11:51:15 <Guest8999> #startmeeting Fuel weekly sync meeting
11:51:15 <collabot`> Meeting started Thu Apr 21 11:51:15 2016 UTC.  The chair is Guest8999. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
11:51:15 <collabot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
11:51:15 <collabot`> The meeting name has been set to 'fuel_weekly_sync_meeting'
11:52:44 <mskalski> #info Michal Skalski
11:52:48 <mskalski> Hi
11:52:58 <Guest8999> #topic roll call
11:53:28 <JonasBjurel> ^^^ Jonas
12:00:36 <JonasBjurel> Please pound in
12:01:02 <JonasBjurel> No Goto meeting today!
12:01:13 <billyo> #info Billy O'Mahony
12:01:21 <JonasBjurel> Hi Billy
12:01:56 <s_berg> #info Stefan Berg
12:02:08 <billyo> hi All
12:02:45 <JonasBjurel> Lets wait a few minutes
12:03:31 <JonasBjurel> #topic Brahma R3.0
12:03:45 <JonasBjurel> #info Status on OVS
12:03:55 <JonasBjurel> Billyoma ....
12:05:20 <billyo> Hi Jonas, so I guess I'm waiting to get the nod that I can test with CI where the segmentation is set up as VLAN instead of VxLAN.
12:05:31 <billyo> That *should* pass about half the y/s tests
12:05:45 <billyo> However I think y/s will still report a fail in that case.
12:05:47 <JonasBjurel> billyoma: Can you info that
12:05:52 <billyo> sure
12:06:05 <billyo> #info  I'm waiting to get the nod that I can test with CI where the segmentation is set up as VLAN instead of VxLAN
12:06:17 <billyo> #info That should pass 1/2 the y/s tests
12:06:44 <billyo> #info The remaining half will require the nova flavor patch I put up to y/s code.
12:06:47 <billyo> end
12:07:04 <JonasBjurel> #info Jonas is working on a modified OVS scenario that uses VXLAN segmentation. I had some issues with the build, thats why it has taken a while.
12:07:14 <billyo> np
12:07:41 <billyo> Is Nikolas here? Is he still using pod1 (apologies for not seeing his email earlier)
12:07:47 <JonasBjurel> billyo: Have you heard when you can get POD1?
12:08:14 <billyo> JonasBjurel: no I'll check wiht Nikolas now directly
12:08:27 <JonasBjurel> billyo: Great.
12:08:34 <billyo> JonasBjurel: np
12:08:39 <JonasBjurel> Anything more on OVS?
12:09:45 <JonasBjurel> Is Nikolas here?
12:10:17 <mskalski> 14:05 <freenode> enikher has left IRC (Ping timeout: 244 seconds)
12:10:22 <SzilardCserey> Hi  Jonas there is another issue with ODL
12:10:40 <DanSmithEricsson> #info Daniel Smith (apologies for tardiness).
12:10:46 <SzilardCserey> let me know if you want to discuss about that
12:10:47 <SzilardCserey> later
12:10:50 <JonasBjurel> SzilardCserey: Tell us
12:11:07 <timirnich> #info Tim Irnich (sorry for being late)
12:11:08 <SzilardCserey> okay, thanks, so the problem is that YangUI is not able to load properly
12:11:26 <SzilardCserey> have you noticed it
12:11:34 <SzilardCserey> I was trying to debug with the help of Michal
12:11:46 <SzilardCserey> but I couldn't find the root of the problem yet
12:12:23 <SzilardCserey> I get some XML errors when I try to load the YangUI in ODL
12:12:33 <SzilardCserey> and lots of errors like this
12:12:34 <SzilardCserey> "cannot load file /yang2xml/netconf-auth.yang.xmlfrom static storage"  "cannot load file /yang2xml/packet-processing.yang.xmlfrom static storage"
12:12:37 <JonasBjurel> timirnish @mskalsi: Any ideas?
