00:01:12 #startmeeting Networking FWaaS 00:01:13 Meeting started Thu May 12 00:01:12 2016 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is SridarK. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 00:01:14 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 00:01:17 The meeting name has been set to 'networking_fwaas' 00:01:20 #chair xgerman 00:01:21 Current chairs: SridarK xgerman 00:01:27 o/ 00:01:58 thx all for joining and lets get started. 00:02:03 #topic FWaaS current state 00:02:19 Some updates from the last few days 00:02:58 With the merge of #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/223343/ in neutron - FWaaS is broken. What initially seemed like something that could be fixed within the scope of FWaaS - does not seem so. 00:03:14 sadly 00:03:51 njohnsto_: , mfranc213 , padkrish and i have been triaging this to get an understanding of what is needed 00:04:21 Essentially the FWaaS Agent which resided in L3Agent - now is out. There were plans to have the ability for L3Agent to load Service Agents in a clean manner and some work is needed on this. 00:04:48 We have raised this with the L3 team and thanks Nate for capturing the issue in: 00:05:02 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1580239 00:05:04 Launchpad bug 1580239 in neutron "[RFE] Add agent extension framework for L3 agent" [Wishlist,New] 00:05:36 We hope to have a discussion in the L3 team meeting tomorrow 00:05:49 njohnsto_: thx again for getting this filed 00:06:09 +1 00:06:09 I have started on a draft spec (unpublished) but I don't feel like enough of the details are known to intelligently describe a proposed solution. 00:06:55 njohnsto_: that is fair - hopefully some discussion with the L3 folks will help get the details flushed out 00:07:16 SridarK: that is my hope 00:08:57 Unfortunately, until we have some resolution - we really cannot have anything merge in FWaaS 00:09:14 :-( 00:09:23 Completely stuck. 00:09:51 and we dont see some easy way to solve this in FWaaS 00:10:32 For my part, I have the L3 extension as top priority, but if that is blocked I will work on doing any fleshing out of the DB model. 00:10:47 njohnsto_: +1 00:11:36 that is kind of where things stand - we hope to get some resolution and a way fwd soon 00:12:06 any other thoughts or suggestions ? 00:12:27 SridarK: oh well... nothing much else we can actually do 00:12:36 s3wong: yes 00:13:42 Does this mean we will be in a separate process like Octavia or code loaded into L3 like QoS is in L2? 00:13:42 njohnsto_: i will join u in the L3 mtg and will certainly help in any way possible 00:14:03 SridarK: very much appreciated 00:14:20 njohnsto_: if we are a separate process then we may need the appropriate hooks 00:14:43 clearly the inheritance model that was present was not desirable 00:14:59 indeed 00:15:04 njohnsto_ I assume we will be a plugin. dougwig has said that this should work for projects not in the neutron repo 00:15:19 I can see why they wanted to get that inheritance model deleted 00:15:25 but either an option to load service agents or something else along those lines should be the model 00:15:55 njo 00:16:06 xgerman: +1 that will enable other projects to let their agents reside in the context of L3Agent 00:16:28 njohnsto_: I agreed. Sucks for us, but I do think it is cleaner on l3agent perspective 00:17:01 the inheritance model existed as there was no other option 00:17:26 and oddly fwaas and vpnaas went in slightly different directions too 00:17:42 definitely a cleaner model is needed 00:17:46 After the L3 meeting we can confer with the LBaaS team and the VPNaaS team (if there is such a thing) to get their buy-in/help. 00:18:10 yeah, LBaaS doesn’t use L3 00:18:13 njohnsto_: if i am not mistaken LBaaS has no such dependency 00:18:18 they do everything over the API 00:18:23 xgerman: +1 00:18:41 OK 00:18:57 Lets hope for a good discussion tomorrow 00:19:39 I am not sure if reverting the patch will even be considered 00:19:54 It won't be considered 00:19:59 I doubt it 00:19:59 I agree, I think we are past the point of no return 00:20:10 so if there is a quick solution that will get us going that is our only hope 00:20:21 i feel so too 00:21:05 At least we can demonstrate momentum, commitment, and contribution to the greater Neutron community. 00:21:13 njohnsto_: +1 00:21:19 +1 00:21:24 and this is an enabler 00:21:35 for such service models 00:22:17 Yes 00:22:30 Ok lets quickly hit other topics 00:22:39 #topic FWaaS v2 00:23:49 so while this issue gets sorted - we can try to get some momentum on our patchsets - we may need to get creative on how we test things out 00:24:01 L2! 