#opendaylight-meeting: tws
Meeting started by colindixon at 17:02:30 UTC
(full logs).
Meeting summary
- agenda (colindixon, 17:02:35)
- today Michal Polkoráb will present info on the
topology processing framework (colindixon,
17:03:37)
- if you have other topics, please let Keith and
I know, and we’ll get you on the agenda (colindixon,
17:04:40)
- https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Tech_Work_Stream:Main#Meeting_Schedule_and_Logistics
(colindixon,
17:04:50)
- topology processing framework (colindixon, 17:04:58)
- restarted recording around 10:07, and we’re
starting things in case you’re trying to sync meeting minutes and
the recording (colindixon,
17:06:35)
- the topology procesing framework sits in the
controller (colindixon,
17:07:02)
- its primary role is to create aggregated
topology interfaces instead of one (or more) topology per
protocol (colindixon,
17:07:40)
- right now it works by creating logical nodes
and embedding them in a single logical topology (colindixon,
17:08:03)
- in addition to logically merging topologies,
topologies can be filtered so that you can see a subset of
topology (colindixon,
17:10:12)
- right now there is a way for you to provide a
Comparator (I think) which will say if two nodes should be unified
when aggregated topologies are created (colindixon,
17:12:20)
- there is also a way to filter based on the Node
IP (colindixon,
17:12:28)
- live-view operations (colindixon, 17:12:53)
- the framework appropriately handles and
produces node added, node removed, and node changed (colindixon,
17:13:56)
- https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Topology_Processing_Framework:Developer_Guide
the developer guide (colindixon,
17:14:01)
- https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Topology_Processing_Framework:Main
the project main page (colindixon,
17:14:15)
- equality aggregation use case (colindixon, 17:15:06)
- they show the 80-topoprocessin-confg.xml
file (colindixon,
17:16:28)
- shows the running ODL karaf container: the bgp
features are installed, the topology processing feature is
installed, and the restconf feature is installed (colindixon,
17:17:57)
- they push a REST request telling topoprocessing
to merge the 3 bpg topologies into one (colindixon,
17:18:43)
- show via a REST get that there is now a logical
topology (colindixon,
17:19:06)
- they push 3 nodes with the same IP address into
the 3 different pcep (bgp) topologies and show that they get
aggreged into the same node in the logical topology (colindixon,
17:20:04)
- they change the IP address of one of the nodes
so that it has a different IP addess, this is reflected in the
logical topologies (colindixon,
17:21:17)
- they also demonstrate remving nodes
(colindixon,
17:21:26)
- the key point here is that in the equality use
case only published nodes that can be aggregated into the logical
topology, if there are nodes which have no potential aggregations,
they aren’t listed (colindixon,
17:22:36)
- unification aggregagion use case (colindixon, 17:22:53)
- in this case, the logical topology will contain
all nodes in the topologies it is reading from even if there is no
way to aggregate it with anything else (colindixon,
17:23:27)
- colindixon asks if there’s any reason you’d use
the equality use case over the unification, the answer is that seems
likely but for now they suppor both because it wasn’t hard
(colindixon,
17:24:33)
- they go through the demo of adding, changing,
and removing nodes and showing they are appropriately
represented (colindixon,
17:25:00)
- colindixon asks how it finds the fields to
compare equality, tony asks Michal to show the network topology
configuration to answer the question (colindixon,
17:27:20)
- the config shows that they are specifying the
fields to compare for equaity, but they have to be fields defined as
augmentations to topoglogy node (colindixon,
17:29:39)
- critically, that means you can’t corelate OF
nodes since they augment inventory nodes (colindixon,
17:31:17)
- colindixon asks abhijitkumbhare if there’s any
plan to move OF from inventory to topology, he says no, not at this
time (colindixon,
17:31:38)
- abhijitkumbhare notes that we can discuss this
during the Beryllium release plans (abhijitkumbhare,