12:12:59 <SzilardCserey> I tried the latest plugin with Beryllium SR1
12:13:05 <SzilardCserey> the problem still persist
12:13:21 <SzilardCserey> however if I install Beryllium SR1 outside of OPNFV, standalone
12:13:23 <SzilardCserey> it works
12:13:40 <SzilardCserey> but inside OPNFV it doesn't work anymore
12:13:47 <JonasBjurel> Hmm
12:13:51 <SzilardCserey> so that's the problem
12:14:08 <mskalski> I will check one possibility, jetty service is bind to particular IP and in logs I see that some services also try bind to the same IP and port which fail
12:14:57 <mskalski> this may change, since we did not have problems with yang module in lithium and it was deployed in the same way
12:14:57 <SzilardCserey> aha, good point Michal
12:15:49 <mskalski> services or features from karaf to be more precise
12:15:53 <SzilardCserey> okay so that's all from me, thanks for the info Michal, and of course for your help :)
12:15:58 <JonasBjurel> Onto BGP-VPN - timirnish or nikolas?
12:18:30 <JonasBjurel> Noone from BGP-VPN here?
12:18:48 <timirnich> ups sorry was nipping out for a moment
12:19:18 <timirnich> BGPVPN status: all green - we have successful builds and Functest is passing
12:19:37 <timirnich> looks like the virtual deployment CI job ist not running - could we give that a bump?
12:19:50 <timirnich> for the bgpvpn scenarios I mean
12:19:58 <billyo> timirnich: are you using pod1 at the moment ?
12:20:28 <timirnich> billyo: I don't think so - Niko is back in 10 min then I can ask him
12:21:01 <JonasBjurel> timirnish: can you info that
12:21:40 <timirnich> #info BGPVPN status: all green - we have successful builds and Functest is passing
12:22:00 <timirnich> #undo
12:22:04 <JonasBjurel> timirnish: Super great.
12:22:10 <timirnich> #info BGPVPN status: all green - we have successful deploys and Functest is passing
12:22:30 <timirnich> hm only chair can undo - but anyhow
12:22:47 <JonasBjurel> Its OK.
12:23:01 <billyo> timirnich: Thanks, no rush on you guys. I just don't want to leave it idle!
12:23:43 <JonasBjurel> I will try to kick-off the virtual deployment, Fatih is not here for a couple of days, so we will see when it can happen.
12:24:11 <billyo> timirnich: all green status is worth info'ing twice ;)
12:24:37 <JonasBjurel> mskalski: Anything worth to mention around ODL?
12:25:27 <mskalski> JonasBjurel: not in context of B v3.0, but I have some success with deploying odl plugin on Fuel 9.0
12:25:45 <JonasBjurel> mskalski: Tell us :-)
12:26:58 <mskalski> #info tasks of odl plugins are mostly rewritten to support task base deployment in Fuel 9.0
12:28:12 <mskalski> #info I want to implement additional option to give possiblility to use networking-odl v2 which may resolve our problems with l3 scenarios
12:28:50 <JonasBjurel> mskalski: Very interesting.
12:29:07 <mskalski> #info HA for ODL is also in my plans for C-release
12:29:24 <JonasBjurel> mskalski: Do you know when Bohr is out, and do you know if that supports redundancy?
12:30:03 <mskalski> JonasBjurel: not sure about Bohr release date but redundacy is already possible in Be
12:30:21 <DanSmithEricsson> i have some info that might be interesting on this subject
12:30:26 <DanSmithEricsson> (from Pharos meeting :) )
12:30:36 <billyo> sorry guys gotta nip out
12:30:42 <JonasBjurel> mskalski: Didnt know that, do you think we should try redundancy for Colorado?
