#opnfv-infra: infra-wg
Meeting started by bramwelt at 15:03:21 UTC
(full logs).
Meeting summary
- Agenda Bashing (bramwelt, 15:03:34)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/2019-10-21+Infra-WG+Meeting
(bramwelt,
15:05:18)
- One central place for meeting details
(bramwelt,
15:06:58)
- Confusing when there are multiple places for
meeting agendas/schedules (bramwelt,
15:07:22)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Infra+Working+Group
(jentoio,
15:07:35)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Infra+Working+Group+Meeting
(jentoio,
15:07:48)
- Jack plans on running meeting initially
(bramwelt,
15:09:21)
- AGREED: Meeting
details will stay in INFRA space and be linked to the meeting space
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Infra+Working+Group (bramwelt,
15:12:18)
- Jack plans to move the meeting notes under
INFRA (bramwelt,
15:13:52)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Meeting+notes
(bramwelt,
15:13:54)
- Discussion on how to manage and organize
meeting minutes (bramwelt,
15:15:17)
- ACTION: bramwelt to
clean up minutes to be in individual pages (bramwelt,
15:16:23)
- Jack moving minutes from Meeting space to Infra
space (bramwelt,
15:16:36)
- ACTION: Jack to clean
up the infra-wg page under the Meeting space and point to the
agenda (bramwelt,
15:19:42)
- Discuss agenda (bramwelt,
15:21:13)
- Pharos (bramwelt, 15:22:45)
- Jack plans to reach out to community lab owners
and get a status update (bramwelt,
15:22:57)
- Will try to encourage lab owners to come to
infra-wg (bramwelt,
15:23:17)
- Jack also planning on cleaning up Pharos
JIRA (bramwelt,
15:23:31)
- Infra wiki needs to be cleaned up / archived /
migrated (bramwelt,
15:23:53)
- Lincoln mentions Pharos spec being updated,
LaaS gives you one-click-openstack (bramwelt,
15:25:06)
- What is the outlook for the infra
projects? (bramwelt,
15:25:31)
- Jack mentioned Parker should be part of
infra-wg given the nature of LaaS (bramwelt,
15:25:56)
- Also mentions Pharos direction towards PDF/SDF
and refresh of Pharos specification (bramwelt,
15:26:47)
- Lincoln mentioned discussions at CNTT around
Pharos spec and PDF (bramwelt,
15:27:16)
- There wasn't take up in the structure and
content of the PDF/SDF previously, and the hope is CNTT/RI will help
drive and align that content (bramwelt,
15:28:34)
- PDF/SDF very helpful for Lab owners as it
provides a single description of the environment and makes it
helpful to determine what the infrastructure looks like (bramwelt,
15:29:27)
- Jack explains context of SDF being collection
of components needed for the scenario - CNTT will help set what
those scenarios should be and determine the selection of
components (bramwelt,
15:30:40)
- PDF defines hardware in OPNFV configurations
(RAM, Disk, CPU, NICs) (bramwelt,
15:31:22)
- SDF defines deployment configuration (networks,
IPs) (bramwelt,
15:31:54)
- Lincoln suggest RI is it's own scenario -
Consumability of that scenario for XCI or Airship shouldn't differ -
That part of the SDF was missed before (bramwelt,
15:33:39)
- Discussions still needed on implementation and
consumability of SDF (bramwelt,
15:34:05)
- Jack hasn't been able to attend F2F where the
SDF may have been discussed to provide feedback (bramwelt,
15:35:02)
- Michael asks if Pharos or Infra should be
driving those specifications? (bramwelt,
15:36:47)
- Jack states it hasn't been clear where that
should happen as the discussion have taken place outside those
projects (bramwelt,
15:37:38)
- Lincoln suggests Infra helps provide/locate
hardware for projects to help meet needs for reference
implementation - LaaS doesn't care so much about the format, but the
agreement on the content (bramwelt,
15:38:53)
- More requirements need to be gathered from CNTT
to determine new specifications - networking infra (10/25g?), size
of machines, etc (bramwelt,
15:40:44)
- Mark mentions '10 server' was not a random
selection. (bramwelt,
15:42:07)
- Jack explains how process around Pharos
specification may work in the future - installer -> hardware
-> deploy -> testing -> ovp (bramwelt,
15:44:16)
- Pharos spec wasn't able to get to 'sizing' in
the past (bramwelt,
15:45:26)
- Discussion on LaaS being used to help determine
specification (bramwelt,
15:46:02)
- Lincoln explains dimensions of flexibility in
LaaS comes from the network configurations, but not hardware
(currently) - Machines are static hardware (bramwelt,
15:47:25)
- Jack explains LaaS is closer to cloud
hardware (bramwelt,
15:48:38)
- All labs except LaaS at UNH are static
(bramwelt,
15:50:41)
- Lincoln explains how labs may transition from
static to dynamic LaaS (bramwelt,
15:51:34)
- LaaS vision is that given a PDF -> hardware
is returned configured as specified, and given SDF -> servers are
configured to match the scenario needs (bramwelt,
15:52:59)
- LaaS goal is to provide community way to
provision hardware easily through the UI (bramwelt,
15:54:37)
- Mark asks what the overlap between installers
and LaaS is? (bramwelt,
15:57:37)
- Lincoln answers there is 0 overlap (bramwelt,
15:57:48)
- Installers are still needed to provide a
deployment of OpenStack (bramwelt,
15:58:40)
- LaaS does not provide the VM images need to do
the deployment either (bramwelt,
16:00:31)
- Jack mentions LaaS, Pharos, and infra projects
have been involved in the space for a while and it's great to have
more people involved and interested (bramwelt,
16:01:20)
- Mark asks why each POD has individual
IP? (bramwelt,
16:03:15)
- Jack explains it's a benefit to reduce
confusion around address space (bramwelt,
16:04:10)
Meeting ended at 16:04:56 UTC
(full logs).
Action items
- bramwelt to clean up minutes to be in individual pages
- Jack to clean up the infra-wg page under the Meeting space and point to the agenda
Action items, by person
- bramwelt
- bramwelt to clean up minutes to be in individual pages
People present (lines said)
- bramwelt (57)
- collabot (5)
- jentoio (2)
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.