16:00:23 <trevor_intel> #startmeeting OPNFV Pharos
16:00:23 <collabot`> Meeting started Wed Jan 13 16:00:23 2016 UTC.  The chair is trevor_intel. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:23 <collabot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:23 <collabot`> The meeting name has been set to 'opnfv_pharos'
16:00:32 <trevor_intel> #topic roll call
16:00:43 <fdegir> #info Fatih Degirmenci
16:00:46 <trevor_intel> #info Trevor (INtel lab)
16:00:49 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: are you using GTM?
16:00:59 <fdegir> trozet: radez: ping
16:01:02 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: no
16:01:04 <jmorgan1> #info Jack Morgan
16:01:44 <trevor_intel> ok lets start ... for me lab status, POD usage for rls, documenation are tops
16:01:52 <trevor_intel> waht else?
16:02:13 <trevor_intel> what else?
16:02:28 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: Intel labs need to migrate some pods to new VPN enviornment
16:02:53 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: we will get there
16:03:03 <trevor_intel> #topic lab status
16:03:22 <fdegir> to me, things look good
16:03:28 <fdegir> so I should first than jmorgan1
16:03:28 <trevor_intel> #info Intel POD 2
16:03:31 <fdegir> and trevor_intel
16:03:50 <fdegir> with those exceptions
16:03:57 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: can you give an update on POD 2
16:04:35 <jmorgan1> im waiting to hear back from trozet, need additional info on what to troubleshoot
16:04:58 <trozet> jmorgan1:  what are you waiting for from  my side?
16:05:25 <jmorgan1> trozet: i'm not sure what is the problem
16:05:44 <trozet> jmorgan1: i can pull our latest RPM and try a run on there to see if it works
16:05:52 <jmorgan1> trozet: we have download/upload bandwith slowness and possibly internode connectivity issues
16:06:00 <jmorgan1> two possible issues
16:06:05 <trozet> jmorgan1: right
16:06:08 <jmorgan1> im waiting to hear about possible second issue
16:06:24 <jmorgan1> but its not been clear if second issue is an issue or not
16:06:27 <trozet> jmorgan1: did you login to the nodes and attempt to ping for a while between them?
16:06:44 <trozet> jmorgan1: watch how many pings fail over an hour, or the response time delays
16:06:58 <jmorgan1> trozet: no troubleshooting done for internode connectivity yet
16:07:17 <jmorgan1> trozet: are you using pod 2 currently?
16:08:11 <jmorgan1> i'd like to migrate it to another set of switches
16:08:14 <trozet> jmorgan1: no im not
16:08:25 <trozet> jmorgan1: feel free to do any troubleshooting you would like
16:08:33 <jmorgan1> do we know of anyone else using pod 2?
16:08:43 <fdegir> jmorgan1: it is reserved for apex
16:08:52 <trevor_intel> trozet: As I understand you will in teh future so we need to resolve
16:08:53 <fdegir> jmorgan1: so noone should be there
16:09:10 <jmorgan1> trozet: i'll solve this problem today and get back to you
16:09:17 <trozet> jmorgan1: thanks!
16:09:32 <trevor_intel> Right now Apex is only using 1 POD (LF POD 1)
16:09:34 <jmorgan1> trozet: you will need to get vpn access to env117 vpn (new vpn enviorment)
16:09:45 <trozet> jmorgan1: ok
16:10:20 <trevor_intel> trozet: ... can you confirm for rls B that yo do / donot intend to use a second POD?
16:10:45 <trevor_intel> trozet: just so everybody has clear understanding
16:10:47 <trozet> trevor_intel: we could definitely use intel pod2 and would use it if we thought it was stable
16:11:36 <trevor_intel> Fatih: POD 7 was planned for Fuel
16:12:03 <trevor_intel> Fatih: It is ready but no response from Fuel team if they need it for rls B
16:12:04 <fdegir> trevor_intel: I think you can take it back
16:12:20 <fdegir> trevor_intel: we didn't have ericsson pod available during november but we have it now
16:12:21 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: let us get pod 2 working, I think we can do it today
16:12:22 <trevor_intel> Fatih: So it could be allcoated to Apex?
