16:59:40 #startmeeting FDS synch 16:59:40 Meeting started Thu Dec 1 16:59:40 2016 UTC. The chair is frankbrockners. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:59:40 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:59:40 The meeting name has been set to 'fds_synch' 17:00:36 hey folks 17:00:42 #info Michal Cmarada 17:00:45 #info Frank Brockners 17:00:46 hey 17:00:59 #info Vlado Lavor 17:01:28 #info Juraj Linkeš 17:02:21 #info Sean Chandler 17:02:35 #info Tim Rozet 17:02:36 #info agenda for today (a) update on Cisco FDS POD / testing os-odl_l2-fdio-ha scenario (b) update on os-nosdn-fdio-noha (c) update on L3 scenario 17:02:56 anything else to discuss? 17:03:45 jlinkes__: any updates on (a) ha testing / Cisco FDS POD availability? 17:05:09 there seems to be progress with regards to dhcp traffic, but I was unable to test it, since now ipmi traffic is not working 17:06:17 notified davinder and seanatcisco also provided some more details 17:06:31 jlinkes__: thanks 17:07:21 any other progress from a test perspective (e.g. wrt/ race conditions in GBP etc.) 17:07:40 ? 17:07:42 from test perspective no 17:07:48 well 17:08:08 except for https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/FDS-152 https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/FDS-153 and https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/FDS-154 were created 17:08:20 now being investigated by michal-cmarada and vlavor 17:08:32 jlinkes__: thanks 17:08:48 michal-cmarada: any news? 17:10:10 today i was looking into qrouter recreate issue. maybe there will be a way to update it without creating the qr-tap again 17:10:13 I went briefly through logs provided by Juraj, and I saw several errors caused by netconf - mainly failed transactions 17:10:51 is that odl netconf client? 17:11:06 yes 17:11:44 data were created by vbd/gbp but weren't sent to device because of it 17:12:12 vlavor: could that be a HC issue? 17:12:48 no this specific issue is not an HC issue 17:13:43 ok... was just wondering because of failed transactions. Would be good if you could work with jlinkes__ 17:14:12 let's move to agenda topic (b) os-nosdn-fdio-noha status 17:14:39 I have contacted netconf guys, so they are working on it right now 17:14:41 we got the scenario into the release thanks to sean and onong's hard work 17:14:52 thanks vlavor 17:15:30 there are jira tickets for the open issues for the scenario: FDS-155 ... to FDS-161 17:15:42 those tickets don't have an owner jet 17:15:55 seanatcisco: could you get owners assigned? 17:16:21 if i have those rights 17:16:43 apparently so 17:17:21 in case you don't please send an email to opnfv-helpdesk@rt.linuxfoundation.org asking for access 17:17:25 FDS-161 really is only related to release notes/documentation which i also have to write for fd.io anyhow on the enic configuration 17:18:19 not sure who should look into the FD-155 bug (mariadb/mysqld) 17:18:54 there is one more update on the ha scenario that i forgot: trozet created a jenkins job for the scenario - so should be part of the pipeline now 17:19:40 jlinkes__: is FDS-155 something you could help with? or trozet? 17:19:47 frankbrockners: I saw an email from you saying we wont release fdio-ha as part of C3.0? 17:20:35 trozet: yes - this is true. We still don't have an operational pod where we can test ha properly 17:20:57 frankbrockners: what if it passes tonight on LF pod 1 :) ? 17:21:10 trozet: we had a set of issues seen on the cengn pod - but that was taken away for the cengn summit demos 17:21:51 trozet: I could beg the folks for more time... - but basically we're past the deadline for test results reporting. deadline was yesterday 17:22:16 trozet: am curious on test results of course 17:22:23 frankbrockners: i mean, are we really that strict? 17:22:28 frankbrockers: I think https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/APEX-356 should help with FDS-155 17:22:35 frankbrockners: when does C3.0 release? 17:22:57 trozet: apparently they are. the testing folks prepare documentation based on the results 17:23:17 frankbrockners: and I believe this is the upstream bug for it https://bugs.launchpad.net/tripleo/+bug/1524809 17:23:29 frankbrockners: cant we just include the scenario in apex release notes and list any bugs? 17:23:35 trozet: i asked whether there might be other scenarios which are a bit late in the release call on Tuesday - but got no input/support 17:23:51 frankbrockners: for example we dont have ovs dpdk functest results because of a bug with UCS 17:23:59 frankbrockners: but we still release that scenario, works fine on virtual 17:24:52 trozet: we need https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/APEX-346 for the scenario to work - the old ODL won't work with new vpp/hc 17:24:59 trozet: we never got it to deploy without major issues (e.g. flapping services after the setup is operational for 5+ minutes) - so am feeling a bit uncomfortable. 17:25:06 jlinkes__: yeah the patch is almost done CI 17:25:09 jlinkes__: any thoughts on readiness? 17:25:39 frankbrockners: flapping services i thought was only seen on 1 pod 17:25:51 frankbrockners: do you know when C3.0 release date is? 17:26:06 frankbrockners: readiness of the ha scenario? 17:26:16 trozet: formal release is Dec/5 - Monday 17:26:22 jlinkes__: yes 17:27:14 trozet: depending on how things go we could make the case for a Colorado 4.0 in the TSC on Tuesday 17:27:15 frankbrockners: well we did have one successful run of it on the cengn pod, so it might be ready if we fix FDS-152 and FDS-154 17:27:33 frankbrockners: or we have a lucky run where those two won't manifest 17:27:58 frankbrockners: I'm planning on trying out virtual deployment tomorrow 17:28:06 let's see how the deployments on the opnfv pipeline go 17:28:23 based on that we can see whether we can make a case for C4.0 17:28:45 I'm also not sure whether there are other scenarios which would benefit from a C4.0 17:29:04 frankbrockners: we need https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/APEX-346 for the scenario to work - the old ODL won't work with new vpp/hc 17:29:33 frankbrockners: so when that is done we should things maybe passing in ci 17:29:45 we should see things* 17:29:57 trozet: could you get APEX-346 done? 17:30:37 frankbrockners: it is already done, just waiting on the patch to finish CI for stable/colorado 17:30:49 trozet: sounds good. keeping fingers crossed 17:30:56 given that we only have a few more min, let's quickly touch on the L3 work.... 17:31:13 michal-cmarada: any quick updates/status on L3 work? 17:32:00 I think that the update for routing model is not yet ready 17:32:09 i need to check 17:32:38 michal-cmarada: thanks. 17:33:08 so let's hope that the HA scenario passes CI. If that is the case I'll start a discussion tomorrow on a potential C4.0.... 17:33:32 any other final thoughts? 17:34:02 if that is not the case then we're done 17:34:24 thanks everyone 17:34:39 #endmeeting