15:01:32 #startmeeting neutron_l3 15:01:32 Meeting started Thu Jun 12 15:01:32 2014 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is carl_baldwin. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:01:33 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:01:36 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_l3' 15:01:46 hi 15:01:56 #topic Announcements 15:02:18 Juno-1 is today. 15:02:27 hi 15:02:32 hi 15:03:25 If you’re going to the mid-cycle sprint for nova/neutron parity, you’ll want to have booked your travel. Kyle sent an email about the hotel block. 15:03:34 #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/neutron-juno-mid-cycle-meeting 15:04:19 #topic Bugs 15:04:28 #link https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bugs?field.tag=l3-ipam-dhcp 15:04:47 I haven’t seen any new bugs of High Importance or higher. 15:06:06 I don’t see Swami here. We’ll leave DVR for last. 15:06:16 #topic l3-high-availability 15:06:22 safchain: hi 15:06:45 carl_baldwin, hi 15:06:46 Anything new this week? Looks like there were a few questions on the blueprint. 15:07:28 carl_baldwin, started to discuss with the dvr team, trying to address some comments 15:07:39 carl_baldwin, feel free to add yours 15:08:10 I have not revisited the bp this week. I will do so today. 15:08:21 carl_baldwin, seems there is a lot of dependencies with the dvr, I will have to rebase my proposal on it 15:08:24 #action carl_baldwin will revisit l3-high-availability bp 15:08:30 safchain: anything else? 15:08:40 carl_baldwin, ok for me 15:09:19 safchain: thanks 15:09:28 #topic neutron-ipam 15:09:37 Hi 15:09:41 seizadi: hi 15:09:52 roaet_: ping 15:10:07 We have a few reviewers of the bp but no comments. 15:10:15 seizadi: I did an initial read through of your blueprint but have not finished my comments. 15:10:33 I added a handful of reviewers to it as well. 15:10:49 Great, we are trying to meet the Juno2 date but need the comments to scope the effort 15:10:51 I think Juno-1 may have taken reviewers’ energies this week. 15:11:03 OK 15:11:25 That 15:11:35 is it for this week. 15:11:55 seizadi: One thought that I had when I read through it is that I think I’d like to see IPAM decoupled from the DHCP implementation. 15:12:41 I realize that they may be coupled in some external implementations but decoupling them wont’ prevent an implementation from implementing both. 15:12:45 Any thoughts? 15:12:50 Yes, we wanted to decouple DHCP and DNS from bp. If there is anything like that point it out. We might have missed something. I will look at it again. 15:13:50 I will read through it again and add my comments soon. 15:14:12 #action carl_baldwin will also review neutron-ipam bp. 15:14:18 seizadi: anything else? 15:14:19 The IPAM driver is abstract class, we will have couple implements one that does what the current functionality and one that will talk to our Infoblox solution. 15:14:40 No other update. 15:14:52 seizadi: thanks 15:15:10 #topic bgp-dynamic-routing 15:15:40 nextone92: devvesa: ping 15:15:49 hi 15:16:21 nextone92 is not available today 15:16:30 okay. Updates? 15:16:41 hi 15:16:53 I summited a new patch based on the conversation we had after the meeting 15:16:56 yamamoto: hi 15:16:56 about the use cases 15:17:27 but i've been busy in other stuff this week and I haven't played with the Ryu bgp speaker 15:17:39 devvesa: Yes, I need to review that update as well. I’ve had juno-1 blinders on for a week or so. 15:17:56 ryu team is working on new api which is hopefully easier to use than the current one 15:18:06 http://sourceforge.net/p/ryu/mailman/message/32434586/ 15:18:59 but I understand the current bgp speaker is part of the whole ryu library 15:19:13 are you planning to update the neutron dependency? 15:19:26 ? 15:19:55 i mean, ryu is a dependency of neutron, right? 15:20:17 ryu plugin and ofagent depends on ryu 15:21:04 neutron’s requirement.txt doesn’t have ryu 15:21:07 do you mean this? 15:21:10 yes 15:21:18 ok, then forget it 15:21:34 yamamoto: Do you need input from us for this work? 15:21:46 the current practice is install ryu with pip when using ofagent or ryu plugin 15:22:06 yes we love to hear opinions from neutron folks 15:23:21 yamamoto: Could the speaker be broken out into a library? 15:23:41 what do you mean? packaging? 15:23:48 More or less, yes. 15:24:23 bgp-only library is preferable? 15:24:58 We’ll have a core piece of neutron depending on ryu so I think it would be added as a formal dependency. I’m just wondering if that would be easier with a bpg-only library. 15:25:13 I’m not really stating any requirements yet. Just thinking out loud to get your thoughts. 15:25:20 yamamoto: that would be great for me 15:25:23 ok, i’ll discuss the possibility with the rest of ryu folks 15:25:35 yamamoto: Thanks. 