14:59:43 <dmcbride> #startmeeting Colorado 2.0 daily release meeting
14:59:43 <collabot> Meeting started Mon Oct 10 14:59:43 2016 UTC.  The chair is dmcbride. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:59:43 <collabot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic.
14:59:43 <collabot> The meeting name has been set to 'colorado_2_0_daily_release_meeting'
14:59:51 <dmcbride> #topic roll call
15:00:00 <dmcbride> #info David McBride
15:00:23 <dmcbride> topic is set to roll call, please info your name
15:00:37 <fzhadaev> #info Fedor Zhadaev
15:00:41 <kubi001> #info kubi
15:01:59 <dmcbride> we're starting the Col 2.0 release meeting, please info your name
15:02:36 <dmcbride> #topic release schedule
15:02:50 <dmcbride> #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Colorado+2.0+and+3.0
15:03:19 <dmcbride> #info the schedule and related information may be found at the link I just entered ^^
15:03:41 <jmorgan1> #info Jack Morgan
15:03:57 <dmcbride> #info testing and documentation should be complete 2 weeks from today
15:04:06 <dmcbride> #info i.e. Oct 24
15:04:28 <dmcbride> #info to be followed 3 days later (Oct 27) by the release
15:06:02 <dmcbride> #info we still have some holes in the intent-to-release for Colorado 2.0
15:06:07 <dmcbride> #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Colorado+Scenario+Status
15:06:26 <dmcbride> #info see the columns to the far right of the table ^^
15:07:15 <dmcbride> #info specifically, I'm still waiting for the Compass team to fill in several gaps
15:08:18 <dmcbride> does anyone have any concerns about Col 2.0 at this time?
15:09:12 <kubi001> one question about intent to col 2.0
15:09:34 <dmcbride> kubi001: go ahead
15:11:00 <kubi001> if one scenario intent to col 1.0, but this scenario don't intent to col 2.0, what will be happened?
15:12:13 <kubi001> if it is avaliable for col 1.0. it should be available for col 2.0, right?
15:12:39 <dmcbride> #info the intent-to-release just alerts me that the scenario is working on changes
15:13:00 <kubi001> dmcbride: ok, I see
15:13:02 <dmcbride> kubi001: it doesn't change the tagging
15:14:25 <dmcbride> I was hoping to find someone from compass team online
15:14:42 <dmcbride> #topic Functest status
15:16:31 <dmcbride> #info substantial degradation for scenarios on Apex, according to functest dashboard
15:16:39 <dmcbride> is trozet around?
15:16:56 <dmcbride> trozet: any comments?
15:17:24 <trozet> dmcbride: i'm here
15:17:40 <trozet> dmcbride: there was a bug introduced for HA deployments, it was fixed over the weekend
15:17:49 <trozet> dmcbride: Sunday's run looks good
15:17:56 <trozet> dmcbride: and bgpvpn passed functest and yardstick
15:18:07 <dmcbride> trozet: ok - thanks for the update
15:18:20 <dmcbride> trozet: any concern for upcoming Col 2.0 milestone in two weeks?
15:18:21 <trozet> let me get that run
15:18:42 <trozet> dmcbride: https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/apex/job/apex-daily-colorado/51/
15:19:06 <dmcbride> #info trozet reports that there was a bug introduced in HA deployments that was fixed over the weekend
15:19:27 <dmcbride> #info trozet reports that Sunday runs of functest and yardstick look good
15:19:41 <dmcbride> #link https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/apex/job/apex-daily-colorado/51/
15:19:57 <trozet> #info dpdk based scenarios (ovs-dpdk fdio) are failing functest, we need to get thsoe back on track - then we should be good for release
15:20:47 <dmcbride> trozet: is this related to the ODL bug that we discussed last week?
15:21:15 <trozet> dmcbride: no that ODL bug is for ODL L3 scenario.  I checked with ODL guys, it was fixed by using the "new netvirt" but then it broke again
15:21:24 <trozet> dmcbride: so i think it is too late to try to include that in C2.0
15:21:36 <trozet> dmcbride: so ODL L3 will continue to fail with floating IPs for C2.0 I think
15:22:15 <dmcbride> narindergupta: any comments about C
15:22:37 <dmcbride> narindergupta: any comments about Col 2.0 scenarios on Joid?
15:23:17 <dmcbride> trozet: so, does that mean that most deployments continue to use Berrylium?
15:23:31 <trozet> dmcbride: yeah
15:23:43 <trozet> dmcbride: well we could switch it to use boron
15:23:51 <trozet> dmcbride: but htey would be using the old features still
15:24:04 <dmcbride> trozet: right - so, no point
15:24:10 <trozet> dmcbride: correct
15:24:44 <dmcbride> trozet: is that true across all installers?
15:25:06 <dmcbride> trozet: or does it only affect Apex?
15:25:33 <trozet> dmcbride: no I think that is applicable to every installer.  New netvirt also requires specific versions of OVS and conntrack
15:25:41 <trozet> dmcbride: there is more to it than just using boron and turning it on
15:26:08 <trozet> dmcbride: and the fact that the ODL bug is still in new netvirt means that it applies to any installer using ODL
15:26:15 <dmcbride> trozet: are any scenarios using Boron at this point?
15:26:29 <trozet> dmcbride: yeah fdio and SFC
15:28:14 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: any comments or concerns about Col 2.0?
15:28:53 <fzhadaev> no
15:29:13 <fzhadaev> looks like we're on track
15:29:52 <dmcbride> fzhadaev: coolio
15:30:19 <dmcbride> ok - any last comments or concerns from anyone?
15:30:33 <dmcbride> regular release meeting is tomorrow
15:30:51 <dmcbride> next daily meeting will be Thursday, on this channel, same time
15:31:13 <dmcbride> thanks for participating
15:31:21 <dmcbride> #endmeeting