On Nov 14, 2013, at 9:38 AM, Mohammad Banikazemi <m...@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> Kyle, > > Thank you for organizing this. > > I think the original email you sent out did not solicit any comments (except > for possibly proposing a different time for the weekly meetings). So that is > probably why you have not heard from anybody (including me). So we are ready > to have the meeting but if the consensus is that people need more time to > prepare that is fine too. Lets go with the time slot I've proposed, as no one objected. > I think we need to set an agenda for our meeting (similar to what you do for > the ML2 calls) so we have a better idea of what we need to do during the > meeting. In the proposal, we have identified new object resources. Should we > start making those definitions and their relationship with other objects more > precise. Just a suggestion. > Can you add this to the agenda [1] for next week? Thanks, Kyle [1] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy > Thanks, > > Mohammad > > > <graycol.gif>"Kyle Mestery (kmestery)" ---11/13/2013 01:09:02 PM---On Nov 13, > 2013, at 10:36 AM, Stephen Wong <s3w...@midokura.com> wrote: > > From: "Kyle Mestery (kmestery)" <kmest...@cisco.com> > To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" > <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>, > Date: 11/13/2013 01:09 PM > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Group-based Policy Sub-team > Meetings > > > > On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Stephen Wong <s3w...@midokura.com> > 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) > > <kmest...@cisco.com> wrote: > >> On Nov 13, 2013, at 8:58 AM, "Stein, Manuel (Manuel)" > >> <manuel.st...@alcatel-lucent.com> 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:kmest...@cisco.com] > >>>> 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 > >>>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >>>> > >>> _______________________________________________ > >>> OpenStack-dev mailing list > >>> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > >> > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> OpenStack-dev mailing list > >> OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > >> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > > _______________________________________________ > > OpenStack-dev mailing list > > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
