#opnfv-meeting: Weekly Technical Discussion

Meeting started by bh526r at 14:04:36 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

  1. Roll Call (bh526r, 14:06:54)
    1. Bin Hu (bh526r, 14:06:59)
    2. Tim Irnich (timirnich, 14:07:09)
    3. Bryan Sullivan (bh526r, 14:07:28)
    4. Claudio Serra (bh526r, 14:07:36)
    5. Dave Neary (bh526r, 14:07:44)
    6. Pierre Lynch (bh526r, 14:07:51)
    7. Tapio Tallgren (bh526r, 14:08:41)
    8. Dan Radez (bh526r, 14:08:57)

  2. Deep Dive of Release Goals of Model and VES Projects in Fraser Release (bh526r, 14:09:31)
    1. Background: (bh526r, 14:09:42)
    2. https://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2017-November/019254.html (bh526r, 14:09:57)
    3. Bryan reviewed briefly the background and evolving of OPNFV with the new era of ONAP emerging on market (bh526r, 14:10:51)
    4. Tim asked if we do integration and testing in OPNFV, will we end up with still developing some components that are not in ONAP? Is it still the same situation as of today? (bh526r, 14:13:36)
    5. Bryan mentioned that we may not use installer-based approach, but more focus on container, k8s, etc. (bh526r, 14:14:42)
    6. So it is more like VIM-agnostic approach (bh526r, 14:15:06)
    7. e.g. Model experiment now is not dependent on OpenStack (bh526r, 14:15:22)
    8. Narinder Gupta (bh526r, 14:15:41)
    9. In a word, stop relying on installers (bh526r, 14:17:37)
    10. Then what should OPNFV do for ONAP? For example, testing, certification, more complex use case such as hybrid cloud (bh526r, 14:18:16)
    11. Tim understands the frustration in the past, e.g. pain of installers. OPNFV is not expected to be production-ready. (bh526r, 14:22:12)
    12. Happy to see the path of evolution, e.g. evolution to more VIMs such as k8s (bh526r, 14:22:39)
    13. Dave Neary indicates that we still need something to manage k8s instead, so not sure if simplification can be achieved even if we evolve to k8s. Installer just provides a way to install and deploy. (bh526r, 14:25:22)
    14. Tim understands the complexity is not expected, and wants some level of simplification. (bh526r, 14:27:20)
    15. The question is whether to focus on simplification, or to focus on support of more VIMs (bh526r, 14:28:34)
    16. Bryan indicated less dependencies, and some more internal collaboration (bh526r, 14:29:23)
    17. Tim thinks it is very important topic, and if VES/Models finds a way to simplify the experience, we OPNFV needs to look into it (bh526r, 14:30:37)
    18. Dan mentions that maybe we need to see if this issue is shared by broader community, or is specific to the practice that one specific project needs. Then we can address it at broader community level or support specific project(s) (bh526r, 14:32:16)
    19. Tapio understands because Nokia experienced the same when using different installers. For example, if anything goes wrong, we need to go back to the beginning of re-install which takes another 2 hours (bh526r, 14:33:49)
    20. So it would be good to separate into different layers/modules (bh526r, 14:34:15)
    21. Tim thinks it is ideal to put it on the agenda of PlugFest because of the complexity of this topic, i.e. (1) supporting multiple VIMs/Clouds in integration instead of OpenStack-centric (2) Improve user experience. (bh526r, 14:39:33)
    22. Bryan mentions that it is really not to give actions to installers, but to reduce the dependency of feature projects on installers (bh526r, 14:41:20)
    23. ACTION: Tim will arrange a session in PlugFest for this topic. Bryan will help scope this right, and give the right objective (bh526r, 14:42:40)

  3. Discuss Collected Feedback on Hardware Requirements and Improvements on Pharos Specification (bh526r, 14:44:32)
    1. Background: (bh526r, 14:44:39)
    2. https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/pharos/Pharos+Specification (bh526r, 14:44:59)
    3. https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/Pharos_Specification2.0 (bh526r, 14:45:24)
    4. Tim mentions that there has been discussions of integration of L2 gateway of OpenStack, and more testings in HA projects. (bh526r, 14:46:27)
    5. SmartNIC is another example (bh526r, 14:47:21)
    6. We try to figure out a way of how to deal with it, and avoid situation that certain thing only works in certain lab (bh526r, 14:48:01)
    7. One element of this is Pharos spec (bh526r, 14:48:14)
    8. Others include CI engine (intelligent to differentiate labs), test framework (intelligent to activate or deactivate test cases automatically) (bh526r, 14:49:41)
    9. Bryan mentions "programmable lab", i.e. users can use interface for lab to present some production features (bh526r, 14:54:36)
    10. Tim indicates that today's Pharos Spec describes server features (bh526r, 14:56:42)
    11. Tim will advocates it in several places such as infra, testing, etc. (bh526r, 14:58:00)
    12. Bin will follow up with Jack Morgan regarding Phraos Spec 2.0 (bh526r, 14:58:21)

  4. AOB (bh526r, 14:59:44)
    1. Nothing else, meeting adjourned (bh526r, 14:59:53)


Meeting ended at 14:59:57 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. Tim will arrange a session in PlugFest for this topic. Bryan will help scope this right, and give the right objective


People present (lines said)

  1. bh526r (49)
  2. collabot (3)
  3. timirnich (1)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.