15:25:45 but installing the whole ryu and just using only bgp part should be fine 15:25:48 btw, yamamoto: do you think is better that i use the current development branch with the new API 15:25:58 unless you concern disk space :-) 15:26:15 devvesa: Will you be able to review their new API? 15:26:20 devvesa yes 15:26:46 but the patch i mentioned with the above url has not been merged yet 15:27:02 i’ll tell you when it’s merged 15:27:06 great 15:27:25 when do you estimate it will be? 15:28:00 hopefully by early next week 15:28:03 devvesa: A review of the unmerged code would be good. If we have any feedback, it could be worked in before merge. 15:28:51 ok! 15:28:52 yea, the patch above have a comment which has a usage example 15:29:26 #link http://sourceforge.net/p/ryu/mailman/message/32434586/ 15:29:34 (better to come back later) 15:29:57 we want to hear on which event you want callbacks 15:29:57 #action devvesa will review BGP speaker API. 15:30:31 devvesa: Feel free to pull me in for discussion. I’ll be a bit scarce over the next week but I’ll check in on email. 15:30:46 Anything else on this topic? 15:30:53 nothing from me 15:30:58 nothing from me neither 15:31:24 yamamoto: devvesa: thank you. 15:31:45 thanks to you 15:32:01 #topic neutron-ovs-dvr 15:32:28 thank you 15:32:34 A lot of the DVR team are on vacation this week. 15:32:47 Is anyone here to represent the DVR team? 15:33:16 I can give a report. 15:33:42 A few patches on the dvr topic merged for juno-1. However, the bulk of the work is still under review. 15:35:17 The team has completed all of the features internally and are busy pushing patches up now. 15:36:27 This is a top priority for the Neutron team. 15:36:30 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/q/topic:bp/neutron-ovs-dvr,n,z 15:36:57 I put some notes for reviewers on the this link: 15:37:08 #link https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/DVR/HowTo 15:37:29 I’ve started adding notes about the deployment of DVR as well to this page. 15:38:15 I’m building a reference two-node devstack system. If anyone would like help building a system of their own, I can give you access to mine to use as reference. 15:38:23 Contact me out of band for details. 15:39:00 chuckC: Related to this topic, is there anything that you have to discuss? 15:39:32 not much, still getting my 2-node devstack system going 15:39:46 I'll be helping out with system testing 15:40:29 chuckC: That will be great. 15:41:10 Are there others with interest in testing the DVR code? 15:42:19 chuckC: I can work with you on this a bit. I’ll be continuing to work on my reference system. 15:42:24 We need help from folks with related experience 15:42:43 carl_baldwin: thanks 15:42:57 chuckC: noted, I will engage a few cores with testing skills for discussion. 15:44:22 #topic Open Discussion 15:45:07 carl_baldwin: For client validation removal. See you signed up for that. Thanks! 15:45:30 carl_baldwin: Should the resolution be to convert the enum attributes to strings? 15:45:41 pcm_: Did I miss your topic? 15:45:49 Sure, but np 15:46:18 #topic l3-svcs-vendor-* 15:46:27 Sorry for the oversight. 15:46:32 np 15:46:49 BP for vendor validation was approved. Appreciated the reviews. 15:47:14 pcm_: Great. 15:47:30 Having a bit of problem with UT for VPN code for this. Making changes now. Hope to push out Fri or Mon 15:47:37 pcm_: I might have missed something in my patch. 15:47:39 (side tracked by other items) 15:48:24 For the client side validation removal, I saw you sign up for it. Thanks! Is there a patch out? 15:48:50 pcm_: Did you see the patch I put up? I think what I did was to effectively remove the enum and accept any string. 15:49:11 #link https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99437/ 15:49:27 carl_baldwin: Not yet. Will look for it. Cool I was wondering if that would be the right thing to do (enum->string) 15:50:09 Will review today. 15:50:30 Appreciate you grabbing that. I've been swamped. :( 15:50:39 That's all I have. 15:50:45 It was a really easy change. That’s why I took it on. I needed something easy to get through because I was stuck on everything else I was trying to do yesterday. :) 15:51:20 :) 15:51:33 pcm_: Let me know if you want to discuss about the unit tests. I’ll be around today but not tomorrow. 15:51:42 * pcm_ knows exactly what you mean from this week 15:52:34 carl_baldwin: Will do. I think I have it sorted out. Purely an issue with mocking. 15:52:50 Cool. Let me know. 15:52:59 Will certainly seek you and others out! 15:53:08 pcm_: Thanks for your report. I won’t leave you out next time. 15:53:19 no problemo 15:53:31 #topic Open Discussion 15:55:37 Thanks everyone. 15:55:44 #endmeeting