14:31:26 <gzhao> #startmeeting Lithium release review 14:31:26 <odl_meetbot> Meeting started Tue Jun 23 14:31:26 2015 UTC. The chair is gzhao. Information about MeetBot at http://ci.openstack.org/meetbot.html. 14:31:26 <odl_meetbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 14:31:26 <odl_meetbot> The meeting name has been set to 'lithium_release_review' 14:31:37 <phrobb> good morning gzhao 14:31:50 <gzhao> #topic roll call 14:31:58 <zxiiro> Good morning all 14:31:58 <gzhao> phrobb: -:) 14:32:25 <phrobb> #info Project Leaders and TSC members please #info in 14:32:28 <oflibMichal> #info oflibMichal for openflowjava and topoprocessing 14:32:52 <gzhao> #chair phrobb colindixon 14:32:52 <odl_meetbot> Current chairs: colindixon gzhao phrobb 14:32:53 <LuisGomez> #info LuisGomez 14:33:01 <colindixon> #info colindixon 14:33:46 <gzhao> #topic Openflow Java 14:33:53 <oflibMichal> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Openflow_Protocol_Library:Release_Notes:Lithium_Release_Review release review 14:33:57 <oflibMichal> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Openflow_Protocol_Library:Release_Notes:Lithium_Release_Notes release notes 14:34:21 <gzhao> colindixon: one question, when is the deadline for doc? 14:34:57 <colindixon> gzhao: ASAP, but since we don’t publish it to a site as far as I know, I think we can post docs in a decoupled way 14:35:26 <gzhao> colindixon: thanks 14:35:39 <shague> #info shague 14:36:40 <gzhao> oflibMichal: do you think unit test coverage can be linked to build page 14:36:42 <colindixon> oflibMichal: are there any issues with compatibility or migration? 14:37:04 <oflibMichal> gzhao: sure, will do 14:37:31 <oflibMichal> colindixon: this release is not compatible with previous ... openflowjava went through model update 14:37:36 * shague I am in another call right now with OVSDB review at 11:00/08:00pst. I am watching this channel but might need a second ping to wake up 14:37:48 <oflibMichal> colindixon: and also a writting / flushing mechanism changed 14:38:09 <gzhao> #info colindixon asks about any issues with compatibility or migration 14:38:51 <gzhao> #info gzhao suggests unit test coverage link with the test and oflibMichal will do the update 14:38:55 <colindixon> #info oflibMichal says the model changed and the writing/flushing mechanism changed, so it’s not compatible with Helium 14:39:19 <gzhao> #info oflibMichal says his release is not compatible with previous because openflowjava went through model update 14:39:23 <colindixon> I’d like to see the one known issue in the release notes as well as the release review 14:39:26 <gzhao> #undo 14:39:26 <odl_meetbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.ircmeeting.items.Info object at 0x1944cd0> 14:39:50 <oflibMichal> colindixon: ok, will add a mention of it 14:39:56 <colindixon> thanks 14:40:13 <colindixon> I guess it’s “suspected” issue not a “known” issue, but it would still be nice 14:40:22 <oflibMichal> sure 14:40:25 <colindixon> #action oflibMichal to add the bug from the release review to the release notes 14:40:26 <colindixon> ok 14:40:34 <colindixon> anything else from anyone? 14:40:47 <gzhao> LGTM 14:42:17 <gzhao> #topic Topoprocessing 14:42:21 <oflibMichal> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Topology_Processing_Framework:Lithium_Release_Review release review 14:42:25 <oflibMichal> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Topology_Processing_Framework:Lithium_Release_Notes release notes 14:43:21 <gzhao> oflibMichal: this link Topology Processing Framework Presentation broke for me 14:43:56 <colindixon> gzhao: both work for me 14:44:10 <oflibMichal> ou, same here ... will definitely fix that 14:44:31 <colindixon> oh 14:44:32 <colindixon> nm 14:45:06 <oflibMichal> works on the main page 14:45:15 <oflibMichal> will re copy-paste the link 14:45:46 <gzhao> #action oflibMichal is to fix the broken link for https://www.markoweb.eu/topoprocessing/presentation 14:46:04 <oflibMichal> please reload the release review page 14:46:07 <oflibMichal> should work now 14:46:17 <gzhao> oflibMichal: do you plan to link dev guide? 