I guess my only concern would be whether either of those things are contentious (both sound like must-do's at some point) and whether there is anything on either topic that requires f2f conversation to resolve. There's a spec out for Cinder HA already (https://review.openstack.org/#/c/101237/) that seems to have at least general support from everyone, and it's not clear to me that the L3 one can be resolved by us. It sounds like we need Nova and Neutron changes for that. Of course, if we can get some Nova and Neutron folks to commit to attending that session then I could see that being helpful.
In general both of those topics on the etherpad are a little light on details, so I'd personally like to see some more specifics on what we'd be talking about. -Ben On 10/16/2014 03:14 PM, Clint Byrum wrote: > The format has changed slightly this summit, to help encourage a more > collaborative design experience, rather than rapid fire mass-inclusion > summit sessions. So we have two 40-minute long slots, and one whole day > of contributor meetup. > > Our etherpad topics page has received quite a few additions now , and > so I'd like to hear thoughts on what things we want to talk about in the > meetup versus the sessions. > > A few things I think we should stipulate: > > * The scheduled sessions will be heavily attended by the community at > large. This often includes those who are just curious, or those who > want to make sure that their voice is heard. These sessions should be > reserved for those topics which have the most external influence or > are the most dependent on other projects. > > * The meetup will be at the end of the week so at the end of it, we > can't then go to any other meetups and ask for things / participate > in those design activities. This reinforces that scheduled session > time should be focused on things that are externally focused so that > we can take the result of those discussions into any of the sessions > that are after. > > * The Ops Summit is Wendesday/Thursday , which overlaps with these > sessions. I am keenly interested in gathering more contribution from > those already operating and deploying OpenStack. It can go both ways, > but I think it might make sense to have more ops-centric topics > discussed on Friday, when those participants might not be fully > wrapped up in the ops sessions. > > If we can all agree on those points, given the current topics, I think > our scheduled sessions should target at least (but not limited to): > > * Cinder + CEPH > * Layer 3 segmentation > > I think those might fit into 40 minutes, as long as we hash some things > out here on the mailing list first. Cinder + CEPH is really just a > check-in to make sure we're on track to providing it. Layer 3, I've had > discussions with Ironic and Neutron people and I think we have a plan, > but I wanted to present it in the open and discuss the short term goals > to see if it satisfies what users may want for the Kilo time frame. > > So, I would encourage you all to look at the etherpad, and expand on > topics or add more, and then reply to this thread with ideas for how > best to use our precious time together. > >  http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/tripleo >  https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-tripleo-summit-topics >  http://kilodesignsummit.sched.org/overview/type/ops+summit > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStackemail@example.com > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > _______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStackfirstname.lastname@example.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev