14:30:15 <debrascott> #startmeeting Brahmaputra Daily Standup
14:30:15 <collabot`> Meeting started Mon Jan 18 14:30:15 2016 UTC.  The chair is debrascott. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:30:15 <collabot`> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
14:30:15 <collabot`> The meeting name has been set to 'brahmaputra_daily_standup'
14:30:28 <debrascott> #info agenda https://wiki.opnfv.org/releases/brahmaputra/minutes
14:30:39 <debrascott> #topic roll call
14:30:52 <trozet> #info Tim Rozet
14:30:54 <anac1> #info Ana Cunha
14:31:30 <morgan_orange> #info Morgan Richomme
14:31:49 <fdegir> #info Fatih Degirmenci
14:32:25 <joekidder> #info Joe Kidder
14:32:31 <frankbrockners> #info Frank Brockners
14:32:39 <HKirksey> #info Heather Kirksey
14:32:45 <debrascott> holiday in US we may be missing some today, not all companies celebrate it though
14:32:51 <debrascott> #info Debra Scott
14:32:54 <StuartMackie> #info Stuart Mackie
14:33:02 <debrascott> Lets get started
14:33:10 <debrascott> #topic Hardware / POD status
14:33:20 <fdegir> #info PODs used by Fuel are having problems (LF POD2, Ericsson POD2)
14:33:26 <fdegir> #info LF POD2: A deployment is running on it at the moment to see if Peter Bandzi's fixes solved the issue
14:33:27 <debrascott> #info LF POD 2 status
14:33:32 <debrascott> ??
14:33:32 <fdegir> #info Ericsson POD2: Still having problems. WIP.
14:33:33 <frankbrockners> pbandzi - could you update us?
14:33:59 <pbandzi> #info POD2 - now looks OK. deployment is still in progress
14:34:08 <frankbrockners> what was the issue?
14:34:22 <debrascott> pbandzi: good!!
14:34:39 <pbandzi> #info 1. we could not get to jumphost via SSH, once we turned off other nodes from pod2 then we were able to access
14:34:48 <pbandzi> #info duplicate IP? not sure
14:35:25 <debrascott> Is https://wiki.opnfv.org/pharos_rls_b_labs#status_of_production_ci_resources_for_release_b up to date?
14:35:42 <fdegir> yes
14:36:00 <bin_> #info Bin Hu
14:36:01 <pbandzi> #info 2. issue we have wrongly configured PXE bridge on jumphost, after reconfig on linux nbow it looks that it is ok.... at least deployment still in progrees (but nodes were recognized by fuel now)
14:36:05 <fdegir> LF POD2 status will be updated when/once the deployment succeds
14:37:01 <ashyoung> #info Ashlee Young
14:37:21 <debrascott> what about Ericsson POD2- what is going on there?
14:37:41 <pbandzi> debrascot: it looks to be up to date but hope that lf pod2 can be soon changed from in-process to operational once the deploy finish
14:38:11 <debrascott> pbandzi: thanks
14:38:22 <debrascott> Shall we move on to Scenarios?
14:38:27 <fdegir> we had problem with switch - WIP
14:38:29 <morgan_orange> we also may add that Intel POD2 is not up, so there is only 1 POD for Apex
14:38:41 <trozet> morgan_orange: its ok
14:39:16 <debrascott> #Topic Scenarios
14:39:37 <debrascott> #info Scenarios are now frozen.
14:40:09 <debrascott> #info are there gaps now in test because of them?
14:40:40 <debrascott> #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/brahmaputra_testing_page#candidate_scenarios
14:41:57 <debrascott> #info bm odl_l3-ha has no owner so will be dropped- what impact on the release?
14:42:12 <debrascott> HA testing?
14:42:38 <trozet> debrascott: no i think that means HA openstack
14:42:49 <debrascott> ok?
14:42:56 <debrascott> what impact?
14:43:01 <trozet> debrascott: ODL can be run as L2 or L3 (and replace Neutron L3 agent)
14:43:02 <fdegir> several installers already have odl_l3
14:43:25 <trozet> debrascott: so that scenario is for the latter case, Apex plans on supporting it
14:43:25 <fdegir> (can count 2 installers on jenkins at least)
14:43:51 <debrascott> #info ok so moves to release C?
14:44:02 <fdegir> debrascott: it is already supported
14:44:10 <debrascott> Got it
14:44:32 <debrascott> #info this scenaro is already supported
14:44:38 <[1]JonasB> #info Jonas Bjurel
14:44:43 <debrascott> #info what about virt onos-ha
14:45:36 <debrascott> sorry that one has an owner
14:45:47 <debrascott> #info what about 	bm nosdn-ovs-ha
14:45:56 <trozet> debrascott: onos already running in Apex
14:46:14 <trozet> debrascott: i dont know what nosdn-ovs-ha means
14:46:37 <[1]JonasB> That is not an existing scenario
14:46:51 <trozet> i actually dont know what 15, 16, 17 mean
14:46:58 <trozet> they are all empty
14:47:01 <trozet> should be removed imo
14:47:04 <[1]JonasB> Sorry, taking back my point, it is a valid scenario
14:47:20 <trozet> [1]JonasB: what is 15?