14:46:21 <colindixon> oflibMichal: so, is there a reason that only two of the bugs listed on the release review are also listed in the release notes 14:46:45 <gzhao> oflibMichal: it works, thanks 14:47:09 <oflibMichal> gzhao: ok, I can link the developer guide, no problem 14:47:51 <oflibMichal> colindixon: bug 3802 and 3715 on release review page 14:47:56 <gzhao> oflibMichal: thanks 14:48:09 <oflibMichal> are both covered by ...filtering can be based only on ipv4 address fields 14:48:13 <gzhao> #info colindixon asks is there a reason that only two of the bugs listed on the release review are also listed in the release notes 14:48:20 <oflibMichal> but I can provide more information 14:48:39 <gzhao> #actions oflibMichal is to link developer guide in release review 14:49:37 <colindixon> ok 14:50:10 <colindixon> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/developer-guide/src/main/asciidoc/topoprocessing/odl-topoprocessing-framework-dev.adoc developer docs 14:50:24 <colindixon> ok 14:50:26 <colindixon> anything else? 14:51:01 <gzhao> colindixon: question, does release notes need to be in accsi format 14:51:17 <gzhao> general question not for the project 14:51:17 <colindixon> gzhao: ideally, yes, in practice I’m likely to wind up translating that 14:51:28 <colindixon> it should be pretty fast 14:51:28 <gzhao> colindixon: got it 14:51:36 <colindixon> we just ran out of time/discipline 14:51:58 <gzhao> #topic SDNi 14:51:59 <oflibMichal> thanks for the review 14:52:13 <SDNiShahid> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/ODL-SDNi:Lithium_Release_Review <-- Release Review 14:52:25 <SDNiShahid> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/ODL-SDNi:Lithium_Release_Notes <-- Release Notes 14:52:49 <gzhao> #info SDNiShahid is representing SDNi 14:53:31 <SDNiShahid> yes 14:54:01 <colindixon> ok 14:54:07 <SDNiShahid> updated the contents for release review and release notes - please let us know of comments 14:54:43 <gzhao> SDNiShahid: can you link in release notes, dev guide and user guide in the release review 14:55:20 <phrobb> SDNiShahid: is there a reason you specifically call out Ubuntu 12.04/14/04 as the execution environment? Is there lack of support for other environments? 14:55:33 <colindixon> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/developer-guide/src/main/asciidoc/sdninterfaceapp/odl-sdninterfaceapp-all-dev.adoc developer docs 14:55:57 <SDNiShahid> sure we can include the ascii doc links 14:56:02 <colindixon> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/user-guide/src/main/asciidoc/sdninterfaceapp/odl-sdninterfaceapp-all-user.adoc user docs 14:56:16 <colindixon> SDNiShahid: were you intending to update those? 14:56:24 <colindixon> SDNiShahid: or is that all you wanted to provide? 14:56:35 <gzhao> SDNiShahid: I mean link those in the https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/ODL-SDNi:Lithium_Release_Review 14:56:50 <SDNiShahid> sure. Will update 14:57:17 <gzhao> #action SDNiShahid will link user guide, dev guide and release note in release review 14:57:47 <gzhao> SDNiShahid: question, why Compatibility with Previous Releases section is not in release note? 14:58:17 <SDNiShahid> So far we have tested with 12.04 and 14.04 ... Hence we mentioned the same. As such there are no issues with other releases, it should work with other environments where ODL is supported 14:59:14 <gzhao> #info SDNiShahid says SDNi has tested with 12.04 and 14.04, it should work with other environments where ODL is supported 14:59:22 <colindixon> SDNiShahid: I think gzhao means how is it compatilbie with the Helium release of sdni 14:59:31 <SDNiShahid> OK, will update the "Compatibility with Previous Releases section" as well in release notes 14:59:37 <gzhao> colindixon: that is right. 14:59:47 <gzhao> SDNiShahid: thanks 15:00:02 <phrobb> Thanks SDNiShahid. By including those ubuntu versions specifically, the implication is that other environments are not for execution. This may be confusing to our users. 15:00:09 <gzhao> #action SDNiShahid to update the "Compatibility with Previous Releases section" in release notes 15:00:44 <colindixon> thanks 15:00:48 <SDNiShahid> phrobb: I can remove the versions 15:01:01 <gzhao> #info phrobb notes By including those ubuntu versions specifically, the implication is that other environments are not for execution. This may be confusing to our users. 15:01:28 <phrobb> General question for docs and TSC members: What information and how do we want to convey it for our target execution environments?... so that there is consistency across the project release notes? 15:01:54 <colindixon> phrobb: it’s a good question and I’m not sure how many TSC members we have here 15:02:32 <gzhao> #action SDNiShahid to remove the ubuntu versions. 15:02:36 <colindixon> phrobb: I think we’d like to see java version, specific linux versions if there’s a reason to believe it’s needed, and otherwise, we need a general ODL-wide set of requirements 15:02:44 <gzhao> any more questions for SDNi 15:02:49 <colindixon> phrobb: I think the kind of thing that is here is more about testing 15:03:21 <phrobb> colindixon: agreed 15:03:22 <SDNiShahid> I think we should have a general ODL-wide set of requirements 15:03:49 <colindixon> #action colindixon to work on getting requirements more clearly stated in release notes/review 15:04:05 <colindixon> I’m ready for OVSDB 15:04:11 <phrobb> same here 15:04:12 <gzhao> #topic OVSDB 15:04:15 <SDNiShahid> Any more questions ? 