15:02:57 #startmeeting nic weekly 15:02:57 Meeting started Fri Mar 20 15:02:57 2015 UTC. The chair is gzhao. Information about MeetBot at http://ci.openstack.org/meetbot.html. 15:02:57 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote. 15:02:57 The meeting name has been set to 'nic_weekly' 15:03:07 #Roll Call 15:03:14 #topic Roll Call 15:03:19 #info gzhao 15:03:23 #info tbachman 15:03:34 #link https://meetings.opendaylight.org/opendaylight-nic/2015/nic_weekly/opendaylight-nic-nic_weekly.2015-03-13-15.02.html Minutes from last week’s meeting 15:03:59 #info duane mentze 15:04:33 #info Hideyuki Tai 15:04:53 #chair tbachman phrobb dmentze 15:04:53 Current chairs: dmentze gzhao phrobb tbachman 15:05:36 #topic agenda 15:05:43 #info dmentze and devon have to change roles — moving on 15:06:21 #link https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/nic-dev/2015-March/000584.html email describing today’s agenda 15:06:41 #info gzhao will be the project contact 15:06:45 #action gzhao to update M3 status 15:06:54 #undo 15:06:54 Removing item from minutes: 15:07:00 lol 15:07:01 sorry gzhao 15:07:07 #action gzhao to work with dmentze for M3 status 15:07:07 * tbachman misheard 15:07:13 got it 15:07:14 ;) 15:07:19 tbachman: ;) 15:07:45 #topic PTL election 15:08:00 dmentze: My understanding is a few weeks 15:09:18 #info dbainbri is out until the end of the month; dmentze says we have two options — do election w/o dbainbri, or just have folks volunteer for those roles until a PTL election can be done that includes dbainbri 15:09:18 gzhao: May I offer some precedents for this ? 15:09:38 * alagalah_ can't get on microphone... 15:10:20 #link https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/nic-dev/2015-March/000600.html email from gzhao describing his thoughts/proposal on this issue 15:10:21 gzhao: PTL is self-nominating only ... but even though PTL has been in the charter for as long as I remember, we got by with POC... so I believe the precedent of a POC in the interim would be acceptable 15:11:08 phrobb: Can you verify what I said above ? 15:11:11 #info phrobb says his recommendation is to try to contact dbainbri to see if he will self-nominate 15:11:27 tbachman: Are you on webex ? 15:11:27 #link https://wiki.opendaylight.org/view/CondorcetElection4PTLs < --- ODL PTL process 15:11:31 alagalah_: ack 15:11:37 Can you ask folks to look at IRC plesae? 15:11:55 gzhao: ^^^^ 15:12:25 tbachman: IRC only 15:12:34 got it — just mentioned that they look at it 15:12:35 tbachman: So can you direct people to IRC please ? 15:13:22 #info phrobb says worst-case is that a Point of Contact can be used for a while — asks if anyone else is planning to self-nominate 15:14:08 #action gzhao will try to contact dbainbri re: PTL self-nomination 15:14:45 #action colindixon to also try to contact dbainbri 15:15:10 I may self-nominate, negotiating w/mgmt, when is deadline? 15:15:21 dlenrow: Folks aren't paying attention to IRC 15:15:22 dlenrow: I think they’re trying to define it :) 15:15:23 dlenrow: great 15:15:31 On plane doors closing soon... 15:15:42 #info dlenrow may self-nominate (pending approval from mgmt) 15:15:42 dlenrow: tbachman Can you PLEASE GET PEOPLE TO WATCH IRC 15:16:10 #info mlemay says there are a couple of candidates who are expressing concern about the amount of time involved in being PTL 15:16:22 #Info gzhao asks if everyone agrees to extend deadline to next week 15:16:35 #info dmentze agrees we need to extend it to next week 15:17:04 #info dmentze asks colindixon if the TSC would approve just putting dbainbri’s name on the PTL nominiation list 15:17:35 #info colindixon says that projects are free to determine their nomiation process — the election has to be handled as called out by the TSC 15:17:53 #info colindixon says he’s not aware of any timeline that a project has for running w/o a PTL 15:18:22 #info gzhao recommends moving the deadline to March 31st, as there are several candidates who need more time — would have PTL elected on April 3rd meeting 15:18:34 "If nominated I will not run. If elected I will not serve" :) 15:18:54 Just goofing 15:18:57 #agreed moving the nomination deadline to March 31st; PTL election on April 3rd meeting 15:19:08 #topic M3 status 15:19:48 dlenrow: looks like the process is "self-nominate", you are safe. lol 15:20:21 #info dmentze says NIC doesn’t have customer-visible features, which simplifies this 15:20:56 #info dmentze asks for volunteers for karaf features 15:21:12 #info mlemay says dmentze can put mlemay’s name next to karaf features 15:23:20 #info colindixon says the docs requirement for M3 is to mostly just create a template, not filling in content; requests help adding content as the project moves along 15:24:57 dmentze: I can help on Karaf as well if needed 15:25:15 #info dmentze says there are no system/integration requirements, as there are no user-facing features 15:26:31 gzhao: ok great.. :) thx george lets sync up on that if you want 15:26:45 mlemay: sure 15:27:12 #info dmentze recommends picking a model so that code can be written 15:27:42 #info dmentze asks how to get a consensus decision from a large group 15:27:55 * tbachman wonders if this is a TSC question, or project question 15:30:03 Recommend coders assume model can change still 15:30:36 #info dmentze says one possibility is to take HP code, work with it, and then let that drive design discussions 15:31:07 Recommend EPG-centric intent model so EP concensus not needed 15:31:39 #info gzhao agrees with dmentze — if we want something to happen in Lithium time frame, given