers> I think Wed/Thurs would be best for me
09:49:11 <aspiers> we often have meetings on Mon/Tues
09:49:19 <aspiers> beekhof: any preference
09:49:36 <beekhof> tuesday is good
09:49:38 <aspiers> I can submit a review for the day change and add everyone to review it
09:49:43 <beekhof> but wednesday can also work
09:49:51 <beekhof> thursday is out
09:51:00 <aspiers> ok
09:51:04 <aspiers> I'll submit for Wed then
09:51:08 <aspiers> thanks
09:54:54 <aspiers> #topic AOB
09:54:59 <aspiers> anything else?
09:55:07 <ddeja> nothing from my side
09:55:11 <aspiers> sorry, I am still in this other important meeting, difficult to multi-task
09:55:27 <ddeja> no problem
09:58:24 <aspiers> alright, I guess we can end if nothing else
09:58:27 <aspiers> thanks all
09:58:30 <aspiers> see you in gerrit :)
09:58:33 <aspiers> #endmeeting