15:04:17 <colindixon> SDNiShahid: just move the Ubuntu things into what’s been tested 15:04:22 <gzhao> SDNiShahid: thank you 15:04:26 <shague> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_OVSDB:Lithium_Release_Review 15:04:27 <shague> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_OVSDB:Lithium_Release_Notes 15:04:36 <phrobb> thanks SDNiShahid ! 15:04:37 <SDNiShahid> sure, Thanks for the review 15:04:47 <gzhao> #info shague is representing for OVSDB 15:04:54 <gzhao> SDNiShahid: you are welcome 15:05:30 <colindixon> shague: randomly, it’s Open vSwitch not OpenvSwitch 15:06:30 <shague> colindixon: yeah, the name is used all over in different forms from previous release so difficult to follow one 15:06:40 <colindixon> shague: the guides should point to stable/lithium branch not master 15:06:51 <colindixon> shague: undestood, I was just seeing it in “project name” in the release review 15:06:52 * phrobb appreciates both the feature name and a short description of functionality in the Features section of the OVSDB release review 15:07:26 <gzhao> shague: very well written 15:07:42 <shague> colindixon: I will update that. I think some of the docs were not merged to lithium yet and are just in master 15:08:04 <colindixon> that would surprise me, but is possible, yell at me if that’s true 15:08:08 <gzhao> #action shague to update to use Open vSwitch not OpenvSwitch 15:08:21 <colindixon> gzhao, shague just in the project name :p 15:08:59 <colindixon> this looks good otherwise 15:09:02 <colindixon> reads well 15:09:22 <colindixon> #info colindixon notes there is no compatibility with Helium 15:10:11 <gzhao> I have no questions 15:10:12 <colindixon> anything else? 15:10:17 <shague> colindixon: wasn't sure what to word there. Technically functionlly there is compatibilioty but the mdsal stuff is all new 15:11:00 <gzhao> shague: I think what you put there is correct 15:11:06 <gzhao> #topic Opflex 15:11:09 <colindixon> shague: I think what you have there is right, if you wanted to make it sound better you could say the netvirt part is compatible insofar as it’s both neutron 15:11:42 <gzhao> do we have adam on line 15:11:56 <readams> Hi folks this is Rob Adams for OpFlex 15:11:57 <colindixon> readams: is here 15:11:58 <colindixon> hey 15:12:01 <shague> colindixon: Ok, I might update that section 15:12:02 <gzhao> sorry rob 15:12:10 <readams> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpFlex:LithiumReleaseReview Release Review 15:12:17 <readams> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpFlex:Lithium_Release_Notes Release Notes 15:12:20 <gzhao> #info readams is representing for Opflex 15:12:43 <readams> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/developer-guide/src/main/asciidoc/opflex/libopflex-dev.adoc libopflex dev guide 15:12:49 <readams> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/developer-guide/src/main/asciidoc/opflex/genie-dev.adoc genie dev guide 15:12:55 <readams> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/developer-guide/src/main/asciidoc/opflex/agent-ovs-dev.adoc OVS agent dev guide 15:13:01 <readams> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/getting-started-guide/src/main/asciidoc/opflex/agent-ovs-install.adoc Agent install guide 15:13:06 <readams> #link https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/stable/lithium/manuals/user-guide/src/main/asciidoc/opflex/agent-ovs-user.adoc Agent user guide 15:13:17 <colindixon> thanks :p 15:13:21 <readams> And now I'm done with my linkspam :-) 15:13:56 <colindixon> ok, this looks good 15:14:10 <gzhao> readams: could you link those in https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpFlex:LithiumReleaseReview as well 15:14:12 <colindixon> #info colindixon notes that the target environment is different here and that’s likely intentional 15:14:50 <readams> Yea the target environment here is a bit different :-) 15:15:21 <readams> I'll add teh direct links to the release review page 15:15:21 <colindixon> do you have an idea what your code coverage from tests looks like in numbers? 15:16:00 <readams> I don't have code coverage numbers specifically (it's harder for C++) but based on prior experience I'd estimate on the order of ~75-85% 15:16:15 <colindixon> ok 15:16:16 <readams> i.e. everything with any meat has tests 15:16:16 <colindixon> cool 15:16:21 <colindixon> I’m happy 15:16:25 <gzhao> #info readams says he doesn't have code coverage numbers specifically (it's harder for C++) but based on prior experience I'd estimate on the order of ~75-85% 15:16:55 <gzhao> #action readams to link dev, user doc to https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpFlex:LithiumReleaseReview 15:17:38 <gzhao> any more question for Opflex? 