=========================================== #opnfv-meeting: Weekly Technical Discussion =========================================== Meeting started by bh526r at 14:04:01 UTC. The full logs are available at http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2017/opnfv-meeting.2017-01-19-14.04.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll Call (bh526r, 14:04:19) * Bin Hu (bh526r, 14:04:23) * Uli (uli-k, 14:04:46) * LINK: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Scenario+Consolidation (uli-k, 14:05:17) * Larry Lamers (ljlamers, 14:05:51) * Scenario Consolidation (bh526r, 14:05:55) * See link provided by uli-k above (bh526r, 14:06:16) * Uli indicated that there was discussion in the forum since last week (bh526r, 14:07:10) * 2 different names - generic and specific (bh526r, 14:07:33) * The intention is to merged with generic scenarios (bh526r, 14:08:55) * Generic scenarios are our goal of integration work (bh526r, 14:12:42) * typically generic scenarios should be supported by multiple installers (bh526r, 14:13:23) * Bryan indicated that the expectation is to be supported by all installers (bh526r, 14:15:14) * regardless of the installer being used, we can have the feature (bh526r, 14:15:50) * This is the expectation - generic scenarios should be supported by all installers (bh526r, 14:16:13) * we should keep the number of generic scenarios limited (bh526r, 14:17:44) * Dan Radez suggested and Uli changed the wording to "... generic scenarios supported by all installers ..." (bh526r, 14:19:27) * Bryan said to meet the soft target (bh526r, 14:19:38) * some limitations, such as cannot deploy 2 SDN controllers at the same time (bh526r, 14:21:54) * specific scenarios are to introduce new features (bh526r, 14:22:38) * typically start with one installer (bh526r, 14:22:57) * should provide roadmap from the beginning (bh526r, 14:24:42) * overlap may happen, but should lead to merge (bh526r, 14:25:36) * more resources will be allocated to maintaining generic scenarios. specific scenarios will likely have a shorter support period after release as they are of interest to a smaller user community vs generic scenarios, and we may need to prioritize resources post-release for scenario maint/regression testing (bryan_att, 14:33:26) * specific scenarios may be released at any time, vs generic scenarios that are expected to be released at the overall release schedule (bryan_att, 14:34:12) * HA scenarios typically in release (bh526r, 14:37:22) * NOHA should be available to users (bh526r, 14:37:43) * non-HA as a config option is a better approach, as the expectation continues with the release, that the installers continue to support all config options for generic scenarios, at the least (bryan_att, 14:38:26) * thus non-HA will continue to be supported post-release in any case (bryan_att, 14:38:54) * HA/non-HA should be just a selectable option through the scenario descriptor file which enables the user to select which services are deployed in which node, and in which configuration (HA/non-HA) (bryan_att, 14:42:58) * the resulting assumption is that all scenarios will support HA and non-HA, since they are selectable options in the scenario config file (bryan_att, 14:45:07) * Uli introduced details of current scenarios, and ideas of possible consolidation/merge (bh526r, 14:58:08) * Uli will drive the actions of next steps (bh526r, 15:02:11) * Uli will send a request to community for help of filling up the table and collect more information (bh526r, 15:05:47) * Those information will help possible paths of scenario consolidation (bh526r, 15:06:14) * We will discuss the status of information collection next week (bh526r, 15:06:36) * Meeting adjourned (bh526r, 15:06:42) Meeting ended at 15:06:46 UTC. People present (lines said) --------------------------- * bh526r (30) * bryan_att (6) * collabot (3) * uli-k (2) * dneary (1) * ljlamers (1) * hongbo333 (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4