that we’re at M3, this may be the best path 15:31:52 #info gzhao asks who at HP would be the contact for his code going forward 15:32:23 #info dmentze says during the deep-dive, there wasn’t a lot of questions; wasn’t sure how to interpret that; going forward, HP has 3 dedidcate engineers who are going to be ramping on the code 15:33:02 #link https://lists.opendaylight.org/pipermail/nic-dev/2015-March/000574.html email from dmentze describing replacements from HP 15:33:59 #info helen says sometimes it 15:34:01 #undo 15:34:01 Removing item from minutes: 15:34:19 #info helen says sometimes it’s harder to inherit code than create from scratch 15:35:14 #info helen says it may be better to focus on a single use case, such as SFC 15:35:19 was it SFC or NFV? 15:35:37 #info dmentze says it’s important for the group to agree on that use case 15:36:14 #info colindixon says the challenge is to create clean, simple abstractions in order to support a bunch of use cases; focusing on a single use case early on may make creating such a model hard 15:38:13 #info helen said we look at the whole use case set, and implement one for the lithium time frame 15:38:22 helen_chen: thx! 15:38:29 * tbachman didn’t realize helen_chen was on IRC ;) 15:38:42 tbachman: welcome 15:40:04 #info mlemay says there’s been a lot of model discussions — we’ve identified a bunch of use cases, but we need to start working at providing extra value in ODL through this project 15:41:20 #info dmentze says that while he appreciates the need for clean APIs, the code underneath is really non-trivial 15:42:01 #info dmentze says we need to get coders working on supporting some of these APIs — might be good for some to go explore SFC space; pull HP code and work with it 15:42:26 #info dmentze says it might be hard to do a “think-tank” design 15:43:27 #info colindixon says there are lots of implementations of intent in ODL: OVSDB is an implementation of one kind of intent; SFC is another implementation of another kind of intent; there’s GBP which is another implementation of another kind of intent; he feels that this might be down to simple shims into those projects 15:43:52 #info colindixon says his experience is that if the people who wrote the code aren’t there, then the code is not useful 15:44:14 #info gzhao says during the 2hrs deep dive let people understand the structures; but to take ownership of the HP code is harder 15:44:39 #info colindixon says there are implementations that are lying around, with active committers; figuring out how NIC maps onto those might be very constructive 15:45:14 #info mlemay agrees with colindixon — having a shim layer to existing pieces in ODL is already providing value 15:45:42 #info mlemay says having the ability to batch intent has a lot of value, and an intent topology 15:45:54 #info gzhao agrees with colindixon and mlemay 15:46:32 #info helen_chen agrees with that idea 15:47:18 #info someone asks if we need to agree on the API for intent, and then can start on the implementation 15:49:22 #info mlemay asks if those on the meeting would be okay with merging the HP code in one folder and the models in another folder, and then get started on the code piece 15:49:29 #info hideyuki asks what the shim layer is 15:50:02 #info mlemay says the shim layer is a mapping of the intent NB’s to existing projects or ways of implementing that, instead of translating to existing openflow rules 15:50:53 #info mlemay says for example, an intent that would describe an overlay could map to an overlay model in OVSDB 15:51:20 #info hideyuki says they are planning to developing a mapping layer in VTN project; that’s fine for them 15:51:56 #info gzhao asks what the concrete plan for Lithium, given agreement to the shim layer strategy 15:53:29 #info mlemay says we may come up with a model totally different 15:53:35 #info mlemay says one thing to keep in mind for the models is to keep the notion of groups 15:53:37 gzhao: thx! 15:54:07 * tbachman wonders who “Call in user 6” is 15:54:16 I would guess Cathy? 15:54:27 tbachman: cahty 15:54:30 yes, it is Cathy 15:54:30 mlemay: thx! 15:54:31 gzhao: thx! 15:54:58 * tbachman is having trouble hearing Cathy 15:55:07 #info colindixon says he believes the developers will drive the model 15:56:04 mlemay: you are opening the "Pandora's box" now 15:56:11 #info dmentze and mlemay agree 15:56:13 in this case, it’s going to be very interersting and hard to drive this 15:56:27 we need to both have people writing code drive the models up 15:56:38 but also we need to keep implementation details out of th emodel 15:56:46 colindixon: +1 15:56:50 and keep it to a very small number of abstractions 15:56:52 #info gzhao asks if the conclusion is to let the developers work on the models 15:57:19 ther aren’t a ton of examples fo this happening the past, the UNIX abstrations focusing on the file is one of the few I can point to 15:58:36 #info dmentze asks how the project is going to operationalize all of this — who are the people who are going to write the code to connect it into ODL projects 15:59:56 #info mlemay says he can commit 2 resources to the project 16:00:06 #info helen_chen says she can include 1-2 resources 16:00:10 #info colindixon notes (in the IRC logs) that this is going to be *really* hard because it needs to be bottom up from the coders, but also keep the implementation details out of the model and keep the abstractions very simple 16:00:21 #info dmentze has committed resources 16:00:31 colindixon: thx! 16:00:45 wasn’t sure if you wanted me to capture that 16:01:20 #endmeeting