15:17:52 <colindixon> I’m good 15:17:56 <colindixon> phrobb: 15:18:01 <gzhao> do we have people from SXP? 15:18:23 <phrobb> readams: The release notes mention that genie generates "group-based-policy" model, and agent-ovs implements "group-based-policy" model with OpenStack "group-based-policy". When you reference "group-based-policy" is that to the ODL Group Based Policy project and if so, is there a relationship/dependency between OPFLEX and ODL GBP? 15:18:59 <phrobb> sorry colindixon ... took a bit to type my question. Hopefully it is coherent... just looking to not confuse the users with overloaded GBP terms 15:19:09 <colindixon> yeah 15:19:15 <readams> It's all part of the same big happy family :-). Group-based policy is a multi-project initialive across OpenStack and OpenDaylight 15:19:28 <readams> I'm also the original author of the GBP project 15:19:32 <gzhao> #info phrobb asks The release notes mention that genie generates "group-based-policy" model, and agent-ovs implements "group-based-policy" model with OpenStack "group-based-policy". When you reference "group-based-policy" is that to the ODL Group Based Policy project and if so, is there a relationship/dependency between OPFLEX and ODL GBP? 15:19:37 <readams> they implement the same policy model 15:19:52 <colindixon> #info readams says they implement the same policy model 15:20:02 <gzhao> #info readams says Group-based policy is a multi-project initialive across OpenStack and OpenDaylight 15:20:05 <readams> There is currently no explicit dependency from the GBP model to the OpFlex project however currently 15:20:13 <readams> that integration is planned for some time in the future 15:20:18 <phrobb> Cool, thanks readams. But there is no dependency/relationship between OPFLEX and ODL GBP other than they implement the same model, correct? 15:20:53 <readams> Yes phrobb currently no dependency though integration is something we want to do in the future 15:20:58 <gzhao> do we have representative from SXP project, Mathew ? 15:21:18 <readams> release review updated 15:21:21 <phrobb> readams. got it... sorry I was typing my previous question while you were answering it :-p 15:21:26 <phrobb> no more questions from me 15:21:28 <readams> np :-) 15:22:01 <gzhao> do we have representative from l2switch? 15:22:11 <gzhao> is Alex Fan on line? 15:22:21 <mrobertson> Yes, I am representing SXP 15:22:27 <gzhao> mrobertson: cool 15:22:31 <gzhao> #topic SXP 15:22:51 <gzhao> mrobertson: please info in your release review and release note link 15:23:03 <gzhao> #info mrobertson is representing for SXP 15:23:50 <mrobertson_> release review - https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/SXP:Lithium:Release_Review release notes - https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/SXP:Lithium:Release_Notes 15:24:22 <gzhao> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/SXP:Lithium:Release_Review <-- release review 15:24:35 <gzhao> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/SXP:Lithium:Release_Notes <-- release notes 15:24:58 <phrobb> mrobertson_: if SXP depends on tcpmd5, is your execution environment not limited to 64bit Linux boxes? 15:25:55 <gzhao> mrobertson_: your user guide and dev guid link seems wrong 15:27:02 <gzhao> oops, it seems we lost mrobertson_ 15:27:31 <gzhao> #action mrobertson_ to fix user guide and dev guide link in release review 15:27:41 <phrobb> Actually, I think I now see that SDNi has the same Linux execution environment requirement re tcpmd5 15:27:58 <mrobertson_> we will correct the link. seems to be pointing to the wrong spot 15:28:10 <colindixon> phrobb: yes 15:28:23 <mrobertson_> re: 64bit; paritally, but only if we use a password. 15:28:52 <mrobertson_> SXP can go without Password authentification then thera are no limitation otherwise 15:28:53 <phrobb> mrobertson_: right. Is there a way to reflect that in the release notes so that users are aware 15:29:13 <mrobertson_> yes, we can make that change 15:29:19 <phrobb> thanks mrobertson_ 15:29:56 <gzhao> #action mrobertson_ to update target environment with 64 bit 15:30:19 <gzhao> #action gzhao to inform SDNi to update release notes for limitation of 64 bit linux 15:31:36 <colindixon> sxp should remove “TOUPDATE” from bugzilla summary 15:32:28 <colindixon> #info colindixon notes that the target environment should really read “as per OpenDaylight” 15:33:19 <colindixon> #action mrobertson_ to remove “TOUPDATE” from the bugzilla summary 15:33:27 <colindixon> anything else form others? 15:33:28 <gzhao> alefan: hello 15:33:39 <alefan> hi 15:33:50 <colindixon> #topic l2switch 15:33:51 <phrobb> nothing more from me 15:34:09 <gzhao> #info alefan is representing for L2switch 15:34:24 <gzhao> alefan: please info your releae review and release notes 15:34:33 <colindixon> is there a release review in additional to release notes? 