21:02:15 <markmcclain> #startmeeting Networking 21:02:16 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Feb 17 21:02:15 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is markmcclain. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 21:02:17 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 21:02:19 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'networking' 21:02:21 <armax> hello 21:02:55 <markmcclain> #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Network/Meetings 21:03:03 <markmcclain> #topic Announcments 21:03:34 <markmcclain> #info Oleg Bondarev (obandarev) is our newest core reviewer 21:03:40 <markmcclain> Welcome to Oleg! 21:03:55 <mestery> Congrats obandarev! 21:03:56 <marun> welcome! 21:04:00 <nati_ueno> hi! 21:04:01 <emagana> Congratulation obondarev 21:04:16 <markmcclain> #info Feature proposal deadline is the end of day tomorrow (Feb 18th) 21:04:18 <nati_ueno> Congrats obondarev 21:04:41 <pcm_> yea! 21:05:03 <amotoki> congrats oleg 21:05:35 <markmcclain> #link https://launchpad.net/neutron/+milestone/icehouse-3 21:06:02 <markmcclain> We have many blueprints that do not have any code associated with them 21:06:32 <markmcclain> I will move any blueprints that do not have associated with them out of Icehouse 21:06:47 <salv-orlando> markmcclain: that will be tomorrow right? 21:07:08 <salv-orlando> just saying because I have one for which I'm finishing the code, and I was planning to push it tomorrow 21:07:14 <markmcclain> salv-orlando: correct.. as long as it is Feb 17th somewhere in the world, code can be submitted 21:07:24 <salv-orlando> ah I thought 18th 21:07:34 <markmcclain> if there oops you're right 18th 21:07:52 <salv-orlando> ok, that's fine then 21:08:08 <gongysh> oops? :( 21:08:27 <salv-orlando> yeah gongysh markmcclain had a kernel panic 21:08:27 <markmcclain> gongysh: sorry forgot to delete 'if' 21:08:30 <salv-orlando> he's rebboting now 21:08:42 <gongysh> :) got it. 21:09:04 <markmcclain> end of the day Feb 18th is the cutoff 21:09:53 <markmcclain> if there is an important blueprint that needs an extension, please send me a PM and we can discuss the options 21:10:29 <markmcclain> after the cutoff we'll spend time reviewing and revising 21:11:17 <markmcclain> Note: this deadline only applies to features and not bugs 21:11:22 <markmcclain> Questions? 21:11:42 <nati_ueno> markmcclain: so codes shouldn't be WIP? 21:12:05 <markmcclain> nati_ueno: correct the proposal must be ready for review 21:12:13 <nati_ueno> markmcclain: gotcha 21:12:44 <markmcclain> #topic bugs 21:13:02 <markmcclain> The gate has been fairly stable since we got all of the fixes in place 21:13:09 <markmcclain> we're currently working on new client release 21:13:16 <markmcclain> Any other bugs the team should discuss? 21:13:59 <markmcclain> #topic Docs 21:14:02 <markmcclain> emagana: hi 21:14:08 <emagana> markmcclain: Hi There! 21:14:41 <emagana> In order to keep it short I have updated the wiki with the list of high priority bugs 21:15:06 <emagana> most of them should be completed by this week (short fixes) 21:15:08 <markmcclain> great thanks for updating the wiki 21:15:37 <emagana> I have requested the entire team to create BP or bugs or any new feature to be follow in icehouse 21:16:08 <emagana> So, just a kind reminder.. besides all new drivers in services I have not seen any major feature change 21:16:22 <markmcclain> seems like we need to crosscheck any commit messages with DocImpact 21:16:38 <markmcclain> to make sure there is the corresponding doc fix or bug 21:17:05 <markmcclain> emagana: currently right now we have not merged any major changes 21:17:18 <markmcclain> I expect we'll have a few land over the next two weeks 21:17:23 <emagana> markmcclain: what about OVS and LinuxBridge code? 21:17:24 <markmcclain> Anything else? 21:17:42 <markmcclain> emagana: until we have a migration script we'll have to carry them 21:17:57 <markmcclain> hopefully we'll get more info in the ML2 update section 21:18:01 <emagana> markmcclain: Got it! 21:18:14 <emagana> ML2 team, please point me to any BP describing this process. 