16:00:28 #startmeeting OPNFV Pharos 16:00:28 Meeting started Wed Dec 16 16:00:28 2015 UTC. The chair is trevor_intel. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 16:00:28 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 16:00:28 The meeting name has been set to 'opnfv_pharos' 16:00:36 #info Frank Brockners 16:00:39 #info Trevor Cooper 16:00:48 #info Fatih Degirmenci 16:00:55 IRC only or do we have a GTM? 16:01:10 irc 16:01:22 cool - thx 16:02:12 Agenda topics 1) CI/labs 2) LF 3) Templates 4) MAAS 16:02:27 Whate else or instead? 16:02:35 looks good to me 16:02:46 #info StuartMackie 16:03:25 #topic CI resources for Brahmaputra 16:03:36 trevor_intel: should I give a quick status 16:03:44 fdegir: please 16:03:56 #info CI Lab/POD Status Update 16:04:17 #info LF POD1: Waiting for Apex to move virtual deploys to Intel Machine from Intel POD4 16:04:27 #info Lab resources for Release B  https://wiki.opnfv.org/pharos_rls_b_labs 16:04:47 #info LF POD1: Once it is done, pbandzi will convert it to a full POD which will be used for Apex CI, running stable 16:05:16 please note that after some thinking and talking with Tim, we moved Apex CI to LF POD1 16:05:27 updated the page https://wiki.opnfv.org/brahmaputra_testing_page 16:05:36 and will update the page https://wiki.opnfv.org/pharos_rls_b_labs#status_of_production_ci_resources_for_release_b 16:06:01 #info LF POD1: Not operational yet 16:06:15 #info LF POD2: Operational and used by Fuel CI. 16:06:39 #info Intel POD2: Operational and used by Apex development and project work/connected to Jenkins 16:06:45 fdegir: Plan for LF POD 1 has chnaged from Apex latest to Apex stable? 16:06:52 trevor_intel: that's correct 16:06:58 the reason is to keep LF access limited 16:07:04 fdegir: Ok I will update the Wiki 16:07:15 and LF POD has higher bandwidth which is needed by Apex 16:07:24 fdegir: That means INtel POD 2 is now Apex latest? 16:07:32 trevor_intel: that's correct 16:07:46 and also used for development work by apex 16:07:56 when it is not used by CI 16:07:57 fdegir: are there plans for using the recently bought servers in LF lab for virtual deploys? 16:08:07 frankbrockners: we have plans :) 16:08:11 frankbrockners: we lack hands 16:08:44 fdegir: a poet too?!? :) 16:08:50 :) 16:09:20 #info Intel POD3: Operational - connected to Jenkins and will be used by vsperf. 16:10:02 fdegir: what would the missing hands do if they were there? 16:10:04 #info Intel POD4: Operational - 1 fuel virtual deploy, 1 apex virtual deploy, 1 ubuntu build server (majority of project builds), 1 centos build server (ovsnfv builds), 1 free 16:10:30 frankbrockners: I lack all the details 16:10:38 frankbrockners: first, we need to fix pod1 16:10:51 frankbrockners: and then look at new blades to see how we can use them 16:10:59 frankbrockners: fix the os, packages etc 16:11:01 ok - if it a matter of configuration - let me know 16:11:12 peter already installed base os on some of the servers 16:11:17 frankbrockners: will do - was planning to do that yesterday 16:11:24 thx 16:11:26 frankbrockners: but we must first get apex guys out of lf 16:11:34 you will hear from me 16:11:54 #info Intel POD5: Operational (kind of) - Joid CI 16:12:10 #info Intel POD5 lacks jumphost so joid only deploys 3 controllers and 1 compute 16:12:18 fdegir: Jack is working on Intel jumphosts POD 5, 6, 8 ... will be up EOD today 16:12:20 #info Intel POD6: Waiting for jumphost 16:12:28 #info Intel POD8: Waiting for jumphost 16:12:39 #info Huawei SC POD1: Operational - Compass CI 16:12:44 thanks trevor_intel 16:12:59 #info Ericsson POD2: Operational - Fuel POD config is ongoing 16:13:35 did I miss any? 16:13:51 fdegir: I think that is all the CI stuff 16:14:01 good 16:15:17 just to record it again 16:15:49 #info LF POD1 (apex), LF POD2 (fuel), Intel POD5 (joid), Huawei POD1 (compass) for release testing purposes 16:16:02 meaning hands off, limited access, totally dedicated to CI 16:16:06 Also here https://wiki.opnfv.org/doku.php?id=pharos_rls_b_labs 16:16:34 Those are CI stable resources 16:16:57 #info Intel POD6 (joid), Intel POD8 (Huawei), Intel POD2 (Apex), Ericsson POD2 (fuel) for project work which is used for development if necessary 16:17:10 yes 16:17:27 Those are CI latest / test + dev resources 16:17:30 yes 16:17:41 since I'm still getting questions 16:17:45 just to record in mom 16:17:55 fdegir: Other than jump servers no other hw needs now? 16:18:07 trevor_intel: that's right 16:18:27 as I mentioned before, we should focus on making them operational 16:18:40 any other resources offered by community or exist in LF need to wait 16:18:56 fdegir: Any other help needed to get operational? 16:19:14 I think I can take care of the basic CI config 16:19:30 but when installer or other project teams need help 16:19:35 they might come to your way 16:19:47 or to LF 16:19:49 fdegir: ok 16:20:28 fdegir: what about the 2nd Jenkins instance? 16:20:57 for test 16:20:59 not there yet 16:21:12 But still teh plan, correct? 16:21:27 I think we passed the point 16:21:37 it is late already 16:21:53 teams need to learn stuff on production instance 16:21:56 fdegir: Do you mean too late for rls B? 16:22:01 yes 16:22:03 we can have it 16:22:12 but who will support teams to try stuff out is the question 16:22:25 the ones who know jenkins stuff is totally focused on release work 16:22:46 fdegir: ok I can see the issue 16:22:54 it is priorities as you know 16:23:31 I have a question re. mangement of the labs ... or it can wait 16:23:42 no need to wait :) 16:24:22 the issue of using a separate Jira project for lab operations 16:24:38 yes 16:25:08 Wouln't it be cleaner to seperate Pharos dev with lan operations? 16:25:30 but then it won't be in pharos backlog 16:25:34 Not sure how to label ops stuff it is all in one project? 16:25:40 making it disconnected from pharos 16:25:53 Don't want it disconnected 16:25:57 so it might not be simpler to see how much work needs to be done by pharos 16:26:16 if we have a separate project, it might result in 2 different backlogs 16:27:02 and more cross-project referencing 16:27:07 I am ok to keep it together but we need a scheme for labeling ops tasks/issues/labs/etc 16:27:26 I think what Jack suggested is good 16:27:29 component? 16:27:45 component = a particular lab 16:27:50 yep 16:28:03 I am not jira master but try to pull in Mark 16:28:21 he can perhaps say what he thinks 16:28:53 Ok I think we shoudl take this off-line from this meeting 16:29:01 yes 16:29:16 we can bug him and see what he thinks 16:29:28 fdegir: ok 16:29:29 offline I mean 16:29:43 change topic? 16:29:49 templates? 16:29:55 yes 16:30:01 frankbrockners is with us as well 16:30:09 #topic Config Files 16:31:16 frankbrockners: ping? 16:31:30 fdegir: yes - I'm here 16:31:38 Progress on config files? 16:31:44 What is your take? 16:32:17 #info Starting points for common config files have been defined 16:32:20 #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/genesis/configuration-files-discussion#common_config_files 16:32:53 #info will wait till the end of this week - hopefully we have comments/changes from everyone who cares in by then 16:33:12 #info can take it to a vote and close early next week in Genesis meeting (Monday) 16:33:39 frankbrockners: sounds good 16:33:40 #info IMHO deploy and inventory are quite far along 16:34:03 #info network config is still evolving 16:34:33 #info hope that by next week we can define "scenarios" using the common config files 16:35:06 frankbrockners: just a quick question regarding scenarios 16:35:06 (this is at least my hope) - let's see 16:35:08 frankbrockners: For now we said all test complexity will be handled by Jenkins jobs, correct? 16:35:24 will all the scenarios include a controller? 16:35:33 any of the controllers 16:35:50 trevor_intel: yes - testing figures out which tests to run 16:36:04 or do we have any possibility of having a scenario where there is no controller? 16:36:17 personally I'm not sure how this would work on any but the simple default scenarios 16:36:26 but I'm happy to be convinced otherwise 16:36:38 fdegir: why this question (I assumed there will be a controller)? 16:36:48 fdegir: IMHO all the scenarios should include a controller 16:37:02 trevor_intel: it will impact how we will handle combinations 16:37:03 otherwise we'd test openstack - which openstack already does 16:37:29 the structuring of jenkins jobs, the parameters, how those parameters will be evaluated and used by installers and test projects 16:37:30 fdegir: I know but why would there NOT be a controller? 16:37:45 trevor_intel: I have no reason, just asking 16:37:53 we could have a setup with pure neutron networking 16:38:00 but this isn't very useful for NFV 16:38:10 nor is this a new case to be run 16:38:18 I plan to have 1 job per installer per controller 16:38:19 openstack already tests openstack only cases 16:38:32 and then this job will have extra parameter to specify the feature 16:38:47 both controller and feature will be exposed to installers and test projects 16:38:59 fdegir - can you handle multiple versions of e.g. ODL that way 16:39:00 ? 16:39:02 and they will take care of the details in there 16:39:11 frankbrockners: we can 16:39:16 cool - thx 16:39:28 frankbrockners: but we need to know what else should be handled 16:39:33 is it just for odl or? 16:39:44 since jenkins is not that clever 16:40:00 that is a question that I don't have an answer for 16:40:03 btw, this is not a question I want answer 16:40:06 :) 16:40:13 onos and ocontrail just come on board 16:40:36 this is why I started the matrix_ https://wiki.opnfv.org/brahmaputra_testing_page#test_scenarios_for_brahmaputra 16:40:59 if we don't find owners for onos or ocontrail scenarios - then let's remove them from the map 16:41:07 ok 16:41:12 joid doesn't have virtual as of yet 16:41:19 or at least when I asked last week 16:41:22 anyway 16:41:47 key thing is to get visibility into what people want to pull together 16:42:08 yes 16:42:14 question: should I ask the "scenario" question as a standalone question on tech-discuss? 