15:34:53 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/L2_Switch:Lithium:Release_Review release review 15:34:54 <colindixon> found it 15:35:03 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/L2_Switch:Lithium:Release_Notes relase notes 15:35:14 <alefan> Thanks Colin, beat me to it. 15:36:15 <alefan> Those are the two documents related to Lithium. 15:36:40 <LuisGomez> I do not see link/port status issues reported in release notes 15:36:48 <LuisGomez> csit test is failing on that 15:37:01 <mrobertson_> Sorry, topic changed before I could ask - re: SXP - just to clarify if the TSC considers SXP to be part of the Lithium release 15:37:20 <colindixon> mrobertson_: yes 15:37:24 <alefan> I believe Amit committed the fix for the links not being removed correcdtly -- he cleared one of the member variables 15:37:42 <mrobertson_> colindixon: thanks. 15:37:52 <gzhao> alefan: the release notes New Features and Enhancements seems used older version 15:38:11 <gzhao> https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/L2_Switch:Helium:Release_Notes#New_Features_and_Enhancements 15:38:22 <LuisGomez> the csit is still failing :9 15:38:47 <gzhao> LuisGomez: for l2switch? 15:39:20 <LuisGomez> yep 15:39:37 <LuisGomez> loop removal and host tracker do not update after a link down 15:39:37 <colindixon> #info LuisGomez says we still have failing l2switch CSIT tests failing because links are not being removed correctly and asks that it be listed in known issues 15:39:44 <LuisGomez> this is old issue 15:39:50 <alefan> I'll add that to the release notes then for now & discuss with Amit later today about the failing. 15:39:55 <LuisGomez> being reported for weeks and not fixed 15:40:06 <gzhao> alefan: actually your release notes point to Helium release note in release review 15:40:18 <colindixon> #action alefan to update the release notes and release review with the known issues around link removal 15:40:43 <alefan> Hmm...let me check... 15:40:54 <colindixon> ok 15:41:07 * gzhao take a eye break 15:41:09 <alefan> You're right 15:41:21 <alefan> There are references to Helium in the Lithium document, I'll remove those 15:41:22 <LuisGomez> alefan, you can check RC0 and RC1 test reports 15:41:31 <abhijitkumbhare> gzhao: you are not allowed an eyebreak :) 15:41:42 <alefan> I'll do that Luis, thanks 15:41:42 <LuisGomez> ii added there the l2switch failures 15:41:51 <alefan> I'll check why it's failing & see if Amit's fix got committed properly 15:41:53 * gzhao notices the line grows quite long at check in counter @SFO 15:41:56 <alefan> or if it didn't fix the underlying issue 15:41:57 <colindixon> alefan: can you change the name of or remove the “Lithium Stable Update 1” section in the release notes 15:42:09 <abhijitkumbhare> OK - gzhao :) 15:42:09 <gzhao> abhijitkumbhare: -:) 15:42:18 <colindixon> gzhao: you can leave hwenver you need 15:42:28 <alefan> Yes, I will do that, colin 15:42:30 <alefan> I'll do that now 15:42:38 <gzhao> colindixon: in 2 hours 15:43:30 <gzhao> any more questions for l2switch? 15:43:43 <LuisGomez> not from me 15:43:52 <colindixon> ok, other than the issues raised above, e.g., wrong links in the non-code aspects of the release review, misnamed section in release notes, and the other known issues 15:44:09 <alefan> Thanks George & Luiz & Colin :) 15:44:18 <LuisGomez> thanks alefan 15:44:20 <colindixon> thanks 15:44:30 <gzhao> #action alefan to fix the issues raised above, e.g., wrong links in the non-code aspects of the release review, misnamed section in release notes, and the other known issues 15:44:49 <gzhao> #topic openflow plugin 15:45:04 <abhijitkumbhare> Hi 15:45:05 <gzhao> #info abhijitkumbhare is representing for openflow plugin 15:45:17 <gzhao> please info in your docs 15:45:27 <abhijitkumbhare> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_OpenFlow_Plugin:Lithium_Release_Review 15:45:43 <abhijitkumbhare> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_OpenFlow_Plugin:Lithium_Release_Notes 15:46:03 * colindixon starts reading 15:46:40 <colindixon> #action abhijitkumbhare to remove the “per-edition release notes” from the top of the release notes 15:47:01 <abhijitkumbhare> OK 15:47:19 <gzhao> phrobb: colindixon LuisGomez I have to head in to check in and pass security gate now. 15:47:27 <colindixon> gzhao: understood 15:47:36 <phrobb> sound good gzhao 15:48:00 <colindixon> abhijitkumbhare: in terms of migration, will it work from a Helium install to a Lithium install? 15:48:09 <colindixon> abhijitkumbhare: my guess is no, but the release notes would make me think yes 15:48:52 <vishnoianil> colindixon, you mean from user perspective ? 