16:02:59 <sridhar_ram> #startmeeting tacker
16:03:00 <openstack> Meeting started Thu Sep 17 16:02:59 2015 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is sridhar_ram. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:03:01 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
16:03:03 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'tacker'
16:03:11 <sridhar_ram> trozet: hi
16:03:19 <sridhar_ram> #chair bobh
16:03:20 <openstack> Current chairs: bobh sridhar_ram
16:03:47 <sridhar_ram> #topic Announcements
16:04:07 <sridhar_ram> Today's agenda is here - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Tacker#Meeting_Sep_17.2C_2015
16:04:23 <sridhar_ram> anything else to discuss beyond that ?
16:05:16 <Rajkumar_> Hi Everyone
16:05:26 <sridhar_ram> Rajkumar_: hi!
16:05:37 <sridhar_ram> few general announcements ...
16:06:00 <sridhar_ram> our first functional test landed in Tacker - thanks a lot santosh!
16:06:33 <sridhar_ram> now you can run 'tox -e functional' on a running tacker devstack to exercise these tests
16:06:53 <sridhar_ram> more tests are expected to be added over time...!
16:07:01 <lsp42> nice
16:07:02 <sripriya> yey!
16:07:47 <sridhar_ram> I'm working w/ infra team to add a gate-job to hook them up to the gate...
16:08:23 <sridhar_ram> initially it will be non-voting .. meaning it won't block a merge but the core team would expect the tests to pass
16:08:34 <sripriya> sridhar_ram: do we need to write a post_hookup script for the job or is just configuration in project-yaml?
16:08:45 <sridhar_ram> once we gain some confidence we will move it voting
16:09:36 <sridhar_ram> sripriya: still working thru' them .. I'm hoping existing gate-functional-dsvm hook should be sufficient but it still to be seen
16:10:06 <sridhar_ram> Next on Tokyo summit ..
16:10:34 <sripriya> sridhar_ram: cool
16:10:55 <sridhar_ram> I've grabbed a BoF (Birds-of-Feather) session for OpenStack NFV Orchestration ...
16:11:20 <sridhar_ram> it will be on Tuesday 12:05 - 12:40 ... so please mark your calendars
16:11:37 <sridhar_ram> it will show up in the main conference schedule soon
16:12:16 <sridhar_ram> It is a fish bowl style session (upto 30 people I guess) ..
16:12:37 <sridhar_ram> we should invite our partner orgs like ETSI, TOSCA, OPNFV and other developers to attend and provide inputs
16:13:00 <sridhar_ram> Last .. our Liberty Release deadline in next week Sept 25 !
16:13:05 <sridhar_ram> just one week to go ..
16:13:12 <sridhar_ram> lets move on..
16:13:31 <sridhar_ram> #topic Liberty Release Status
16:13:42 <sridhar_ram> #topic Health Monitoring
16:13:49 <sridhar_ram> bobh: please take over ...
16:14:04 <bobh> I pushed the basic framework last night as WIP
16:14:19 <sridhar_ram> bobh: that's cool !
16:14:34 <bobh> I'm still working on the link between the template processing in heat.py and the monitoring thread
16:15:00 <bobh> Hoping to have that in place tomorrow so I can start testing
16:15:43 <bobh> Working with tbh for http-ping, unit tests and devrefs
16:15:44 <sridhar_ram> bobh: that's nice ..
16:16:18 <bobh> I think it will be similar enough to the ETSI spec and we can tweak from that
16:17:11 <bobh> There are some larger design issues that will need to be addressed at some point but this is a good start
16:17:44 <sridhar_ram> bobh: agree, the last iteration of the spec looks reasoanable ..
16:17:59 <bobh> That's all I have unless anyone has questions/comments
16:18:31 <sridhar_ram> bobh: of course we need to get the spec merged ... ;-)
16:18:41 <sripriya> i guess we have 2 WIP for monitoring framework.. one from bobh and other from tbh
16:18:45 <sridhar_ram> I know we doing are things in parallel .. as we are short on time
16:18:49 <bobh> minor details... I'll push the final(?) version today
16:19:37 <sridhar_ram> bobh: I'm quite happy w/ the spec.. one thing I would like to see is the abstract class interface .. we can take that up in the code-review
16:20:08 <bobh> I copied the class from Mgmt but we can modify as needed
16:20:34 <bobh> Its definitely more than we need at the moment but I think it provides a good framework for future expansion
16:20:59 <sridhar_ram> bobh: agree..
16:21:21 <sridhar_ram> team - if you've any last minute thoughts on health-mon .. please review https://review.openstack.org/#/c/202126/
16:21:47 <sridhar_ram> bobh: anything else ?
16:22:00 <bobh> not that I can think of
16:22:32 <sridhar_ram> sripriya: I believe tbh and bobh are consolidating the two WIP patches...
16:22:39 <sridhar_ram> tbh: ping
16:23:24 <sridhar_ram> okay .. lets move on to SFC
16:23:28 <sripriya> sridhar_ram: i see
16:23:33 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: ping
16:23:46 <sridhar_ram> #topic Tacker-SFC
16:24:15 <sridhar_ram> trozet: hi, can you provide some quick updates from OPNFV-SFC of things..?
