=========================================== #opnfv-meeting: Weekly Technical Discussion =========================================== Meeting started by bh526r at 14:01:05 UTC. The full logs are available at http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2017/opnfv-meeting.2017-02-16-14.01.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll Call (bh526r, 14:01:14) * Bin Hu (bh526r, 14:01:19) * Al Morton (bh526r, 14:01:25) * Georg Kunz (bh526r, 14:01:33) * Juha Oravanien (bh526r, 14:01:42) * Prakash Ramchandran (bh526r, 14:01:51) * Uli Kleber (uli-k, 14:02:02) * Dan Radez (bh526r, 14:02:04) * Aimee Ukasick (bh526r, 14:03:19) * Bryan Sullivan (bh526r, 14:03:25) * rprakash (rprakash, 14:05:47) * Proposal of DevOps Mode; (bh526r, 14:07:10) * One of the topic is Keystone integration (bh526r, 14:07:31) * If I need to have an OPNFV build, should I be able to pull from stable branch or from master with more recent feature (bh526r, 14:08:08) * rprakash (rprakash_, 14:08:28) * This assumption needs to be validated (bh526r, 14:08:40) * (Uli) we can try it to validate the feasibility (bh526r, 14:09:28) * (Bryan) another implication is, e.g. if I have a test, but dovetail cannot pick it up for a few months, how stable will be the test and python library while we are moving forward (bh526r, 14:10:47) * So we don't leave behind the community too far, while we don't have to wait just for the sake of stable release (bh526r, 14:11:32) * We need to really understand who the users are (bh526r, 14:11:46) * (Uli) we have 2 types of users (bh526r, 14:11:54) * One type is to use the coolest features (bh526r, 14:12:16) * The other type is to use the newest features (bh526r, 14:12:52) * Larry Lamers (bh526r, 14:13:32) * Tapio (bh526r, 14:13:35) * We need to measure the user community proactively and understand their needs (bh526r, 14:14:14) * Talking about the first type of users, some are still trying to use Brahmaputra, even if we don't support it any more (bh526r, 14:14:58) * We need to test feasibility of deploying OPNFV scenarios on trunk? Which installers support that? (bryan_att, 14:15:39) * (Bryan) I am looking for a stable development environment with stable features that enable me to move forward (bh526r, 14:17:50) * ability to devlopoment on trunk on Openstack like with Congress (rprakash_, 14:21:47) * (rprakash) ability to development on trunk with OpenStack Murano, Manila etc. (rprakash_, 14:23:24) * (aimeeu) using Quickstart with trunklevel developement and Dan says in Newtorn Tacker is in (rprakash_, 14:24:10) * (Bryan) ability to develop with multiple components from different upstreams to work together from trunk to suport new features (rprakash_, 14:26:26) * (Bryan) Dvelopment envrionment like RDO, triple-O, Packstack, Quickstart and understand which one are suitable for different features and test plus continuous Devlopment to support OPNFV community (rprakash_, 14:28:48) * (bryan) Feature Devlopment role is different from Packaging and Delivering different upstreams to the releases (rprakash_, 14:30:23) * (Bryan) Resilliancy is imporant for getting Control Plane stability and needs simplicty and flexibility of control plane (rprakash_, 14:31:41) * (Bryant) ability add drop Cielometer for say Billing , Add drop Congree like Policy usgae is different etc. So customization of target deployment is one aspect (rprakash_, 14:33:07) * (Bryan) How light the Control Plane can be with flexibility of installers to choose some of the options from OpenStack for specialized environment that Service Provider needs (rprakash_, 14:34:31) * Uli will try to put those wishes into scenario consolidation (bh526r, 14:35:25) * scenario definitions (bh526r, 14:36:02) * (Bryan) Orchestrator like JujU, Puppet have ability to slect OpenStack Modules and establish relationships and if Scenarios can configure similarly that will be the goal (rprakash_, 14:38:32) * look at scenario descriptor