15:48:54 <abhijitkumbhare> Yes - from my understanding (from yesterday’s OpenFlow meeting) it should work 15:48:59 <colindixon> ok 15:49:03 <colindixon> cool 15:49:08 <vishnoianil> yes from user perspective 15:49:25 <colindixon> vishnoianil: yeah, I meant if I shut down a Helium controller, install Lithium over it, and bring it up, it should work 15:49:31 <colindixon> e.g., the models are all the same 15:49:47 <vishnoianil> yes, it's just location change 15:49:54 <colindixon> cool 15:49:58 <vishnoianil> eventually for md-sal it's loads up the same models 15:50:23 <colindixon> otherwise, this looks fine 15:50:31 <abhijitkumbhare> OK 15:50:35 <colindixon> phrobb? 15:50:51 <phrobb> nothing from me 15:51:33 <abhijitkumbhare> Will update the release notes to remove the “Per edition heading” 15:52:22 <colindixon> ok 15:52:37 <colindixon> next up is dlux 15:52:38 <colindixon> #topic dlux 15:52:41 <colindixon> harman_: you here? 15:52:47 <harman_> Harman Singh for DLUX 15:52:48 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_dlux:Lithium_Release_Review release review 15:52:59 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_dlux:Lithium_Release_Notes release notes 15:53:01 <harman_> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_dlux:Lithium_Release_Notes 15:53:03 <colindixon> #undo 15:53:03 <odl_meetbot> Removing item from minutes: <MeetBot.ircmeeting.items.Link object at 0x19aabd0> 15:53:05 <colindixon> I got it 15:53:05 <harman_> u got it 15:53:10 <colindixon> ok 15:53:13 <colindixon> cool 15:53:14 * colindixon reads 15:53:28 <colindixon> harman_: do you know if we ever got the YANG UI yang visualizer to work? 15:53:35 <colindixon> they were failing the last time I tried 15:53:41 <harman_> yes, currently, its working 15:53:48 <harman_> Juraj fixed some defects 15:53:50 <colindixon> harman_: did it need to be updated? 15:53:50 <colindixon> ok 15:53:52 <colindixon> cool 15:54:01 <harman_> earlier, i saw loading issues, but now it loads up fine 15:54:15 <harman_> there are still some defects that Juraj logged 15:54:25 <colindixon> harman_: good to know 15:54:29 <harman_> i think he is planning to fix them after Lithium 15:54:43 <colindixon> should those go in the known isseus 15:54:57 <harman_> they are mostly enhancements as per Juraj 15:55:15 <harman_> i can confirm with him one more time, if he wants to keep any of those as known issue 15:55:41 <harman_> I’ll upate notes accordingly 15:55:56 <colindixon> ok 15:56:43 <colindixon> this looks good to me 15:56:48 <colindixon> oh, migration? 15:56:57 <harman_> should not be a problem 15:57:00 <colindixon> migration and compatilbity with Helium 15:57:02 <colindixon> it should be the same? 15:57:07 <harman_> all the changes are orthogonal 15:57:17 <harman_> user won’t see a difference 15:57:17 <colindixon> e.g., a Helium add-on should work with Lihium dlux? 15:57:27 <colindixon> a UI extension 15:57:37 <harman_> ok, i think 15:57:42 <colindixon> if so, you should probably note that 15:57:43 <harman_> user have to make few changes 15:57:52 <colindixon> developer you mean? 15:57:52 <harman_> yes, i’ll update that in release notes 15:58:07 <harman_> developer have to create a bundle now 15:58:08 <harman_> yes 15:58:10 <harman_> developer 15:58:16 <colindixon> #info harman_ says that issues around the YANG UI and YANG visualizer have been fixed 15:58:30 <colindixon> #info harman_ says that migration should be trivial for a user 15:58:56 <harman_> I’ll update migration section in next hour 15:59:07 <phrobb> this looks good to me harman 15:59:16 <harman_> Thank you 15:59:31 <colindixon> #info harman_ says that some modifications might be required for a developer who wrote a dlux extension for Heiium to port it to LIthium 16:00:26 <harman_> We have that documented on wiki , will add a link for that under migration as well 16:00:27 <colindixon> #action harman_ to update the release notes with information on compatibility with and migration from Helium 16:00:30 <colindixon> thanks! 16:00:41 <colindixon> #topic USC 16:00:42 <harman_> thanks guys 16:00:46 <colindixon> Helen_Chen: you there? 16:00:48 <Helen_Chen> #info Helen_Chen is here for USC 16:00:51 <Helen_Chen> yes 16:00:53 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/USC:Lithium:Release_Review relase review 16:01:02 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/USC:Lithium:Release_Notes release notes 16:01:04 * colindixon starts reading 16:01:16 <Helen_Chen> ok, :-) 16:02:17 <Helen_Chen> #info USC is a new project for Lithium 16:04:31 <colindixon> do you have the % coverage for tests? 