=========================================
#opendaylight-group-policy: policy status
=========================================


Meeting started by regXboi at 20:08:18 UTC.  The full logs are available
at
http://meetings.opendaylight.org/opendaylight-group-policy/2014/policy_status/opendaylight-group-policy-policy_status.2014-05-29-20.08.log.html
.



Meeting summary
---------------

* requirements  (regXboi, 20:08:29)
  * LINK:
    https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Group_Policy:Sub-Groups:REQUIREMENTS#Requirements_Sub-Group
    (regXboi, 20:08:40)
  * requirements meeting to be set up  (regXboi, 20:09:18)
  * ACTION: dvokinista to set up requirements meetings  (regXboi,
    20:09:29)
  * for those joining, the hangout is coming  (regXboi, 20:10:43)
  * LINK:
    https://plus.google.com/hangouts/_/noironetworks.com/odl-gbp-status
    (regXboi, 20:10:50)

* functional spec  (regXboi, 20:12:08)
  * LINK:
    https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Group_Policy:Architecture/Policy_Model
    (regXboi, 20:13:41)
  * folks need to read the functional spec and comment, as
    implementation is under way  (tbachman, 20:13:57)
  * The Architecture page has a link to the Policy Model page
    (tbachman, 20:14:36)
  * the main wiki page now has a subpages section  (regXboi, 20:17:15)
  * readams is working on renderer-commons framework  (tbachman,
    20:19:13)
  * Trying to get to a point where a renderer can map a parir of
    endpoints into endpoint groups  (tbachman, 20:19:47)
  * demo-renderer will demonstrate that the basic framework “works"
    (tbachman, 20:20:55)
  * likely a simple overlay  (regXboi, 20:21:17)
  * readams says anybody who wants to take a swing at it can feel free
    (regXboi, 20:22:20)
  * readams thinks that will be more easily filled in as we understand
    what the renderers expect  (regXboi, 20:22:47)
  * LINK:
    https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/groupbasedpolicy-dev/2014-May/000193.html
    <— dlenrow mentioning the renderer group  (tbachman, 20:28:29)
  * regXboi recalls that dvorkinista made a statement that portions of
    the model are optional  (tbachman, 20:30:32)
  * If that is true, regXboi looked at the current YANG in the repo, but
    nothing is tagged as a yang feature, which would indicate that it
    was optiona  (tbachman, 20:31:03)
  * readams notes that entire pieces of the model aren’t necesarrily
    optional, but that the renderer may not be able to render parts of
    the model  (tbachman, 20:31:32)
  * which would result in an exception, then having retries  (tbachman,
    20:31:45)
  * resulting in parts of the model not being required to fulfil the
    policy requirement  (tbachman, 20:32:14)
  * dvorkinista says that there are things that require change of
    placement, and stuff that does not.  (tbachman, 20:32:40)
  * If there are endpoints that can’t be satisified, then the endpoint
    must be moved somewhere else  (tbachman, 20:32:57)
  * because we can’t move workloads  (tbachman, 20:33:06)
  * We may want the option to have a way of expressing whether the
    policy has to be “all-or-nothing”  (tbachman, 20:35:09)
  * dvorkinista feels that this can fall on the renderer. The renderer
    is responsible for achieving the desired state.  (tbachman,
    20:36:25)
  * sanjay asks if the renderer architecture been decided on?  (regXboi,
    20:38:07)
  * readams says that we’re creating a demo-renderer  (tbachman,
    20:38:41)
  * readams says that demo will be based on *something*  (regXboi,
    20:38:43)
  * regXboi points out that *something* is a bit nebulous  (regXboi,
    20:40:32)
  * and that it should be nailed down by the to-be reconstituted
    renderer meetings  (regXboi, 20:40:52)
  * AGREED: renderer meetings will be restarted  (regXboi, 20:41:03)



Meeting ended at 20:42:31 UTC.



People present (lines said)
---------------------------

* regXboi (25)
* tbachman (18)
* odl_meetbot (5)
* Youcef (5)
* Bhushan_ (2)
* dconde (2)
* alagalah (0)



Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4