16:12:32 <fdegir> trevor_intel: can be done
16:12:43 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: ok so keep as backup plan
16:12:52 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: agreed
16:13:55 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: can you summarise changes you are making to the lab config ... if you need anything leading up to rls B
16:14:21 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: ok
16:14:30 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: meaning any downtime needed?
16:15:22 <trevor_intel> We are also looking into teh bandwidth issue ... options to increase it
16:15:44 <jmorgan1> currently, Intel lab has each pod in its own isolated VPN enviornemnt, using lab switches (not managed by our team). I will be moving all PODs to a single VPN environment and our own switches we manage
16:15:53 <trevor_intel> The infrastructure is there to support it but do not haev costs yet
16:16:16 <jmorgan1> this means that a person only needs to connect via vpn and can ssh to any pod in the Intel Lab.
16:16:38 <trevor_intel> So it will ease support alot
16:16:40 <fdegir> jmorgan1: this is good
16:16:47 <jmorgan1> I have pods 7,8,9 on this new enviornment, I will move POD 1,2,3 first
16:17:08 <fdegir> jmorgan1: will the public IPs be impacted?
16:17:18 <jmorgan1> POD 2 today, then POD 3 and then POD 2. I only need an hour of downtime to change the IP and cable/label systems
16:17:51 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: you mention POD 2 twice :)
16:17:59 <jmorgan1> POD 4,5,6 will need to pull current switches and install our switches, re-ip, cable/lable --> this will take 1/2 day of downtime
16:18:12 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: pod 1 rather ;)
16:18:26 <jmorgan1> i will need to work with POD users to schedule down time
16:18:43 <jmorgan1> POD 4,5,6 will need to be done at the same time due to sharing same switch
16:19:00 <jmorgan1> every Intel POD will have 10gbe, and 1gbe network connectivity
16:19:10 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: Fatih's question re public IP?
16:19:35 <fdegir> jmorgan1: I mean jumphost IPs
16:19:44 <jmorgan1> see https://wiki.opnfv.org/get_started/intel_pod7 as example
16:20:33 <jmorgan1> fdegir: yes, all POD systems will be on a 10.2.117.0/24 network
16:20:51 <jmorgan1> fdegir: I will work with each pod as we go to make this transition smooth
16:21:12 <fdegir> jmorgan1: then coordination with aricg is needed
16:21:24 <fdegir> jmorgan1: for LF firewal openings for jumphost public IPs
16:22:13 <jmorgan1> fdegir: no problem, we have time to coordiate when we make transition
16:22:30 <fdegir> jmorgan1: just a note for you
16:22:34 <jmorgan1> fdegir: do you want me to send you the list of every node's public IP to you?
16:22:45 <fdegir> jmorgan1: the new ones?
16:22:51 <jmorgan1> for LF firewall
16:23:00 <fdegir> jmorgan1: that would be good
16:23:01 <jmorgan1> fdegir: yes, new ones
16:23:10 <jmorgan1> fdegir: ok, will send today
16:23:13 <fdegir> jmorgan1: please include aricg as well
16:23:33 <jmorgan1> fdegir: ok
16:23:39 <fdegir> jmorgan1: another note
16:23:44 <jmorgan1> any other concerns with this change at Intel labs?
16:23:52 <jmorgan1> fdegir: shoot
16:23:53 <fdegir> jmorgan1: in case if I'm not around when you do the changes
16:24:08 <fdegir> jmorgan1: you can connect jumphost back to jenkins yourself
16:24:28 <fdegir> jmorgan1: once the firewall is confirmed to be open by aric
16:24:56 <fdegir> jmorgan1: just can check to see if slave.jar process is running as jenkins user or not
16:25:08 <fdegir> jmorgan1: if it is not running, you can issue sudo monit start jenkins command
16:25:26 <fdegir> jmorgan1: please see the link https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/jenkins_slave_connection
16:25:37 <fdegir> jmorgan1: step 12.5
16:25:54 <fdegir> jmorgan1: I'll reply to your ip mail and include this info there as well
16:26:11 <jmorgan1> fdegir: ok, no problem
16:26:20 <trevor_intel> Anything else re. Intel PODs?
16:26:23 <fdegir> one last question regarding Intel PODs
16:26:39 <trevor_intel> keep going if there is more :)
16:26:39 <fdegir> pod8 is operational and compass people got the access
16:26:48 <fdegir> I haven't heard any feedback
16:26:55 <fdegir> jmorgan1: did you hear anything? any problem?
16:27:27 <jmorgan1> fdegir: no feedback nor problems stated. chigang did ping me earlier but not sure why
16:27:38 <fdegir> jmorgan1: ok
16:27:54 <fdegir> jmorgan1: I'll try to catch them early next morning and ask them to send feedback
16:28:21 <fdegir> that's all from me
16:28:24 <fdegir> for PODs
16:28:24 <jmorgan1> fdegir: we ddi confirm that we could do a fuel deployemnt in our new switch/vpn enviornment setup on pod 7 yesterday. so its looks good
16:28:44 <fdegir> good to hear
16:29:10 <fdegir> it could be repurposed for someone else as I mentioned
16:29:33 <trevor_intel> is it ok to talk docs now? Need help
16:29:38 <fdegir> yes
16:29:52 <trevor_intel> #topic Pharos documentation for Rls B
16:30:11 <trevor_intel> This is waht I see for docs ...
16:30:58 <trevor_intel> 1) project stuff "pharos.rst"
16:31:22 <trevor_intel> 2) pharos spec "pharos-spec.rst"
16:31:53 <trevor_intel> 3) jump server config
16:32:05 <trevor_intel> 4) remote connectivity requirements
16:32:22 <trevor_intel> 5) inventory template
16:32:32 <trevor_intel> 6) lab-topology template
16:32:43 <trevor_intel> 7) pod-description template
16:33:11 <trevor_intel> Wnat to verify understanding and who is workign on these
16:34:00 <trevor_intel> First ... do you agree Pharos is responsible for the inventory config file?
16:34:47 <fdegir> I think it can be pushed back to genesis/installers
16:35:00 <fdegir> if I'm not terribly mistaken
16:35:18 <trevor_intel> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/4079/
16:35:46 <fdegir> yes, this was it
16:35:56 <trevor_intel> Who owns the template/example ... which repo?
16:36:21 <trevor_intel> Or should own it?
16:36:24 <fdegir> it can perhaps reside in pharos
16:36:50 <trevor_intel> Fatih: how to close on that?
16:37:01 <fdegir> would be good to hear what frankbrockners says
16:37:23 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: ping
16:37:41 <frankbrockners> yup - on a call... hence a bit slow to respond
16:37:55 <fdegir> the reason is that the example can be embedded to relevant pharos doc
16:38:22 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: np ... trying to close on ownership of the inventory config file
16:38:25 <frankbrockners> how can I help
16:38:25 <fdegir> and residing next to pharos spec etc
16:38:54 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: do you agree it should reside on pharos repo?
16:39:20 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: Also what about network config?
16:39:23 <frankbrockners> probably makes the most sense
16:39:40 <frankbrockners> that said, afaik/ the "early versions" are in installer repos for now
16:39:48 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: Deploy is Genesis, corect?
16:39:58 <frankbrockners> network and deploy config for sure reside in the installer repos
16:40:03 <frankbrockners> templates are genesis
16:40:09 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: Test belongs in functest
16:40:18 <frankbrockners> actual instances will be installer specific and reside in the installer repos
16:40:53 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: yes but mean templates / examples
16:40:59 <frankbrockners> we had this question by installers before
16:41:22 <frankbrockners> IMHO it would be easiest to agree on a location in the installer repos where network and deploy config would be found
16:41:34 <frankbrockners> rather than ask the teams to push things into another repo
16:41:42 <frankbrockners> because the files are installer specific
16:41:58 <frankbrockners> or better scenario specific
16:42:04 <frankbrockners> which are again installer specific
16:42:35 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: How can we close on this so ... just so everybody is clear?