21:18:14 <markmcclain> #topic Nova Parity 21:18:19 <markmcclain> emagana: thanks for the update 21:18:19 <beagles> hi! 21:18:23 <markmcclain> beagles: hi 21:18:44 <beagles> not much movement last week, many of the reviews that were pending still are... maybe because of the sync up? 21:19:07 <markmcclain> yeah a good chunk of the Nova team was in the meeting 21:19:27 <markmcclain> I know I went through and looked at many of the Nova reviews 21:19:38 <beagles> sweston and I were like ships in the night and missed each other, so we are going to sync up immediately after this meeting 21:19:55 <markmcclain> ok 21:20:23 <markmcclain> Anything else? 21:20:23 <beagles> but that's pretty much it for now 21:20:33 <markmcclain> beagles: thanks for updating 21:20:50 <markmcclain> a few extra Nova bits 21:21:19 <markmcclain> First, it was good to sit down with many of the Nova core team last week 21:21:38 <markmcclain> we were able to talk about ways to improve the workflow a bit 21:21:54 <markmcclain> arosen1 has been working on a few of these items 21:22:22 <markmcclain> one of the items the Nova team did ask is that when changes are made the Neutron module within Nova that we get a Neutron core to look at the changes 21:22:52 <markmcclain> a review looking at the changes from the Neutron perspective if very helpful for them 21:23:17 <gongysh> definitely 21:23:25 <mestery> good idea markmcclain 21:24:06 <beagles> was there discussion about interaction with the VIF plugin? 21:24:27 <markmcclain> beagles: a little bit 21:25:05 <markmcclain> we discussed a few ways to make Nova wait until Neutron has notified that the port is ready before booting 21:25:26 <markmcclain> Any other Nova items? 21:26:15 <markmcclain> #topic Tempest 21:26:17 <markmcclain> mlavalle: hi 21:26:20 <mlavalle> hi 21:26:40 <mlavalle> The group contributing to api tests has been chugging along 21:26:52 <markmcclain> You sent out an update via email earlier today: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027362.html 21:26:54 <markmcclain> #link http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027362.html 21:26:59 <mlavalle> earlier today I sent a message to the ML 21:27:20 <mlavalle> with all the patch sets classified to make it easy to cores help us review the code 21:27:40 <mlavalle> as you can see in the message, we are covering the complete api 21:27:41 <markmcclain> that email was very helpful, thank you for sending it out 21:28:05 <mlavalle> we are in a good position to be done by the end of ichouse 21:28:15 <mlavalle> icehouse^^^ 21:28:22 <markmcclain> that's great news 21:28:56 <mlavalle> I am also planning to create a view in gerrit, to make it even easier to review 21:29:06 <markmcclain> awesome 21:29:08 <mlavalle> that was an idea from the qa irc meeting of last week 21:29:26 <markmcclain> that's a good one 21:29:27 <mlavalle> that's all I have, thanks 21:29:43 <markmcclain> any questions on Tempest? 21:30:21 <enikanorov_> i have one, but i'd like to leave it to open discussion 21:30:27 <enikanorov_> it mostly technical 21:30:30 <markmcclain> enikanorov_: ok 21:30:39 <markmcclain> we'll move for now then 21:30:50 <markmcclain> #topic L3 21:31:04 <markmcclain> Doesn't look like carl_baldwin is around today 21:31:43 <markmcclain> There was a meeting of the folks interested in DVR last week 21:32:48 <markmcclain> #link https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1XJY30ZM0K3xz1U4CVWaQuaqBotGadAFM1xl1UuLtbrk/ 21:33:06 <markmcclain> Those are the latest slides for more info please be sure to join their IRC meeting 21:33:11 <markmcclain> #topic IPv6 21:33:14 <markmcclain> sc68cal: hi 21:33:49 <sc68cal> hello 21:33:56 <sc68cal> There is nothing to really report since last week 21:34:07 <markmcclain> ok 21:34:22 <markmcclain> just need to get some review attention, right? 21:34:41 <sc68cal> yes 21:35:22 <markmcclain> ok 21:35:30 <markmcclain> Any questions on IPv6? 21:35:48 <markmcclain> #topic ML2 21:35:56 <markmcclain> mestery, rkukura: hi 21:36:35 <mestery> markmcclain: hi! 21:37:08 <markmcclain> this was raised earlier.. what is the status on the migration blueprint? 21:37:09 <mestery> So, the main item here is that the Migration tool BP still doesn't have any code pushed out yet. 21:37:10 <mestery> #link https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/ml2-deprecated-plugin-migration Migration Tool BP 21:37:20 <mestery> Without that, we can't start deprecating Linuxbridge and OVS plugins 21:37:23 <markmcclain> correct 21:37:36 <mestery> rkukura and I got ahold of the assignee, but no code has been proposed yet. 21:38:04 <mestery> So, it's kind of stuck right now I think. 21:38:21 <rkukura> Would this be a candidate for an extension if someone else picks it up and does something as simple as possible? 21:38:59 <marun> markmcclain: I'm willing to take it on. 21:39:12 <mestery> marun: That would be awesome! 21:39:18 <markmcclain> marun: thank you for stepping up 21:39:27 <rkukura> marun: +1 21:39:57 <markmcclain> rkukura: yes this is definitely a candidate for an extension 21:40:54 <markmcclain> Besides a more reviews anything else to highlight? 21:41:14 <rkukura> nothing else new I can think of 21:41:16 <mestery> Reviews for all the MDs proposed would be great to get from cores markmcclain 21:41:58 <rkukura> all the generic stuff needed for SR-IOV is in review 21:42:05 <markmcclain> ok and I've cleared any -2s due to testing requirements? 21:42:09 <rkukura> on the neutron side, but not on nova 21:42:41 <mestery> rkukura: I thought the PCI stuff on nova was moved out of Icehouse now by Russell? 21:42:48 <mestery> I thought I saw an email about that. 21:43:13 <mestery> I think his reasons were review cycles this late in Icehouse, let me find that and send it to you rkukura. 21:43:35 <rkukura> mestery: Most likely some nova pieces won't make icehouse, but we should get the generic support into neutron if possible 21:43:47 <mestery> rkukura: Agreed on that point. 21:44:36 <markmcclain> ok.. if there are any bits that are not generic let's temporarily move them to WIP 21:46:14 <mestery> That's all on ML2 from me this week. 21:46:16 <markmcclain> looking at https://review.openstack.org/#/c/73500/ 21:46:31 <markmcclain> that's the generic one we need to merge early right? 21:46:45 <rkukura> markmcclain: one of them 21:47:24 <rkukura> markmcclain: others are https://review.openstack.org/#/c/72452/ and https://review.openstack.org/#/c/72334/ 21:48:10 <markmcclain> ok 21:48:21 <markmcclain> I'll work on getting reviewers for those 21:48:25 <markmcclain> Any other ML2 items? 21:48:29 <rkukura> markmcclain: thanks! 21:48:36 <rkukura> none from me 21:48:41 <mestery> None here 21:49:05 <markmcclain> #topic VPN 21:49:17 <markmcclain> nati_ueno: do we have the agent code yet? 21:49:18 <markmcclain> or is it likely to miss? 21:49:53 <nati_ueno> markmcclain: sorry disconnected 21:49:56 <nati_ueno> so topic is vpn? 21:50:06 <markmcclain> nati_ueno: no worries 21:50:19 <markmcclain> yes was wondering that status of the agent 21:50:36 <nati_ueno> We have WIP code for agent, and me and Rajesh is working on it. I think we can make it ready for review until tommorow 21:50:55 <markmcclain> nati_ueno: ok 21:50:57 <markmcclain> Anything else? 21:51:03 <pcm_> markmcclain: FYI, rebased VPNaaS Service Type Framework server code and updated review. 21:51:14 <markmcclain> pcm_: thanks 21:51:16 <nati_ueno> I'll update wiki for how to use it 21:51:20 <nati_ueno> pcm_: Thanks. 21:51:25 <nati_ueno> That's all from me 21:51:28 <pcm_> nati_ueno: np 21:51:34 <pcm_> need reviews of it. 21:52:04 <nati_ueno> it is great if we can have Service Type Framework and SSL-VPN in icehouse 21:52:18 <markmcclain> ok 21:52:30 <pcm_> i have vendor plugin out now and it depends on STF 21:52:35 <emagana> nati_ueno: Could you also update docs besides the wiki? 21:52:43 <nati_ueno> emagana: sure 21:52:51 <emagana> nati_ueno: Thanks! 21:52:52 <markmcclain> the important thing is that we get them right 21:53:02 <markmcclain> #topic FWaaS 21:53:09 <pcm_> i've been running STF for months now 21:53:23 <markmcclain> Looks like we have several items needing review 21:53:28 <SumitNaiksatam> hi 21:53:35 <SumitNaiksatam> yeah, things are ripe for review 21:53:50 <SumitNaiksatam> as with VPNaaS, STF is waiting for another core 21:54:16 <SumitNaiksatam> once, that gets in we have the firewall insertion patch 21:54:17 <markmcclain> I added a comment about the relative lack of tests for that change 21:54:19 <markmcclain> <10% of code 21:54:27 <SumitNaiksatam> STF? 21:54:51 <markmcclain> yes 21:54:55 <SumitNaiksatam> ok, i see that 21:54:59 <markmcclain> Anything else on FWaaS? 21:55:11 <SumitNaiksatam> turning fwaas on in the gate 21:55:40 <SumitNaiksatam> running FWaaS tempest tests will require that 21:55:55 <markmcclain> I think we're probably ready to add it 21:56:04 <SumitNaiksatam> ok 21:56:06 <markmcclain> let's wait until Thursday 21:56:14 <SumitNaiksatam> sure, whenever you decide 21:56:30 <markmcclain> I'll follow up with on Thursday 21:56:33 <markmcclain> #topic LBaaS 21:56:36 <SumitNaiksatam> sure 21:56:58 <markmcclain> enikanorov_ and I have been discussing models in the main channel, so I know the status of the subteam 21:57:04 <enikanorov_> hi, so we have to put on hold l7 feature until the isntance approach is sorted out 21:57:10 <markmcclain> #topic Open Discussion 21:57:21 <markmcclain> enikanorov_: you had an open discussion topic 21:57:35 <enikanorov_> yeah, that's a question about lbaas tempest scenario 21:57:47 <markmcclain> we only have 3 minutes, so may have to jump over to -neutron to finish discussing 21:58:02 <enikanorov_> may be someone culd tell if running http backends on the host (instead of tenant network) is a good idea 21:58:13 <enikanorov_> that could save a VM spinup 21:58:29 <enikanorov_> but maybe it's not a real-life case 21:58:53 <marun> i'm not of the opinion that we need vm's for all network testing 21:59:04 <marun> unless there is vm-specific config required 21:59:21 <markmcclain> so this would be spinning up a server process in a namespace? 21:59:29 <enikanorov_> marun: agree. but then loadbalancer will access members which are out of tenant network 21:59:34 <markmcclain> and then having it load balanced? 21:59:38 <enikanorov_> markmcclain: no 21:59:52 <enikanorov_> we can't do so because in that case test will not be generic 22:00:03 <enikanorov_> so other solutions (other than haproxy) will not work 22:00:25 <markmcclain> yeah I think we should spin up the members as normal 22:00:29 <markmcclain> even if it is slower 22:00:45 <markmcclain> otherwise we're testing a case that isn't representative of deployment 22:01:00 <enikanorov_> ok, good to know your opinion 22:01:10 <enikanorov_> so in fact we have 2 patches (with both variants) 22:01:19 <markmcclain> ok.. I'll look for them 22:01:22 <enikanorov_> so far i tend to go with VM approach as well 22:01:32 <markmcclain> Ok we're over our allotted time 22:01:34 <salv-orlando> the only item I had is that we're adding parallel testing in non voting mode: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/74131/ … I've run some parallel tests already with 'check experimental', and I'm quite positive we can switch the test to voting before I-3 deadline. The only observed issue so far is the 'famous' SSH protocol banner error, which however seems related to floating IP reassignment. I will look into that, I'm not even sure whethe 22:01:35 <salv-orlando> it's a neutron or testing issue. 22:01:39 <enikanorov_> especially when other approach not working well :) 22:02:01 <markmcclain> salv-orlando: +1 to enabling parallel testing 22:02:30 <salv-orlando> as long as it works quite reliably I'm happy too. But we should triage it as non voting for 1-2 weeks 22:02:37 <salv-orlando> at least 22:02:42 <markmcclain> agreed 22:03:34 <markmcclain> Thanks to everyone for stopping by this week. We have a lot of exciting items in review. 22:03:49 <markmcclain> #endmeeting