17:33:02)
- michal says he hopes to work on fixing that
during Beryllium (colindixon,
17:33:48)
- colindixon asks if we could use use comparators
instead of just equality, micahal says that’s planned for Beryllium
along with some scripting (colindixon,
17:35:35)
- filtering use case (colindixon, 17:36:06)
- Micahal says that they have IP address
filtering only right now, but he’s happy to implement whatever else
you want if you ask (colindixon,
17:36:33)
- the demo shows that the logical topolgoy, does
in fact, filter based on IP addresses (colindixon,
17:37:48)
- colindixon asks if you could extend this to be
able to add new filters after compile time (colindixon,
17:39:23)
- Michal says not now, but maybe in Be
(colindixon,
17:39:30)
- wrapping up (colindixon, 17:39:34)
- currnetly this works with real topology and
real data, as long as everything augments the topology model
(colindixon,
17:39:57)
- longer-term goals multi-layer multi-topology
support (colindixon,
17:40:14)
- scripting support for programmable rules in
filtering, equality and unification (colindixon,
17:40:39)
- LuisGomez asks, you showed nodes, what about
links and termination points (colindixon,
17:41:10)
- Michal says links and TPs are aren’t supported,
but they’re hoping to do that in Be (colindixon,
17:41:26)
- colindixon asks what they used to make the
slides, the answer is impress.js (the slides were cool) (colindixon,
17:43:03)
- they will post the slides to the wiki
(colindixon,
17:43:15)
- colindixon says that this is really cool and is
important for anyone writing an app that wants be support multiple
different southbound protoocols and deal with toptology in a
protocol-independent way, because you will have to build your own
version of this or use this stuff (colindixon,
17:49:22)
- hideyuki asks what colindixon meant above about
the inventory model vs. topology model (colindixon,
17:49:45)
- colindixon says that for historical reasons, we
have two top-level models with nodes: inventory (which is
ODL-specific) and topology (which is from an IETF RFC) (colindixon,
17:51:06)
- for historical reasons the OF plugin uses the
inventory model, while pretty much everyone else uses topology and
we should really be moved to the topology model (colindixon,
17:54:37)
- asciidoc stuff (colindixon, 18:01:46)
- tony shows how to do some automated translation
of wiki to asciidoc (colindixon,
18:03:51)
- tony will send an e-mail to the mailing list
describing what he’s done (colindixon,
18:04:59)
- there was a lot of discussion around how to
improve docs going forward (colindixon,
18:05:11)
- dbainbri asks if we want to have a model which
is AsciiDoc as the primary and that’s where people edit it or if we
want to move to a mode where the wiki is the primary and we simply
use AsciiDoc to archive things at a release (colindixon,
18:05:46)
- several people say that having HTML would be
much better than PDFs (colindixon,
18:05:59)
- colindixon says that we have HTML, it’s just
way too segmented (one document per subsection or subsubsection) to
be useful (colindixon,
18:06:52)
- tony shows that on github, we can use some of
their asciidoc renderer to get HTML views of the live docs in the
repo (colindixon,
18:07:16)
- https://github.com/opendaylight/docs/blob/master/manuals/getting-started-guide/src/main/asciidoc/general_installation.adoc
this is a good example (colindixon,
18:08:41)
- odlcasey asks about how the documentation
effort is staffed, colindixon says it’s staffed by people who mostly
have day jobs as well and thus we just don’t have the raw
documentation horsepower except from the projects themselves
(colindixon,
18:10:08)
- colindixon invites anyone who wants to help to
come to the docs project meetings and plan Be features if they are
interested (colindixon,
18:10:35)
- https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Documentation
this page has information on documentation meetings and plans (colindixon,
18:11:09)
Meeting ended at 18:11:14 UTC
(full logs).
Action items
- (none)
People present (lines said)
- colindixon (75)
- odl_meetbot (7)
- abhijitkumbhare (3)
- hideyuki (2)
- dbainbri (2)
- gzhao (1)
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.