16:04:50 <Helen_Chen> Right now, Sonar is currently not reporting our coverage correctly. Will look into it. 16:04:58 <Helen_Chen> but we have 41 unit tests for it 16:05:44 <Helen_Chen> and 5 manual testing, including 4 nodes clustering testing 16:06:31 <colindixon> #action Helen_Chen to remove the “per-edition release notes” header and “release notes for later releases” section since they’re not really applicable 16:06:40 <Helen_Chen> ok 16:06:55 <colindixon> #info just leave the major features, target environment, known issues, testing 16:06:59 <colindixon> if that makes sense 16:07:20 <Helen_Chen> ok 16:07:50 <phrobb> Helen_Chen is your manual testing documented via test plan/test-case anywhere?... assuming you have a physical network environement with particular endpoints you are testing against. 16:08:26 <colindixon> I was going to ask something simlar, presumaby there’s a USC proxy somewhere that’s used for testing 16:08:28 <Helen_Chen> we will post it after this meeting. Yes 16:08:29 <phrobb> I don't believe such info is required. Just curious if folks could see what environment/system test has been done 16:09:29 <phrobb> no more questions from me. Nice job Helen_Chen 16:09:47 <colindixon> ok 16:10:15 <colindixon> #info colindixon and phrobb ask about testing, how it’s done, if there’s a USC proxy and how somebody else might use it 16:10:18 <Helen_Chen> thanks, we'll document the testing evn we have 16:10:29 <colindixon> #info Helen_Chen says she’ll post that later 16:10:30 <Helen_Chen> meanwhile will looking into sonar testing coverage 16:10:42 <Helen_Chen> issue 16:10:43 <colindixon> #topic capwap 16:10:46 <colindixon> navinagrawal: you there? 16:10:46 <navinagrawal> #info navinagrawal for capwap 16:10:49 <colindixon> sweet 16:10:54 <navinagrawal> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/CAPWAP:Lithium:Release_Review 16:10:58 <colindixon> fast 16:11:00 <navinagrawal> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/CAPWAP:Lithium:Release_Notes 16:14:58 <colindixon> navinagrawal: are the robot tests checked into integration? 16:15:08 <navinagrawal> yes colin. 16:15:11 <colindixon> cool 16:16:41 <phrobb> navinagrawal are the connections between the controller and WAP/WTP secured or securable? 16:16:43 <colindixon> are security considerations really n/a? 16:16:46 <colindixon> yeah 16:16:51 <phrobb> :-) 16:17:11 <navinagrawal> at this point of time, there is no security consideration. 16:17:23 <LuisGomez> basic csit test running for capwap: https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/CSIT-1node/job/capwap-csit-1node-cds-ac-only-stable-lithium/ 16:17:24 <colindixon> also, it seems like you should remove “QA” not applicable since you have a paragraph after it 16:17:24 <navinagrawal> capwap controller is only looking for wtp discovery packets. 16:17:53 <colindixon> navinagrawal: I’d say “security considerations were ignored for the first release” or something 16:17:56 <navinagrawal> dtls comes in later phase of capwap protocol, which we will attempt to do in next release. 16:18:17 <navinagrawal> will fix QA not applicable part. 16:18:48 <navinagrawal> also reword the security consideration part 16:19:23 <phrobb> navinagrawal I agree with colindixon , it will be helpful to note why security is N/A... ie only sniffing for WTP discovery packets 16:19:27 <phrobb> thanks navinagrawal 16:20:23 <colindixon> #action navinagrawal to update the security section to say that security wasn’t considered in the first release 16:21:06 <colindixon> #action navinagrawal to remove “not applicable” from QA 16:21:07 <phrobb> nothing else from me for CAPWAP 16:21:11 <colindixon> I’m good too 16:21:19 <navinagrawal> #action nagrawal to remove Per-Edition from capwap release note 16:21:43 <colindixon> vtn is up next 16:21:44 <navinagrawal> thanks folks 16:21:45 <colindixon> navinagrawal: thanks 16:21:49 <colindixon> #topic VTN 16:21:52 <hideyuki> #info Hideyuki for VTN 16:21:56 <hideyuki> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_Virtual_Tenant_Network_(VTN):Lithium_Release_Review 16:22:03 <hideyuki> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/OpenDaylight_Virtual_Tenant_Network_(VTN):Lithium_Release_Notes 16:24:03 * colindixon reads 16:25:03 <colindixon> hideyuki: this looks good, two questoins 16:25:18 <colindixon> 1.) should the workaround for 3818 be listed here? 16:25:29 <colindixon> 2.) does migration from Helium to Lithium work? 16:25:39 <phrobb> Agreed, nicely done hideyuki . One question from me... 16:26:09 <hideyuki> colindixon: 1) Should we write here? if we should, I'll write it. (Now, we write in the bugzilla.) 16:26:21 <colindixon> is it in the bugzilla? 16:26:30 <colindixon> if so, just say “see workaround in the bugzilla" 16:26:40 <hideyuki> colindixon: Ok. 16:27:22 <hideyuki> colindixon: 2) I'm not sure how to answer. VTN configuration (via REST API) is compatible between helium and Lithium. 