18:31:56 #startmeeting networking_fwaas 18:31:57 Meeting started Wed Mar 2 18:31:56 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is sc68cal. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:31:58 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 18:32:00 The meeting name has been set to 'networking_fwaas' 18:32:06 hi 18:32:15 * xgerman will be distracted today with some LBaaS discussion in another channel 18:32:18 o/ 18:33:04 so the agenda today is pretty light I think, I think most of us are busy on other things :( 18:33:18 yep 18:33:25 +1 18:33:34 same here :( 18:33:35 lets do a quick run thru of things 18:35:48 so on my end, it's been the same - basically no time to update any of the fwaasv2 patches 18:36:08 on v2 i think we are in a holding pattern with a few things to get resolved in all areas 18:36:54 agreed 18:37:30 Is there need to resolve particular issue(s) to unblock things, or is it just a time issue? 18:37:43 I have not had time to update my fwaasv2 patch either, and Sukanya has not really gotten started on coding and testing fwaasv2 and security groups co-existence. We know how we want to approach it, just need to free up time to get it done. 18:38:07 jwarendt: i think it is a mix of both 18:38:07 capacity for me 18:38:53 same on our end 18:39:31 we probably should schedule a bigger discussion given the lack of interest in V2 in the community if we are on the wrong path 18:40:04 I think we are on the right path, but we need some thrust to bring it back to life 18:40:28 xgerman: good point but i have seen interest from folks i have spoken to 18:40:37 mickeys: +1 18:41:07 i think we can continue with our patch sets to target N1 18:41:14 +1 18:41:39 yeah, just wanted to play devil’s advocate here... 18:41:51 this cycle in itself is a bit distracted with the holidays and given that we got our spec stuff done sort of in M2 18:41:53 agree- I thin N will be when capacity frees up 18:42:29 i hope we can just move the spec for quick approval for N 18:42:44 so we get more time on coding cycles 18:43:32 ok, sound good to me. 18:44:48 ok looks like we are all on the same page 18:45:52 +1 18:47:30 anything else? or we can end early 18:47:42 just one more thing from me 18:47:51 i will be quick 18:48:03 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/278863/ 18:48:27 jwarendt: thanks for getting on as well, this definitely needs more work 18:48:59 i will reach out to the submitter to have a discussion to get some closure 18:49:11 Yes - am strongly for the observer pattern, as current code has hard calls to process_router_add etc. Just needs to be done well. 18:49:43 jwarendt: also some underlying assumptions are based on the specific vendor implementation 18:49:58 this does not hold completely 18:50:07 will be good if we can get this in 18:50:26 since it is technically a bug fix - we may have a bit more time 18:50:52 thats all from me 18:50:57 we nevertheless should alert dougwig/armax 18:51:11 * dougwig raises head. 18:51:17 Current FWaaS code also has holes - for example, doesn't get notified when a router gets deleted, or if a router sets admin_state_up to False - that observers can help with, if we need a bug to drive. 18:51:36 xgerman: ok sounds good - lets make sure that the submitter gets the fixes in 18:51:36 dougwig we might need an extension for https://review.openstack.org/#/c/278863/ 18:51:46 if you guys can get rid of neutron deriving from fwaas, i'd wager we can find it an exception. that code path is crazy 18:51:47 it;’s technically a bug fix 18:51:58 but wanted to make you aware 18:52:03 dougwig: ok good it does fall there 18:53:00 jwarendt: yes u are correct, we can keep it separate from this patch - so we can atleast push to get this in 18:55:10 i think otherwise on reviews we are good 18:56:44 If others have nothing else to bring up we can end early ? 18:56:56 Nothing from me. 18:57:06 yep, ending early would be good we have a meeting in 3 18:57:14 ok, until next week 18:57:20 #endmeeting