Thanks for all your replies. Thanks for the great inputs on how to frame the discussion in the etherpad so it becomes easier for people to get on board. We will add author indent to track the source of the changes. Will work on cleaning that up.
Regarding the session itself, as you probably know, there was an attempt in Icehouse to get the sr-iov work going. We found that the time allotted for the session was not sufficient to get to all the use cases and discuss alternate views. This time around we want to be better prepared and so would like to keep only a couple of open times for the actual session. Hence, the request for the early meeting. How does Monday 1pm sound? Thanks, Sandhya On 5/9/14 11:44 AM, "Steve Gordon" <sgor...@redhat.com> wrote: >----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Robert Li (baoli)" <ba...@cisco.com> >> Subject: Re: Informal meeting before SR-IOV summit presentation >> >> This is the one that Irena created: >> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/pci_passthrough_cross_project > >Thanks, I missed this as it wasn't linked from the design summit Wiki >page. > >-Steve > >> On 5/8/14, 4:33 PM, "Steve Gordon" <sgor...@redhat.com> wrote: >> >> >----- Original Message ----- >> >> > It would be nice to have an informal discussion / unconference >>session >> >> > before the actual summit session on SR-IOV. During the previous IRC >> >> > meeting, we were really close to identifying the different use >>cases. >> >> > There was a dangling discussion on introducing another level of >> >> > indirection between the vnic_types exposed via the nova boot API >>and >> >>how >> >> > it would be represented internally. It would be ideal to have >>these 2 >> >> > discussions converged before the summit session. >> >> >> >> What would be the purpose of doing that before the session? IMHO, a >> >> large part of being able to solve this problem is getting everyone >>up to >> >> speed on what this means, what the caveats are, and what we're >>trying to >> >> solve. If we do some of that outside the scope of the larger >>audience, I >> >> expect we'll get less interaction (or end up covering it again) in >>the >> >> session. >> >> >> >> That said, if there's something I'm missing that needs to be resolved >> >> ahead of time, then that's fine, but I expect the best plan is to >>just >> >> keep the discussion to the session. Afterwards, additional things >>can be >> >> discussed in a one-off manner, but getting everyone on the same page >>is >> >> largely the point of having a session in the first place IMHO. >> > >> >Right, in spite of my previous response...looking at the etherpad there >> >is nothing there to frame the discussion at the moment: >> > >> >https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-nova-sriov-support >> > >> >I think populating this should be a priority rather than organizing >> >another session/meeting? >> > >> >Steve >> >> > >-- >Steve Gordon, RHCE >Product Manager, Red Hat Enterprise Linux OpenStack Platform >Red Hat Canada (Toronto, Ontario) _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev