On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Stephen Wong <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Kyle, > > So no meeting this Thursday? > I am inclined to skip this week's meeting due to the fact I haven't heard many replies yet. I think a good starting point for people would be to review the BP [1] and Design Document [2] and provide feedback where appropriate. We should start to formalize what the APIs will look like at next week's meeting, and the Design Document has a first pass at this. Thanks, Kyle [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/group-based-policy-abstraction [2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZbOFxAoibZbJmDWx1oOrOsDcov6Cuom5aaBIrupCD9E/edit?usp=sharing > Thanks, > - Stephen > > On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery) > <[email protected]> wrote: >> On Nov 13, 2013, at 8:58 AM, "Stein, Manuel (Manuel)" >> <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Kyle, >>> >>> I'm afraid your meeting vanished from the Meetings page [2] when user >>> amotiki reworked neutron meetings ^.^ >>> Is the meeting for Thu 1600 UTC still on? >>> >> Ack, thanks for the heads up here! I have re-added the meeting. I only heard >> back from one other person other than yourself, so at this point I'm inclined >> to wait until next week to hold our first meeting unless I hear back from >> others. >> >>> A few heads-up questions (couldn't attend the HK design summit Friday >>> meeting): >>> >>> 1) In the summit session Etherpad [3], ML2 implementation mentions >>> insertion of arbitrary metadata to hint to underlying implementation. Is >>> that (a) the plug-ing reporting its policy-bound realization? (b) the user >>> further specifying what should be used? (c) both? Or (d) none of that but >>> just some arbitrary message of the day? >>> >> I believe that would be (a). >> >>> 2) Would policies _always_ map to the old Neutron entities? >>> E.g. when I have policies in place, can I query related network/port, >>> subnet/address, router elements on the API or are there no equivalents >>> created? Would the logical topology created under the policies be exposed >>> otherwise? for e.g. monitoring/wysiwyg/troubleshoot purposes. >>> >> No, this is up to the plugin/MechanismDriver implementation. >> >>> 3) Do the chain identifier in your policy rule actions match to "Service >>> Chain UUID" in Service Insertion, Chaining and API [4] >>> >> That's one way to look at this, yes. >> >>> 4) Are you going to describe L2 services the way group policies work? I >>> mean, why would I need a LoadBalancer or Firewall instance before I can >>> insert it between two groups when all that load balancing/firewalling >>> requires is nothing but a policy for group communication itself? - >>> regardless the service instance used to carry out the service. >>> >> These are things I'd like to discuss at the IRC meeting each week. The goal >> would be to try and come up with some actionable items we can drive towards >> in both Icehouse-1 and Icehouse-2. Given how close the closing of Icehouse-1 >> is, we need to focus on this very fast if we want to have a measurable >> impact in >> Icehouse-1. >> >> Thanks, >> Kyle >> >> >>> Best, Manuel >>> >>> [2] >>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings#Neutron_Group_Policy_Sub-Team_Meeting >>> [3] >>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Group_Based_Policy_Abstraction_for_Neutron >>> [4] >>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fmCWpCxAN4g5txmCJVmBDt02GYew2kvyRsh0Wl3YF2U/edit# >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Kyle Mestery (kmestery) [mailto:[email protected]] >>>> Sent: Montag, 11. November 2013 19:41 >>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) >>>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Group-based Policy >>>> Sub-team Meetings >>>> >>>> Hi folks! Hope everyone had a safe trip back from Hong Kong. >>>> Friday afternoon in the Neutron sessions we discussed the >>>> "Group-based Policy Abstraction" BP [1]. It was decided we >>>> would try to have a weekly IRC meeting to drive out further >>>> requirements with the hope of coming up with a list of >>>> actionable tasks to begin working on by December. >>>> I've tentatively set the meeting [2] for Thursdays at 1600 >>>> UTC on the #openstack-meeting-alt IRC channel. If there are >>>> serious conflicts with this day and time, please speak up >>>> soon. Otherwise, we'll host our first meeting on Thursday this week. >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>> Kyle >>>> >>>> [1] >>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/group-based-pol >>> icy-abstraction >>>> [2] >>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings#Neutron_Group_Policy_ >>>> Sub-Team_Meeting >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>>> [email protected] >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> OpenStack-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