14:47:32 <[1]JonasB> nosdn-ovs-ha means NFVOVS in HA config
14:47:54 <[1]JonasB> trozet: Came in late, what is 15?
14:48:08 <trozet> [1]JonasB: 15th row on https://wiki.opnfv.org/brahmaputra_testing_page#candidate_scenarios
14:48:23 <trozet> [1]JonasB: what is "NFV OVS"?
14:48:42 <[1]JonasB> trozet: Userspace DPDK OVS
14:48:48 <fdegir> [1]JonasB: 15: bm nosdn-ovs-ha
14:48:56 <trozet> [1]JonasB: then i think the scenario needs to say dpdk ovs
14:48:56 <fdegir> [1]JonasB: 16: bm nosdn-kvm-ha
14:49:10 <fdegir> [1]JonasB: 17: bm nosdn-ovs_kvm-ha
14:49:41 <[1]JonasB> Userspace DPDK OVS + NFVKVM
14:50:35 <trozet> [1]JonasB: yeah those scenarios with the term OVS, need to have dpdk attched to them
14:50:46 <trozet> otherwise its pretty misleading
14:51:09 <debrascott> #info OK, then these are going to drop, they aftect DPDK functionality, anything else?
14:51:17 <trozet> debrascott: only Fuel will support 16,17 afaik KVM4NVF team only supports them
14:51:30 <trozet> NFV*
14:51:34 <fdegir> debrascott: they're valid
14:51:59 <debrascott> fdegir: what does it mean “valid”?
14:52:11 <fdegir> meaning at least 1 installer supporting them
14:52:23 <fdegir> unless the installer team says otherwise
14:52:33 <fdegir> in this case, it is [1]JonasB
14:53:06 <debrascott> Then installer team is owning?What about 20-22 and 24?
14:53:50 <fdegir> I didn't mean that - what I meant was installer team should provide their input
14:53:53 <trozet> [1]JonasB: what is the difference between #15 and #11?
14:54:01 <trozet> both are nosdn dpdk ovs
14:55:08 <debrascott> fdegir: Trozet’s question?
14:55:16 <trozet> debrascott: 23 and 24 are the same thing, they can be collapsed into 23
14:55:39 <trozet> debrascott: but 20+ all have owner for ONOSFW so we are good there
14:55:45 <[1]JonasB> Trozet: Dont actually see what is the difference between 1 and 11
14:55:52 <[1]JonasB> *15 and 11
14:55:54 <debrascott> trozet: thanks, but who is owning getting them into Jenkins?
14:56:20 <trozet> debrascott: well the installers should have scenarios for them in jenkins already
14:56:33 <trozet> debrascott: apex has #22 in jenkins
14:56:35 <ashyoung> debrascott: 23 and 24 are different installers
14:56:47 <trozet> ashyoung: yeah but its the same row
14:56:54 <ashyoung> got it :)
14:57:02 <trozet> ill fix it
14:57:09 <debrascott> If already in Jenkins then it should be removed from this wiki
14:57:24 <trozet> debrascott: oh didnt realize that, ill remove ours then
14:57:27 <trozet> sorry
14:57:35 <fdegir> debrascott: candidate scenarios need to stay there
14:57:47 <fdegir> debrascott: available scenarios table got removed
14:58:00 <debrascott> fdegir: I thought this was staging place only?
14:58:15 <debrascott> needed to be in Jenkins or this table not both?
14:58:24 <fdegir> debrascott: candidate scenarios was and still is the place to list what potential/possible scenarios we could have for B-release
14:58:40 <fdegir> debrascott: and jenkins reflects which scenarios could make into the releaseimplemented
14:59:11 <debrascott> OK- then can we add owners to those and/or a column stating they are in Jenkins already?
14:59:36 <fdegir> debrascott: we need to go through the table and perhaps mark the ones that couldn't make it
14:59:40 <fdegir> debrascott: so it is clear
15:00:05 <debrascott> OK- lets try to do that today. Do we need a meeting for it?
15:00:14 <trozet> debrascott: #5 is also the same as #20, 22, 23
15:00:30 <fdegir> debrascott: I think installers and feature projects know what they support
15:00:55 <debrascott> OK but I also need to communicate anything that is dropping so I need to know
15:01:27 <debrascott> do I need specific status from each installer on this then?
15:01:50 <debrascott> Can I get that in Genesis meeting?
15:02:01 <trozet> debrascott: I emailed you our status last night :)
15:02:17 <trozet> but yes you can also join genesis meeting
15:02:24 <debrascott> trozet: thanks havent got to email yet
15:02:40 <debrascott> ok, we neet to close
15:03:09 <debrascott> anyone that didn’t get to share status today please email me.
15:03:14 <debrascott> thanks all for joining
15:03:20 <debrascott> #endmeeting