file and pod descriptor file (bh526r, 14:40:27) * (uli) ability to orchetsrate in layers for Hardware(POD), Infra(descriptor), VNFD/NSD (MANO descriptor) etc (rprakash_, 14:42:34) * (Bryan) mentions like L4 service depends of L3 , L2, so there may be cross layer dependency (rprakash_, 14:43:13) * (Bryan) Its possible to add and remove Charm using Juju and similar can be done with Puppet, Ansible playbook etc. (rprakash_, 14:44:11) * (Bryan) Ability to add reomove Tacke eg. could be using VNF using Tacker once and next using JuJu dynamically (rprakash_, 14:46:28) * (Dan Radez) Why do we need this is there value to this? (rprakash_, 14:47:08) * (Bin) How we can leverage Scenarios to do flexible Control plane objectives and lets discuss and come up with some solutions (rprakash_, 14:48:18) * Update of Scenario Consolidation (bh526r, 14:49:12) * (Uli) has submitted a patch in Octopus to be reviewed- request for reveiew (rprakash_, 14:49:32) * Uli submitted a patch of skeleton of scenario document set (bh526r, 14:49:32) * LINK: https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/28443 (uli-k, 14:49:59) * Uli will send an email to mailing list so that everyone can review the patch (bh526r, 14:51:37) * Then we can move forward to review scenario descriptor patches (bh526r, 14:52:04) * to summarize what we will be doing toward the last topic areas (1) assessing developer-focused options for OpenStack, ODL test envs simpler than full OPNFV deploys, and providing advice on the wiki. (2) assessing over time whether that gives us more dev freedom at a good balance wrt re platform stability (bryan_att, 14:53:24) * (Bryan) mentioned that there was good discussion in MANO WG. (bh526r, 14:54:55) * MANO Update (bh526r, 14:55:06) * (3) looking at how flexible the installers can be for customizing the deployment (e.g. thru the descriptor files); (4) how modeling concepts can be applied to the control plane as well, e.g. how well the blueprint model can cover the needs of the various descriptors we use in CI/CD (bryan_att, 14:55:11) * the goal of (4) being to someday have a common abstraction/specification for the intended control plane deployment, that the installers can "onboard" and then take action to deploy; (bryan_att, 14:56:18) * David M is not present, so Milestone Exception Process discussion deferred to next time (March 2) (bh526r, 14:58:01) * Cross-Community CI process will be on March 2 (bh526r, 14:59:34) * and E release plan (bh526r, 14:59:45) * (rprakash) MANO release E has learining from vIMS VNF about different approach to orchestartion through installers and without it, plus testing (rprakash_, 15:00:01) * (rprkash) the other aspect realted to keystone v 3 v 2 usage based on installers support (rprakash_, 15:00:55) * (rprakash) the bestpractices is still under review for VNF packaing, onboarding, LCM etc. (rprakash_, 15:01:53) * Next week (Feb 23), we will be dedicated to discuss 2 new project proposals (bh526r, 15:02:53) * (rprakash) About the Architecture tehre are different views from different work groups like pipeling of CI,CT,CV, CD form iintegration, Test, Vlaidation to Deployment and Tapio has a Software Architecture viewpoint and thus we need to reflect the upstream integration aspect as we are looking now at Bifrost and working through up[straem Trunk in CI (rprakash_, 15:04:06) * On March 2, we will discuss (1) DevOps/Continuous Delivery and How Scenario Descriptor can enable/support it (2) Cross-Community CI Process (3) Milestone Exception Process (4) E Release Plan (bh526r, 15:04:27) * And the perhaps (5) MANO WG Update and MANO Architecture if time permits (bh526r, 15:04:55) * Meeting adjourned (bh526r, 15:05:09) Meeting ended at 15:06:52 UTC. People present (lines said) --------------------------- * bh526r (45) * rprakash_ (23) * bryan_att (5) * collabot` (3) * rprakash (2) * uli-k (2) * radez (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4