16:24:27 <trozet> sridhar_ram: sure
16:24:33 <sridhar_ram> it will be good to hear where we stand w.r.t SFC & Tacker !
16:24:54 <trozet> so OPNFV has a scope limitation where we cannot release any VNFM/MANO application as part of a release
16:25:09 <trozet> due to a conflict of vendor interests when OPNFV was formed
16:25:32 <s3wong> hello, sorry
16:25:54 <trozet> so this is kind of a dumb limitation, and the chair of OPNFV (Chris Price) has agreed to re-examine the scope after our next release which is Feb 2nd
16:26:25 <trozet> so the tl;dr is they wont let Tacker be in the next release as an official part
16:26:55 <trozet> but I also lead an installer project in OPNFV (Apex), I will continue to do the Tacker work with you guys upstream and then get it into our installer for the next release
16:27:06 <trozet> as an unofficial "experimental testing feature"
16:27:44 <sridhar_ram> trozet: that's awesome!
16:28:29 <sridhar_ram> to make that happen.. which openstack release would OPNFV release base on ?
16:28:37 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: hi
16:28:54 <trozet> it will be Liberty O/S and Lithium ODL
16:29:43 <sridhar_ram> trozet: I guess we need to find a way to get the tacker SFC work done off our liberty branch
16:30:15 <trozet> sridhar_ram: is that OK with you?
16:30:51 <sridhar_ram> overall I'm fine w/ tacker not directly part of OPNFV release .. and going in as experimental feat on top of B will give us room to iron out our initial issues..
16:31:28 <trozet> ok
16:31:54 <sridhar_ram> trozet: that's a question to the team here ... looking for ideas how to support this effort
16:32:18 <sridhar_ram> with the constraint that OPNFV B release is going to be Liberty based
16:32:21 <sridhar_ram> team - any thoughts ?
16:32:27 <trozet> yeah I will probably need some help as this is the first time I've modified/done any openstack dev work
16:32:54 <bobh> sounds like a good plan - a head start on Liberty will be nice
16:33:07 <sridhar_ram> trozet: don't worry, we have many folks here to guide / help you
16:34:06 <trozet> so I will work on the spec, shall that be proposed on master or a liberty branch?
16:34:10 <sridhar_ram> bobh: the challenge is to have make a liberty release with everything else we have - SFC and then somehow accommodate SFC
16:34:37 <s3wong> sridhar_ram, trozet: when is OPNFV B release going to be?
16:34:49 <trozet> s3wong: set for Feb 2nd
16:34:58 <sridhar_ram> one option is to make multiple Liberty release - kinda along the lines of ODL's SR1, SR2...
16:36:24 <s3wong> sridhar_ram: I guess a special Liberty Tacker release for SFC is probably the answer
16:37:01 <s3wong> sridhar_ram: I don't think as a team we want to get into a habit of having in-cycle release, probably just special case
16:37:23 <sripriya> do we work on tacker master for SFC and then backport to Liberty for a SR once OpenStack is released for Liberty...?
16:37:26 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: agree, this would be an exception..
16:38:01 <s3wong> sridhar_ram: since Tacker isn't an OpenStack tent project, and even if it is, it would likely forever be 'release: independent', one option would actually be releasing Liberty sometimes in Dec/Jan with the SFC stuff integrated
16:38:03 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: we need better planning w/ downstream projects .. and even other way around
16:38:35 <sridhar_ram> here is a proposal :)
16:39:15 <sridhar_ram> lets pull a stable/release close to 09/25 for features currently in the pipeline..
16:39:31 <sridhar_ram> * stable/liberty
16:40:01 <sridhar_ram> pull a sfc branch off stable/liberty and have trozet develop code there ... do another liberty-sfc release
16:40:21 <sridhar_ram> ... after merge to stable/liberty
16:40:41 <sridhar_ram> then double commit the sfc feature to master .. towards mitaka
16:41:11 <trozet> makes sense to me
16:41:14 <sripriya> sridhar_ram: agree on the plan
16:41:25 <bobh> sridhar_ram: +1
16:42:12 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: you get the last word !
16:42:53 <sridhar_ram> there is bit of branch merge logistics .. but doable IMO
16:43:01 <s3wong> sridhar_ram: I am OK with that --- given that based on this cycle's development propensity, I don't think we expect a lot of checkins between summit and Jan/Feb (when I presume the SFC stuff would have to work very well)
16:43:36 <s3wong> so presumably there should be minimal syncing between the stable branch and the sfc-dev branch
16:43:51 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: agree...
16:44:35 <sridhar_ram> I hope sfc branch is a short lived one and we quickly get things into master to march on
16:45:15 <sridhar_ram> I've seen the speed at which trozet codes - so I'm not worried ;-)
16:45:15 <s3wong> sridhar_ram: so you are going to take the action item to pull the stable and sfc-dev branches? :-)
16:45:27 <trozet> just a heads up also - there is development work to be done in the lower layers (OVS, ODL) which will be handled in the OPNFV SFC project
16:45:52 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: yeah, I'll take up the branch logistics
16:45:53 <trozet> so the main tacker sfc stuff working with ODL will depend on ^ being complete
16:46:24 <s3wong> trozet: is the OPNFV team pushing to get NSH support (finally) into OVS upstream?