00:24:19 at least with the EXT - Db - Plugin can move fwd 00:24:28 and mickeys: yes L2 for sure 00:24:29 SridarK: wouldn't our CI reject all the patches (or we don't have func-test)? 00:24:39 s3wong: yes that is the problem 00:24:59 we can keep working them 00:25:32 in an ideal situation - if the situation with L3 gets resoloved - we will atleast have some work done to get merges to happen 00:25:49 at a later point 00:25:56 We can also prep a patch to fix all the neutron_lib deprecation notices 00:26:08 njohnsto_: true 00:26:26 but i think we need to have some basic functionality w.r.t v2 done as well 00:27:35 yes 00:29:46 So since we know we will not be inheriting from L3NATAgent can we set up a new ancestor stub to inherit from, and unwed get unit tests? 00:30:05 s/unwed/unwedge/ 00:31:02 makes sense 00:31:59 njohnsto_: for UT yes we could do some thing not sure on functional tests - i have not looked at that recently - i know madhu_ak and others were moving things there 00:32:31 so we may still have an issue on merge, but njohnsto_: good thought 00:32:50 madhu_ak is likely off the project 00:33:03 xgerman: ok 00:33:50 mickeys: u were talking abt a patch needed in neutron to clean up things around iptables for multiple features 00:34:00 Yes. I have not started that yet. 00:34:09 mickeys: ok 00:34:57 I think if you run with security groups disabled you could do something without it. Otherwise the change will be needed 00:35:57 that might be a good way to start 00:36:19 mickeys: ok and we should be targetting this anyways for the v2 effort 00:36:24 So did madhu_ak have changes that were in-progress that someone needs to pick up? 00:37:11 SridarK: Yes it is necessary for the v2 effort 00:37:11 njohnsto_: he was cleaning up things around the functional tests - will need to double check 00:38:41 njohnsto_: i will reach out to him 00:39:07 SridarK: thanks 00:39:12 We can atleast get things lined up on areas that need attention 00:39:33 that will be goodness anyways 00:39:40 even if merging is an issue 00:39:48 now 00:39:50 SridarK let me know if you can’t get through to him - I have a more direct channel :-) 00:40:10 xgerman: ok thx will appreciate ur help 00:40:53 Anything else to discuss on v2 ? 00:41:32 For the new contributors feel free to reach out to folks for any help needed 00:42:00 SridarK: sure, will be reaching out to xgerman soon 00:42:17 padkrish: great 00:42:34 Sure will do 00:42:49 chandanc: ok 00:42:56 #topic Meeting time 00:43:25 I think we have had some inputs on the meeting time that is favorable to all 00:44:09 chandanc: Sarath: What would be the earliest time that would be reasonable to u guys 00:44:36 so we can make it easy on njohnsto_ and mfranc213 on the US Eastern 00:44:51 we can also continue the discussion on the email thread 00:44:54 9:30 India is good time for me 00:45:10 yes 00:45:14 but is it Ok for other people too 00:45:40 That would be 11pm Eastern 00:46:06 9:30am New Delhi time? That is fine with me 00:46:19 SridarK: no problem with me 00:47:14 So am I right, that would be 0400 UTC? 00:47:16 +1 00:47:27 it say 9 pm pacific for me 00:48:08 njohnsto: yes 00:48:31 Excellent 00:48:34 ok we can close out on the email and we can update 00:48:58 #topic Open Discussion 00:49:01 Thanks everyone 00:49:31 chandanc, NP 00:49:40 I can be backup meeting chair for SridarK, to provide a second so you don't have to xgerman 00:49:58 thanks, appreciated 00:50:07 njohnsto_: sounds good thx 00:50:19 njohnsto_: Can you send us your draft spec ? or may be after the meeting with L3 team 00:51:07 After the L3 meeting, I will get it into a better form and send it. 00:51:18 sure 00:51:38 And then we can hopefully get more feedback in the neutron-drivers meeting. 00:52:05 njohnsto_: +1 00:52:14 #action njohnston to send spec after L3 meeting 00:52:39 padkrish, hi. I'd like to share about current status for FWaaS v2 l2-agent. 00:52:58 yushiro# sure 00:54:04 padkrish, OK, thanks. I've just come back from holidays. I'll send e-mail to you. 00:54:25 yushiro# sure, pls do..will sync up 00:54:43 padkrish: yushiro: thx 00:55:02 Anything else anyone would like to bring up ? 00:55:45 I am good 00:55:50 +1 00:56:12 all good 00:56:17 ok then folks have a good rest of the week. Thx for joining 00:56:17 +1 00:56:25 Thanks 00:56:30 Thanks 00:56:31 #endmeeting