#opnfv-meeting: Weekly Technical Discussion

Meeting started by bh526r at 12:58:55 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

  1. Roll Call (bh526r, 12:59:05)
    1. Bin Hu (bh526r, 12:59:11)
    2. Cedric Ollivier (bh526r, 12:59:47)
    3. Mark Shostak (bh526r, 13:00:00)
    4. Greg Oberfield (bh526r, 13:00:11)
    5. Sridhar Rao (bh526r, 13:00:20)
    6. Matt McEuen (bh526r, 13:00:43)
    7. Trevor Cooper (bh526r, 13:00:52)
    8. Cédric Ollivier (ollivier, 13:02:09)
    9. Al Morton (bh526r, 13:02:32)
    10. Georg Kunz (bh526r, 13:02:39)

  2. Continue to Discuss New Project Proposal "Airship-based Infrastructure Deployment and Lifecycle Management" (bh526r, 13:04:08)
    1. https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/Project+Proposals+Airship (bh526r, 13:04:29)
    2. Trevor Cooper (trevor_intel, 13:04:54)
    3. Greg Oberfield from AT&T gave an update of resolved comments after communicating with stakeholders (bh526r, 13:05:15)
    4. Two major comments/comments are addressed (bh526r, 13:05:36)
    5. First major comment/concern: "Why multiple Installers and how to address fragmentation issues in the past?" (bh526r, 13:06:42)
    6. Greg and team communicated community, and explained that the root cause of prior fragmentation issue is lacking a standard definition of NFVi (bh526r, 13:10:06)
    7. Mark Beierl (bh526r, 13:10:19)
    8. Cedric full agrees that multiple installers is not an issue at all (bh526r, 13:10:45)
    9. The main issue is lacking common definition, and loses lots of end users (bh526r, 13:11:20)
    10. Daniel Balsiger (bh526r, 13:11:43)
    11. Pierre Lynch (bh526r, 13:12:08)
    12. Parth (bh526r, 13:12:16)
    13. Cedric asked why Airship cannot be merged with XCI, and MaaS (bh526r, 13:13:02)
    14. #info Matt explained that Airship 1.0 used MaaS for bare metal provisioning, which was the best tool at that time (bh526r, 13:13:56)
    15. With Airship 2.0 work in progress, we are going to leverage k8s Cluster API for bare metal provisioning (bh526r, 13:14:50)
    16. i.e. metal3 project, and lots of plugins for AWS, Google cloud etc. (bh526r, 13:15:20)
    17. The 1st driver to leverage is Ironic (bh526r, 13:15:38)
    18. And Kubeadm support as tooling for k8s itself (bh526r, 13:16:00)
    19. We are behind those projects for k8s cluster for bare metal provisioning (bh526r, 13:16:26)
    20. Lots of installers there, e.g. Ansible/Kubespray/Bifrost in XCI, and Airship isn't intended to support other installers, which is out of scope of mission of Airship (bh526r, 13:17:36)
    21. Each installer can focus on its good, and particular use cases (bh526r, 13:17:56)
    22. Cedric agreed that we shouldn't merge them together (bh526r, 13:18:22)
    23. Greg agreed to add this point in presentation why XCI and Airship are not appropriate to merge together (bh526r, 13:19:07)
    24. Continue to capture the resolved comments from Greg's update slides: (bh526r, 13:23:42)
    25. Re: multiple installers: multiple installers bring more choices for end users, and encourages technological innovation (bh526r, 13:24:16)
    26. With standard definition of common NFVi, all installers will implement it with the same result. Thus fragmentation issue goes away. And end users will have more choices when shopping on market (bh526r, 13:24:45)
    27. Team will ensure level playground of all technologies / installers – no privilege for any installer or technology (bh526r, 13:25:16)
    28. 2nd Resolved comments "How to add new features in Airship, e.g. DPDK, and bring new resources?" (bh526r, 13:25:49)
    29. All new feature work in Airship is happening in OpenStack: (bh526r, 13:26:19)
    30. https://airship.atlassian.net/projects/AIR/issues (bh526r, 13:26:54)
    31. DPDK, Tungsten Fabric etc. is happening in OSH, and brought to Airship on June 18 to bring new NFV features (upstream) (bh526r, 13:27:16)
    32. Features are market-driven. Business will invest resources if they see ROI, i.e. benefit end users. (bh526r, 13:27:33)
    33. Airship 2.0 is modular design, e.g. something for host provisioning + Airship for workloads on top of cluster (bh526r, 13:27:52)
    34. Because Manuel is on vacation and absent from discussion today but he made comments last week, Bin indicated that team communicated with Manuel offline and resolved his comments and concerns. Manuel agreed to move forward and bring Airship proposal for TSC creation review and approval. (bh526r, 13:29:48)
    35. Because no further comments, and all comments and concerns are resolved, group reaches consensus and agrees to recommend "Airship-based Infrastructure Deployment and Lifecycle Management" project proposal for TSC creation review and approval. (bh526r, 13:31:30)

  3. AOB (bh526r, 13:32:15)
    1. Bin asked everyone to propose items for discussion for future meetings (bh526r, 13:32:35)
    2. Meeting adjourned (bh526r, 13:32:45)


Meeting ended at 13:33:55 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. (none)


People present (lines said)

  1. bh526r (50)
  2. collabot` (3)
  3. acmacm (1)
  4. trevor_intel (1)
  5. ollivier (1)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.