16:43:11 <frankbrockners> templates should be in genesisreq asap - we tried yesterday but still pending
16:43:31 <frankbrockners> inventory (you had the link above) is there
16:43:38 <frankbrockners> network and deploy are very close
16:43:58 <frankbrockners> apex has already created apex specific instances based on these templates
16:44:13 <frankbrockners> joid is working on the same
16:44:31 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: ok so Pharos will NOT host inventory config file template
16:44:35 <frankbrockners> so hopefully - but the end of the week we have something
16:44:52 <frankbrockners> trevor_intel: for now it is in genesisreq
16:45:03 <frankbrockners> if you want to move it... I'm fine with that
16:45:03 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: ok good enough for now
16:45:27 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: its ok just want to make sure I am not missing
16:45:31 <frankbrockners> trevor_intel - thanks - let's be pragmatic for now
16:45:38 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: makes sense
16:46:01 <trevor_intel> frankbrockners: thanks, I think we can move on and let you go
16:47:32 <trevor_intel> Fatih: Orange contribution ...
16:47:54 <fdegir> trevor_intel: yes
16:48:02 <trevor_intel> Templates for lab
16:48:22 <trevor_intel> topology and lab desription ... agree?
16:48:30 <trevor_intel> description
16:49:00 <fdegir> yes
16:49:25 <trevor_intel> There was an email and I suggested Orange gusy wirk with Jack
16:49:43 <trevor_intel> Since we haven't had a response, what to do for rls B?
16:50:22 <trevor_intel> I think the templates are really important
16:50:45 <fdegir> perhaps one of the available lab docs could be taken
16:50:50 <fdegir> and converted to a template
16:50:54 <fdegir> as we asked orange guys to do
16:51:29 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: can we do this together?
16:51:48 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: will take your time this week
16:51:50 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: sure, just assign me the AR with details of what needs to be done
16:52:13 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: via email. thanks
16:52:39 <trevor_intel> Fatih: These will all be .rst files?
16:52:47 <fdegir> trevor_intel: yes
16:53:07 <fdegir> trevor_intel: can you include additional names for review when you submit the patch to gerrit?
16:53:36 <fdegir> trevor_intel: Chris, Sofia Wallin and Ryota Mibu
16:53:46 <trevor_intel> Fatih: yes
16:53:48 <fdegir> trevor_intel: mainly for format requirements and so on
16:53:58 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: i'll need commit access if submitting .rst, correct?
16:54:36 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: no you don't haev commit permissions
16:54:49 <trevor_intel> You can submit for review
16:54:58 <trevor_intel> as a contributor
16:55:02 <fdegir> jmorgan1: have you signed CLA on gerrit?
16:55:18 <fdegir> jmorgan1: please go to this link https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/settings/agreements
16:55:24 <fdegir> and you have the agreement there
16:55:25 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: ok, just to an FYI mostly
16:55:31 <jmorgan1> fdegir: ok, i'll take a look
16:55:47 <fdegir> ping aricg as well to get contribution rights fixed faster
16:55:53 <fdegir> after you signed the CLA
16:56:35 <trevor_intel> Those were my main concerns ...
16:56:57 <trevor_intel> Pharos spec and project file we can work on
16:57:29 <trevor_intel> Does anybody have any other topics or concerns for today?
16:57:36 <trevor_intel> Fatih: ?
16:57:42 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: ?
16:57:52 <fdegir> just last question
16:57:56 <fdegir> trevor_intel: about doc
16:58:17 <fdegir> trevor_intel: you might want to check with ChrisPriceAB to see if they intend to include any pharos info in composite release documentation
16:58:20 <trevor_intel> trozet: ?
16:59:03 <trevor_intel> Fatih: yes I know, thx
16:59:06 <fdegir> ok
16:59:12 <jmorgan1> trevor_intel: can we do a JRIA scrub for the Pharos project, perhaps next week?
16:59:42 <jmorgan1> assign tasks per release, close old items, add new ones, etc
16:59:45 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: yes for sure needed badly ... once documents are done
16:59:56 <trozet> no other concerns from me
17:00:02 <trevor_intel> jmorgan1: Rls B is job 1
17:00:15 <trevor_intel> thanks all!
17:00:19 <fdegir> thx
17:00:22 <jmorgan1> thanks
17:00:29 <trevor_intel> endmeeting
17:00:36 <trevor_intel> #endmeeting