15:06:33 #startmeeting neutron_l3 15:06:34 Meeting started Thu Jan 3 15:06:33 2019 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes. The chair is haleyb. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:06:36 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:06:40 The meeting name has been set to 'neutron_l3' 15:07:34 #topic Bugs 15:08:17 There was a new bug filed yesterday regarding IPAM, which is on the l3 spectrum 15:08:31 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1810314 15:08:32 Launchpad bug 1810314 in neutron "neutron objects base get_values() fails with KeyError" [Critical,New] 15:08:44 falls between IPAM and DB 15:09:02 IMO it's failing because of switch to Subnet OVO in IPAM module 15:09:19 and (probably) fix should be somewhere on tricircle's side 15:09:20 slaweq: right, and i didn't know if a quick fix was good or bad 15:09:33 what quick fix? 15:09:36 revert? 15:09:59 slaweq: i think we can tweak get_values() to not fail, but maybe more of a hack 15:10:19 return [c[0] for c in query] 15:10:21 ahh, yes it would be hack IMO 15:10:34 that fails because apparently query = [{}] 15:10:46 I would prefer firts that some OVO expert would take a look at it 15:11:00 njohnston ^^ :) 15:11:10 Yes, let me take a look 15:11:33 haleyb: but if You will change this get_values() function, I think that this test will fail later as this subnet should be created and it wasn't, right? 15:11:33 I'm familiar with that OVO change 15:11:34 slaweq: ack, the quick hack of something like return [c[0] for c in query if c] would fix it, but seemed dirty 15:12:05 having njohnston look would be better than a hack :) 15:12:18 yep, I'll look at it today 15:12:21 +1 15:12:25 thx njohnston 15:13:05 happy to help! 15:13:10 great, thanks njohnston ! 15:13:48 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1809134 15:13:49 Launchpad bug 1809134 in neutron "TypeError in QoS gateway_ip code in l3-agent logs" [High,In progress] - Assigned to Brian Haley (brian-haley) 15:14:01 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/626401/ in progress 15:14:29 i need to address review comments again, but obvious but 15:14:32 s/bug 15:15:44 but I see that even with this patch still many tests in neutron-tempest-plugin-dvr-multinode-scenario are failing :/ 15:16:06 so this wasn't real issue which cause those failures? 15:17:04 i think it fixed some other failures, but not all of them 15:17:14 ok 15:17:27 so we will have to investigate others later :) 15:17:37 I will keep it in mind 15:18:24 yes, i think a lot of the rest were timeout failures 15:19:45 next bug is https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1810349 15:19:46 Launchpad bug 1810349 in neutron "agent gw ports created on non dvr destination hosts" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Enyinna Ochulor (enyinna1234) 15:20:02 https://review.openstack.org/#/c/628071/ was just proposed, have not looked yet 15:22:03 next is https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1774459 15:22:04 Launchpad bug 1774459 in neutron "Update permanent ARP entries for allowed_address_pair IPs in DVR Routers" [High,Confirmed] - Assigned to Swaminathan Vasudevan (swaminathan-vasudevan) 15:22:37 i was able to get through review yesterday, and Swami has continued work with a follow-on as well. 15:23:14 he's not here today... 15:24:24 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1806770 15:24:25 Launchpad bug 1806770 in neutron "DHCP Agent should not release DHCP lease when client ID is not set on port" [Medium,In progress] - Assigned to Arjun Baindur (abaindur) 15:24:55 there is a review, but i don't see an update for a while, https://review.openstack.org/#/c/623066/ 15:25:45 next is https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1798475 15:25:46 Launchpad bug 1798475 in neutron "Fullstack test test_ha_router_restart_agents_no_packet_lost failing" [High,In progress] - Assigned to LIU Yulong (dragon889) 15:26:51 liu is still investigating 15:27:35 that's the only bugs i have 15:27:46 #topic Open discussion 15:27:55 anything else to discuss? 15:27:58 I have one bug also to mention 15:27:59 https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1809238 15:28:00 Launchpad bug 1809238 in neutron "[l3] `port_forwarding` cannot be set before l3 `router` in service_plugins" [High,In progress] - Assigned to LIU Yulong (dragon889) 15:28:06 it's somehow related to L3 15:28:24 as it is related to port forwarding service plugins 15:28:53 it looks that portforwarding service plugin require to be loaded in proper order, after L3 service plugin 15:29:32 so I want to ask You to check this and tell there what You think about it - should we just document properly that order of service plugins in config file is important 15:30:02 or should we implement some internal mechanism to load plugins in proper order 15:30:29 right, i looked yesterday and was surprised order was that important. 15:31:21 there is patch for that: https://review.openstack.org/626561 15:31:23 slaweq: so have a known good order and load if specified? 15:32:00 yes, I was thinking about something like priorities for plugins defined somewhere internally 15:32:25 and then check which of them are configured and sort them in proper order 15:32:28 if we need some 15:32:53 IMHO raising exception which is proposed now in https://review.openstack.org/626561 is not most user friendly solution 15:33:07 but I just wanted to ask others to take a look at it :) 15:33:52 that would be best imo. in this case should the exception still be raised if the l3 plugin wasn't specified at all? 15:34:11 IMHO yes 15:34:30 in such case we should raise exception to tell operator that his config is wrong 15:35:18 we just don't know the reason (wrong order possibly), but we can document that until we have something better 15:35:58 yes, that is kind of workaround for now IMHO 15:37:23 i think i like that better, just wonder how we'd make the internal list withoug making it too complicated 15:38:31 but maybe that's work for whoever codes it up :) 15:38:38 +1 15:39:21 i.e. we don't need to list everything, just a small subset 15:40:22 yes, I think so - we can just list plugins which should be loaded "before" or "after" something else 15:40:33 and left all others as default 15:41:07 right. let's just add a comment for liu 15:41:09 but that some kind of idea - I don't think it will be complicated to code but I may be wrong 15:41:15 ok, thx haleyb 15:41:37 we can make it complicated, but shouldn't :) 15:41:45 LOL 15:41:51 :-) 15:42:16 any other things to discuss? 15:42:31 not from me 15:42:38 nope 15:43:47 #endmeeting