17:00:49 #startmeeting network_common_flow_classifier 17:00:50 Meeting started Tue Jul 5 17:00:49 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is cathy_. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:00:51 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 17:00:54 The meeting name has been set to 'network_common_flow_classifier' 17:01:01 hi there 17:01:27 hello cathy_ 17:01:30 Hey! 17:02:33 anyone else joining this meeting? Sorry It was US National holiday and long weekend. I did not send out meeting reminder notice. 17:03:08 I'm pinging ajo 17:03:17 hope you've had a great 4th of july 17:03:29 igordcard: thanks 17:03:45 hi , I'm on another company meting, I didnt' realize we had this 17:03:48 I'll try to be on both 17:03:51 ping me when necessary 17:04:08 ajo: sorry about this. I forgot to send out the meeting notice due to holiday 17:04:36 np, ping me when you think it's relevant, I will try to follow the meeting 17:04:43 igordcard: davidsha I do not have any urgent issues on my side 17:05:03 igordcard, Louis and I have worked on the spec and posted it for review 17:05:18 So I think we need to wait for more people's review comments 17:05:25 cathy_: it's now reposted in neutron-specs 17:05:31 cathy_: all your content preserved 17:05:42 igordcard: Ok 17:05:49 link? 17:06:09 igordcard: I see some comments. would you like to respond to it? 17:06:12 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333993/ 17:06:20 thanks davidsha 17:06:36 davidsha: thanks 17:06:50 cathy_: yes, I'd appreciate more feedback on approach (at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/333993/) 17:07:01 cathy_: I'm also going to provide more feedback about at least approach 1 17:07:18 igordcard: Ok. 17:07:50 Regarding the bug status, looks like it is not in rfe-approved yet 17:08:18 I see Armando's comment and he would like more clear description of the spec. 17:08:52 igordcard: I assume that you will reply to Armando's comment. OK with you? 17:09:28 He's reviewing the spec as well, so the conversation will probably be moved to there now. 17:09:32 cathy_: yes we need to converge on an approach so we can then start discussing the internals, which seems to be what armax is mostly looking for 17:10:09 cathy_: any specific comment? 17:10:49 igordcard: you can probably first reply to his comments inline. We can then discuss the approaches in next meeting when more people will join. 17:11:04 I will send a reminder of the meeting next time. 17:11:47 Let's continue working on the spec and comments. 17:12:12 cathy_: sure I'll be replying to the best I can, especially for approach 2 17:12:35 cathy_: but please check as well since there might be questions or doubts about the other approaches too 17:12:51 cathy_: yeah 17:12:52 igordcard: OK 17:13:16 I guess we can end the meeting today and resume in two weeks 17:13:25 igordcard: davidsha OK with you? 17:13:39 also, he's commented in the RFE and pointed to the following neutron-drivers meeting minutes: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/neutron_drivers/2016/neutron_drivers.2016-06-30-22.00.log.html#l-86 17:13:42 kk, just to throw it out there PS 2 of flow manager is up 17:14:17 davidsha: could you clarify what you mean? 17:14:27 there PS 2 of flow manager is up? 17:14:37 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/323963/ 17:15:29 flow table management it the WIP to ajos spec. 17:15:31 Which spec are these codes for? 17:15:42 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/320439 17:15:58 awesome davidsha, I'll have a review of it too 17:16:08 davidsha: thanks, will take a look and ask others to review too 17:16:24 igordcard, cathy_ : thanks 17:16:31 davidsha: welcome! 17:16:56 Ok, bye for now. talk to you later. 17:17:17 #endmeeting