16:42:48 do you mean 16:42:49 Hey there - we just set up a pod in the Juniper NJ lab and connected to Jenkins for JOID/OpenContrail initially, and would expect to test other installers there too. 16:42:51 which scenarios people would like to have 16:42:58 which scenarios people believe we can have 16:43:01 or 16:43:10 yes - like to have AND willing to pull together and support 16:43:11 which scenarios we should focus - same as the above 16:43:34 "like" or "+1" is not enough - we need someone to step up and do the work 16:43:41 it would be good to see the response 16:43:50 someone might say we want this but the others say not possible 16:43:55 lack of this and that 16:43:59 let me push out that email after our meeting here 16:44:04 ok 16:44:16 thx StuartMackie 16:44:46 so we should some kind of outcome for config stuff by next week 16:44:55 (have) 16:45:05 fdegir - I share that "hope" 16:45:22 I always hope for the best but expect the worst 16:45:30 :-) 16:46:13 StuartMackie: will NJ lab be available as a community lab? 16:46:44 I guess so, I am not clear on what that exactly means 16:47:28 In particular - how is time scheduled on community labs? 16:48:00 StuartMackie: means 1) Pharos compliant AND 2) part of the OPNFV lab resource plan 16:48:21 StuartMackie: depneds on how it is used 16:48:53 StuartMackie: Can be for dev or CI 16:49:23 StuartMackie: See here https://wiki.opnfv.org/pharos_rls_b_labs 16:49:54 narindergupta: ping 16:50:01 trevor_intel, pong 16:50:32 narindergupta: do you haev any updates re. MAAS this week? 16:50:55 trevor_intel, need help on creating jobs for MAAS 16:51:04 #topic MAAS 16:52:00 trevor_intel, i never worked on jenkins before so need help there. MAAS part and API i can handle though. 16:52:15 fdegir: I am thinking people are focussedon release and will be difficult to get help for this now? What do you think? 16:52:29 narindergupta: I think you can forget the jenkins stuff for creating the script 16:52:37 trevor_intel: that's right 16:52:54 narindergupta: as long as you script, we can put it in a jenkins job and see what happens 16:53:21 narindergupta: the crucial thing here is 16:53:32 trevor_intel, ok i can script where script input will be MAAS IP API key and which release of ubuntu or cent os needs to be installed 16:53:33 narindergupta: where that script is executed on jenkins 16:53:49 that can execute in linux foundation lab 16:53:51 narindergupta: meaning that it should be able to use the api on the machine 16:53:59 narindergupta: then that should be no problem 16:54:13 narindergupta: how will it work? 16:54:20 MAAS URL and API key can be called form anywhere 16:54:31 narindergupta: can I say; give me a centos jumphost with Centos7 and these packages installed 16:55:12 narindergupta: or give me a single machine with this OS and packages where I can run virtual deployment or build 16:55:15 fdegir, for cents answer is yes and for package you need to give me predefined list to modify the image to do that 16:55:21 narindergupta: they're basically same 16:55:30 narindergupta: ok 16:55:42 so i can run installation of package after initial base os install both should work 16:55:43 narindergupta: then if you can create a script and we just get a simple build machine booked to start with 16:56:03 narindergupta: I can pass you the packages and the OS (can start with ubuntu 14.04) 16:56:13 narindergupta: I book that using the script from jenkins 16:56:31 fdegir, correct 16:56:33 once it is provided by maas, I do hello world and then build something 16:56:40 and we move to virt deployment of something 16:56:48 and then to jumphost/pod stuff 16:57:03 fdegir, i am confused now 16:57:14 fdegir, what do you mean by virtue deployment? 16:57:39 like I want a machine where I can run virtual deployment of installer X 16:58:00 which means the cpu of the machine should have certain features 16:58:08 certain packages are installed 16:58:10 fdegir, ok yes MAAS can give you a machine to run your scripts 16:58:11 like libvirt 16:58:15 yep 16:58:32 so, when you have a script and machines I can book 16:58:34 fdegir, MAAS will install the OS 16:58:45 that's good too 16:58:57 I can quickly create a jenkins job to try stuff out 16:59:05 last 2 minutes 16:59:09 fdegir, early next week you can have it 16:59:18 good 16:59:32 fdegir, you want shell script or python? 16:59:38 doesn't matter 17:00:01 we can ask aric to set venv on a host in LF 17:00:17 fdegir, ok sounds good i will work on it where you can say give me machine in intel lab with particular OS installed 17:00:31 ok 17:00:42 we start with most basic and build on top 17:00:51 fdegir, sure sounds good to me 17:01:43 I will end meeting now unless other topics? 17:02:03 going ... 17:02:18 thanks all for attending 17:02:24 #endmeeting