16:46:33 <sridhar_ram> trozet: understood, there are many moving parts here...
16:47:04 <trozet> s3wong: its complicated :)  Intel is pushing  a patch upstream (they estimated within the next 1-2 weeks) that allows Ethernet+NSH, but only with dpdk
16:47:31 <s3wong> trozet: Oh, that is funky...
16:47:32 <trozet> s3wong: OPNFV SFC wants a dpdk and non-dpdk solution
16:48:26 <trozet> s3wong: using the unofficial patch nshv8 that Cisco made works with ODL SFC, but it doesn't work when integrating into openstack without hacks and workarounds
16:48:53 <trozet> s3wong: so there are problems to solve and work to be done there, before we can actually render a service function chain into OVS from Tacker
16:49:12 <sridhar_ram> trozet: with Lithium already released .. is this even doable ? that is to get openstack --> ODL-Li --> patched OVS-NSH to work ?
16:49:39 <s3wong> trozet: yeah, I remember seeing the patch from the Cisco (vCider folks, I believe) on ovs-dev back in early 2013; at that time blp's point is we need to wait for official UDP port number for NSH, and now we have had it for about a year now, and still not in OVS :-)
16:50:10 * sridhar_ram notes, we are 10mins mark
16:50:15 <trozet> sridhar_ram: well how it goes is we have to release by default with Liberty and Lithium...however our installer can have a flag to install a certain version of ODL
16:50:52 <s3wong> trozet: yeah, we at Neutron networking-sfc is also waiting for it. Neutron leadership does NOT allow OVS forks to be the data path backend
16:51:00 <trozet> sridhar_ram: so we have some flexibility there, especially with calling Tacker SFC experimental
16:51:06 <sridhar_ram> I see...
16:51:39 <sridhar_ram> however the openstack pieces will be Liberty .. is there any room to pick something newer ?
16:52:01 <trozet> s3wong: so you are working on the networking-sfc?  We can work together to make sure the spec is abstract enough to meet both versions of SFC (odl + neutron)
16:52:18 <s3wong> trozet: yes, I am a core there as well
16:52:51 <trozet> sridhar_ram: technically yes, we could have  a flag to install a different openstack, but our limitation is our installer (RDO-Manager) which relies on RDO
16:53:02 <s3wong> trozet: and we should work together to get Tacker to work with both
16:53:13 <trozet> sridhar_ram: I'm not sure when RDO would have M support, and if Tacker is included
16:53:37 <sridhar_ram> trozet: okay, then the proposal we painted earlier is the best IMO..
16:53:42 <trozet> i think so
16:54:33 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: trozet: I do believe Tacker-SFC could *eventually* converge with networking-sfc... but for now lets not make networkign-sfc as a dependency for Tacker-SFC
16:54:49 <sridhar_ram> we have enough dependency already - ODL, OVS, etc... :)
16:54:52 <trozet> oh ok you want to keep it separate
16:55:07 <s3wong> sridhar_ram: I don't think for Liberty we are making it a dependency
16:55:10 <sridhar_ram> but totally agree and support the common cause to get OVS pieces in plance
16:55:12 <sridhar_ram> *place
16:55:42 <s3wong> sridhar_ram, trozet: but my guess is eventually even ODL SFC team would want to integrate with networking-sfc
16:55:56 <sridhar_ram> s3wong: agree..
16:56:10 <sridhar_ram> here is the slide deck I circulated to OPNFV-SFC team..
16:56:12 <sridhar_ram> #link https://drive.google.com/open?id=18AGaiysVgHOd_fIHVpObMO7zUkMjJGOQ98CUwkxU1xo
16:56:15 <trozet> s3wong: that party is still fuzzy to me as well.
16:56:36 <sridhar_ram> it show the different phases on how we could evolve Tacker SFC towards networking-sfc
16:56:45 <trozet> sridhar_ram, s3wong: but for Tacker, you want one SFC API that serves both ODL-SFC and networking-sfc, no?
16:57:04 <s3wong> trozet: that would be ideal
16:57:08 <sridhar_ram> trozet: absolutely
16:57:21 <sridhar_ram> atleast that should be the goal..
16:57:22 <trozet> sridhar_ram: ok just wanted to make sure that was the intent
16:58:10 <sridhar_ram> NFV operators wouldn't (or shouldn't ) care how a SF chain is realized underneath
16:58:25 <sridhar_ram> folks we are close to our time limit..
16:58:28 <sridhar_ram> lets wrap..
16:58:52 <sridhar_ram> lets march on w/ the plan we proposed earlier...
16:59:08 <sridhar_ram> I'll take the action items to do the branch logistics..
16:59:25 <sridhar_ram> meanwhile lets get the health-mon in place by next week...
16:59:33 <sridhar_ram> reviewers - please help out!
16:59:59 <sridhar_ram> going to be busy week..
17:00:05 <sridhar_ram> talk to all next week !
17:00:11 <sridhar_ram> #endmeeting