============================= #opendaylight-nic: nic_weekly ============================= Meeting started by tbachman at 16:09:29 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetings.opendaylight.org/opendaylight-nic/2015/nic_weekly/opendaylight-nic-nic_weekly.2015-02-06-16.09.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * project culter (tbachman, 16:09:59) * dbainbri (dbainbri, 16:10:03) * project culture is to use Trello for managing and tracking tasks (tbachman, 16:10:30) * Project Release Plane (tbachman, 16:11:35) * devond says we need to elect the project lead (tbachman, 16:11:51) * devond asks if this is the right time to call for the election (tbachman, 16:12:01) * dbainbri says we should do it on the mailing list (tbachman, 16:12:13) * phrobb says to send mail asking for self-nominations (tbachman, 16:12:21) * phrobb says the condorcet web site is used for the election process (tbachman, 16:12:45) * devond is the project contact (tbachman, 16:12:53) * ACTION: devond to send mail for self nominations (phrobb, 16:13:00) * devond asks how to approach the test contact (tbachman, 16:13:15) * hideyuki says there’s not official process to elect a test contact (tbachman, 16:13:43) * phrobb says the only elected position is the project lead; everything else is by appointment by the project (tbachman, 16:13:58) * phrobb says the test and doc contacts work with the respective teams in ODL (e.g. integration and docs) (tbachman, 16:14:21) * ACTION: devond to work with Project Lead, once elected, to get test and doc contacts (tbachman, 16:15:11) * gzhao asks about the nic project dependencies — do we need the controller for the MD-SAL SFC pieces? (tbachman, 16:15:53) * LINK: https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/Network_Intent_Composition:Lithium_Release_Plan Lithim release plan for the NIC project (tbachman, 16:16:34) * dbainbri says it should be yangtools and the controller for the dependency (tbachman, 16:17:32) * gzhao says you list everything you need, and if there are new features needed, you need to make requests of those projects (tbachman, 16:18:19) * ACTION: devond says he will do the legwork to manage the dependencies (tbachman, 16:19:38) * dependencies to be added are yangtools, ofplugin, and the controller (tbachman, 16:19:53) * devond asks if AAA is a dependency (tbachman, 16:20:00) * team says no (tbachman, 16:20:06) * hideyuki says he doesn’t understand the difference between prototype and ONF-SFC (tbachman, 16:20:33) * hideyuki plans to implement a prototype, and would like to know the difference between them (tbachman, 16:20:53) * ShaunWackerly says the ONF-SFC prototype was specifically what dlenrow and Cathy had spoken to on the mailing list — a well defined prototype (tbachman, 16:21:41) * ShaunWackerly says they also plan to do some prototyping outside of the ONF-SFC as well (tbachman, 16:21:54) * The prototyping selected components was starting implementation of the high level design we come up with (ShaunWackerly, 16:23:19) * It would be unrelated to the ONF SFC. ONF SFC was described earlier as a dead-end branch. (ShaunWackerly, 16:23:46) * dmentze describes that non-ONF prototyping would be the building blocks for a long-term NIC solution (ShaunWackerly, 16:24:15) * devond asks if we should edit the wiki to get rid of the confusion around prototype (tbachman, 16:25:15) * gzhao says yes (tbachman, 16:25:19) * dmentze says that we need input from dlenrow about the differences (ShaunWackerly, 16:25:44) * hideyuki asks if he should add a VTN prototype to the list, that's what he plans on working on (ShaunWackerly, 16:27:13) * dmentze says that will hopefully be included under the general prototyping item (ShaunWackerly, 16:27:34) * dmentze says that the team should discuss architecture well enough to be able to have a prototyped framework that works for all (ShaunWackerly, 16:28:25) * ACTION: dlenrow has been asked (by devond) to give a fuller description of the scope of the ONF SFC prototype (ShaunWackerly, 16:29:59) * devond asks if we need to update themes to reflect other items (ShaunWackerly, 16:33:51) * dmentze suggests we add one item to reflect the high level priorities (ShaunWackerly, 16:34:08) * dmentze says that we’ve got work going on with the model; use case work can progress from that (tbachman, 16:36:00) * uchau asks if we should do f2f meetings (tbachman, 16:37:04) * dbainbri says if we can get this all done in one week that’s great; depends on feedback for use cases (tbachman, 16:38:08) * dbainbri says we can use email and the wiki, so that it’s documented in an easy to find place (tbachman, 16:38:21) * ShaunWackerly asks if we can use email and post outcomes on the wiki? (tbachman, 16:38:53) * ShaunWackerly says we can tag emails for use cases, so we can record a discussion per use case (tbachman, 16:39:10) * dbainbri says that makes sense, as long as we identify the individual who’s going to document it (tbachman, 16:39:23) * phrobb says we don’t typically do that kind of commenting on the wiki, but etherpad is available for such things (tbachman, 16:39:44) * AGREED: will use email, tag use cases in the email, and document on the wiki (tbachman, 16:40:02) * devond would like to have this done by next week; may prompt need for f2f meetings the following week (tbachman, 16:40:26) * ShaunWackerly proposed some changes to the model; wonders if we’re suspending any model changes while we discuss use cases (tbachman, 16:40:50) * dbainbri says we should do both at the same time (tbachman, 16:41:26) * Helen asks if the current use cases are documented? (tbachman, 16:41:51) * ShaunWackerly asks if Helen asks to discuss things on email, propose markups on etherpad or gdoc, and put results on wiki (tbachman, 16:43:57) * Helen says that’s correct (tbachman, 16:44:01) * dbainbri prefers first #agreed — do email, then take to wiki (tbachman, 16:44:31) * devond asks if Helen is okay with the first approach (tbachman, 16:44:39) * Helen says that’s okay — just finds it hard following all the emails (tbachman, 16:44:50) * dbainbri agres it would be nice to have a tool for more focused discussion (tbachman, 16:45:22) * ShaunWackerly asks that folks change the email thread name if the thread changes (e.g. per use case) (tbachman, 16:47:32) * dmentze proposes a special meeting to discuss use cases, like uchau proposed f2f (ShaunWackerly, 16:48:29) * ShaunWackerly asks if we want to talk about src/destinations split and other items (tbachman, 16:50:40) * dbainbri submitted another patch about desired network state (tbachman, 16:51:08) * dbainbri wonders if it makes sense for an intent to have src/dest, and policy with src/dst and dst/src (tbachman, 16:51:37) * ShaunWackerly says that atomicity could be handled by grouping or some kind of ID in policies (ShaunWackerly, 16:57:16) * dbainbri says that might move complexity from one area to another (ShaunWackerly, 16:57:31) * dmentze asks if we need to solve the atomicity issue (ShaunWackerly, 16:57:44) * dmentze proposes that different policies in each direction should be two separate intents (ShaunWackerly, 16:59:41) * dbainbri points out that this would need 2 intents per bidirectional connection (ShaunWackerly, 17:00:07) * dmentze says we should talk more use cases (ShaunWackerly, 17:00:26) * dbainbri referred to an email that LouisF sent, where he identified all of the different options for A,B,C policies (ShaunWackerly, 17:01:20) Meeting ended at 17:02:12 UTC. Action items, by person ----------------------- * devond * devond to send mail for self nominations * devond to work with Project Lead, once elected, to get test and doc contacts * devond says he will do the legwork to manage the dependencies * dlenrow has been asked (by devond) to give a fuller description of the scope of the ONF SFC prototype People present (lines said) --------------------------- * tbachman (107) * ShaunWackerly (36) * odl_meetbot (9) * dbainbri (4) * phrobb (3) * uchau (3) * gzhao (2) * devond (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4