12:31:15 <DanSmithEricsson> i think we should try
12:31:20 <DanSmithEricsson> and here is my reasons :) -
12:31:29 <mskalski> JonasBjurel: yes, I want to implement this
12:31:37 <JonasBjurel> :-)
12:31:40 <DanSmithEricsson> in Pharos, we are looking at how to handle the different "adjuncts" / changes to Pharos reference  architecture
12:32:08 <DanSmithEricsson> in a way (for CI labs only) that allows us to know when a scenario requires a different Netowrking Configuratino (for exampe, needs a second nic)
12:32:22 <DanSmithEricsson> for dpdk, or needs dual nics to allow for bonding, etc
12:32:46 <DanSmithEricsson> Pharos will introduce a process whereby a project that needs to make a chance will run through and it will be added to Pharos reference spec
12:32:57 <JonasBjurel> DanSithEricsson: Does that mean that the Pharos Labs will look/be a little mor consistent across?
12:33:02 <DanSmithEricsson> sort of
12:33:12 <DanSmithEricsson> it means that if you have two scenarios
12:33:20 <DanSmithEricsson> and secn A needs the baseline Pharos Spec
12:33:29 <DanSmithEricsson> but Scenario Two requires a different HW setup
12:33:39 <DanSmithEricsson> for exampel, you want double nics for link redundancy caue your feature needs it
12:33:53 <DanSmithEricsson> then there will be a reference to an approved "Cofniguration Spec"
12:34:12 <DanSmithEricsson> we already have three supportted network configs rightnow in the spec - but going forward we will have more and not just for newtorking
12:34:23 <DanSmithEricsson> from there, when you run through the process for a change request to Pharos specification
12:34:29 <DanSmithEricsson> this wil ensure twothings.
12:34:30 <ethfci> DanSmithEricsson: sould like to have teaming?
12:34:54 <DanSmithEricsson> 1) that we in Pharos that run the labs are aware of changes to hardware coming down the pipe
12:34:57 <DanSmithEricsson> and can anitcipate it
12:35:14 <DanSmithEricsson> and 2) that when a release is coming, the project will know if there is any of the community labs that can support this new setup
12:35:38 <DanSmithEricsson> all that to say - if we do some HA stuff, i would like to try this out as a way of making a Pharos change (we can do link redundancy or bonding or something)
12:36:04 <DanSmithEricsson> for CI, in a scenario (from a practical point of view) this will mean the addition of a flag to call a "HW config spec"
12:36:24 <DanSmithEricsson> and will necessitate in the labs a dynamic configuration tool/engine (baremetal controller) but that is a different subject
12:36:27 <DanSmithEricsson> thx for your time :)
12:36:37 <JonasBjurel> :-)
12:37:04 <JonasBjurel> dansmithericsson: Is there a description of this?
12:37:08 <DanSmithEricsson> there is
12:37:16 <DanSmithEricsson> we have started to update the following:
12:37:33 <DanSmithEricsson> - the wiki for C-release page has been updated to include a question and reference to approval process
12:37:48 <DanSmithEricsson> Trevor has sent the information to Frank and David to ensure inclusion of the new Pharos  process
12:38:14 <DanSmithEricsson> for developer Lab - each freature project will be required to obtain their own resouces on a JIRA ticket basis for what they "new" hardware wise
12:38:31 <DanSmithEricsson> as they do today and in that instant is when a feature project should also start the CR process
12:38:34 <DanSmithEricsson> cause they will have a
12:38:53 <DanSmithEricsson> layout of their lab they need.. that will then go into the process and be populated around alll the community labs to see if it can be supportted in general
12:39:07 <DanSmithEricsson> for when the Dev Lab and feature project go to deliver and need community CI labs available
12:39:16 <DanSmithEricsson> we will draft a process document next week and then release it
12:39:30 <JonasBjurel> Ok
12:39:43 <JonasBjurel> Anything more for today?
12:40:21 <ethfci> Jonas i need pratctical help on yardstick
12:41:02 <JonasBjurel> ethfci: What do you want help with?
12:41:55 <ethfci> how can yardstick configure environment for a specific setup: 1 mean 1 controller, 1 compute
12:42:34 <JonasBjurel> ethfci: That is not Yardstick that does that, its a new scenario
12:43:01 <JonasBjurel> I need to run - sorry
12:43:06 <ethfci> Jonas life does such a thing :D
12:43:20 <JonasBjurel> #endmeeting
12:44:35 <Guest8999> #endmeeting