16:27:23 <phrobb> hideyuki: is it worth noting VTN support for NIC in your release notes?... given that in a sense NIC is a new abstraction/interface to VTN? 16:27:42 <colindixon> #action hideyuki to add either the description of the workaround for 3818 to the release notes/review or say see the bugzilla notes for the workaround 16:27:57 <hideyuki> phrobb: I see. I'll add this note. 16:28:07 <hideyuki> colindixon: Ok. 16:28:22 <colindixon> #info colindixon asks about compatibility with Helium, hideyuki says the REST API to VTN is the same 16:28:51 <colindixon> #action hideyuki to add a section noting that other than that the REST API is the same, compatibility with Helium is unknown and untested 16:29:04 <colindixon> hideyuki: unless you have something more nuanced to add there 16:29:12 <colindixon> #action hideyuki to note that VTN supports the NIC interface in Lithium 16:29:14 <colindixon> cool 16:29:17 <colindixon> anything else? 16:29:23 <phrobb> not from me... 16:29:35 <colindixon> hideyuki: ? 16:29:37 <LuisGomez> not from me 16:29:44 <hideyuki> not from me. 16:30:01 <phrobb> Other than to say what an absolute pleasure it is to have all PTLs on time and prepared... we actually stay right on the 10 minute/project timeline.. You all are AWESOME 16:30:15 <jburns> iotdm? 16:30:37 <phrobb> ah jburns... sorry... did not mean to forget iotdm 16:30:44 <jburns> :-) 16:31:09 <colindixon> #topic iotdm 16:31:12 <colindixon> sorry 16:31:13 <colindixon> jburns: 16:31:26 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Iotdm:Lithium_Release_Review release review 16:31:30 <colindixon> #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Iotdm:Lithium_Release_Notes release notes 16:31:34 * colindixon starts reading 16:31:57 <LuisGomez> iotdm has a basic csit failing: https://jenkins.opendaylight.org/releng/view/CSIT-1node/job/iotdm-csit-1node-cds-basic-only-stable-lithium/ 16:32:02 <LuisGomez> is this expected? 16:32:48 <colindixon> #action jburns to remove the “draft” statement from the top of the release notes 16:32:56 <jburns> The guys have been stuggling to get the robot tests running properly, so maybe? This will continue to be an ongoing effort and I do not rely (yet) on it to determine the quality of the release. 16:33:21 <LuisGomez> jburns, ok, just wanted to double-check 16:33:35 <colindixon> #info LuisGomez asks if a failing CSIT test is expected, jburns says maybe, they are still working on quality given that it’s the first release, they don’t see it as blocking 16:33:38 <colindixon> jburns: does that sound right? 16:33:46 <jburns> yes 16:34:08 <colindixon> it’d be nice if the bugs had numbers/links next to them 16:34:16 <jburns> ok 16:35:17 <jburns> We will be doing integration w/ other vendors soon so I expect more issues to arise. The specs are stillin flux so interpretations of the specs will be interesting. 16:35:20 <colindixon> in the future, you could provide a much shorter set of things for the release review, but I appreciate the depth 16:36:03 <phrobb> as did I... 16:36:26 <colindixon> in general, the idea is to cover any known architectural deficiencies, not a description of the architecture :p but it’s all good 16:36:36 <colindixon> it’s new in Lithium, so no migration issues 16:36:39 <colindixon> I’m happy 16:37:02 <jburns> great, its been fun and will continue to be! 16:37:10 <phrobb> For the release notes, are there any further suggestions/work-arounds that can be provided to users who hit these issues? 16:37:36 <phrobb> ... on the Know Issues/Limitations section that is 16:38:26 <colindixon> jburns: still there? 16:38:31 <jburns> I’ll relook at each one, and write some text if it makes sense. 16:38:44 <phrobb> Great! Much appreciate jburns 16:38:54 <colindixon> #action jburns to provide some guidance about the bugs and how to work around them for users as appropriate for bugs in the release notes 16:38:55 <colindixon> cool 16:38:59 <colindixon> I think we’re done here fols 16:39:02 <colindixon> folks 16:39:04 <jburns> Great! 16:39:09 <colindixon> I’ll restate what phrobb said above 16:39:12 <phrobb> #action jburns to look at "known Issues" and provide more context and work arounds as appropriate 16:39:16 <colindixon> on time all the way through 16:39:22 <phrobb> just did I think colindixon 16:39:41 <phrobb> yea, I find that remarkable given the number of 10 minute meetings we just had 16:39:43 <colindixon> anything else? 16:39:44 <LuisGomez> colindixon and all, any mention to freeze the stable/lithium until we tag the release? 16:39:47 <phrobb> not from me 16:40:11 <LuisGomez> do we need to do that or not? 16:40:14 <colindixon> we already said patches other than blocking bugs should not go into stable/lithium 16:40:17 <colindixon> we can say it again 16:40:28 <colindixon> we have one blocking bug that we don’t know if it’s fixed or not in RC2 16:40:37 <colindixon> #endmeetiing 16:40:44 <colindixon> #endmeeting