[openstack-dev] [mistral] Multi-tenancy and ceilometer triggers

2014-06-10 Thread Angus Salkeld
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Hi I was looking at https://blueprints.launchpad.net/mistral/+spec/mistral-ceilometer-integration and trying to figure out how to implement that. I can see some problems: - - at the moment the trust is created when you PUT the workbook definition

Re: [openstack-dev] [ceilometer][gate] ceilometer unit test frequently failing in gate

2014-06-10 Thread Eoghan Glynn
Over the last 7 days ceilometer unit test jobs have a 18% failure rate in the gate queue [0], while we see expect to see some failures in integration testing, unit tests should not be failing in the gate with such a high frequency (and for so long). It looks like these failures are due to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] DRBD integration as volume driver

2014-06-10 Thread Philipp Marek
Hello Duncan, The best thing to do with the code is push up a gerrit review! No need to be shy, and you're very welcome to push up code before the blueprint is in, it just won't get merged. thank you for your encouragement! I pushed another fix for Cinder last week (2 lines, allowing to

[openstack-dev] [openstack-sdk-php] Pending reviews

2014-06-10 Thread Jamie Hannaford
Hey folks, Could we get these two patches reviewed either today or tomorrow? The first is array syntax: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94323https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94323/5 The second is removing the “bin” and “scripts” directories from top-level tree, as discussed in last week’s

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation scheduler filter - bug, or new feature proposal?

2014-06-10 Thread Jesse Pretorius
On 9 June 2014 15:18, Belmiro Moreira moreira.belmiro.email.li...@gmail.com wrote: I would say that is a documentation bug for the “AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation” filter. Great, thanks. I've logged a bug for this: https://bugs.launchpad.net/openstack-manuals/+bug/1328400 When this was

[openstack-dev] [Containers] Notice: Containers Team meeting cancelled this week

2014-06-10 Thread Adrian Otto
Team, Due to a number of expected absences (DockerCon plenaries conflict with our regularly scheduled meeting), we will skip our Containers Team Meeting this week. Please accept my sincere apologies for the short notice. Our next scheduled meeting is: 2014-06-17 2200 UTC I look forward to

Re: [openstack-dev] [sahara] 2014.1.1 preparation

2014-06-10 Thread Sergey Lukjanov
All patches merged now. Here is the launchpad page for the sahara 2014.1.1 release - https://launchpad.net/sahara/+milestone/2014.1.1 We're doing some final testing now and release tag will be pushed later today. Thanks. On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 4:34 PM, Sergey Lukjanov slukja...@mirantis.com

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-sdk-php] Use of final and private keywords to limit extending

2014-06-10 Thread Choi, Sam
Regarding use of the final keyword and limiting extending in general, a few thoughts below: - While I found the blog post about final classes to be informative, I'd take it with a grain of salt. The author bills himself as a consultant who works with enterprise web applications. Briefly

Re: [openstack-dev] Promoting healing script to scheme migration script?

2014-06-10 Thread Anna Kamyshnikova
Hi, Here is a link to WIP healing script https://review.openstack.org/96438. The idea on which it is based on is shown in this spec https://review.openstack.org/95738. Regards, Ann On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 7:07 PM, Johannes Erdfelt johan...@erdfelt.com wrote: On Mon, Jun 09, 2014, Jakub

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] [Ironic] [Heat] Mid-cycle collaborative meetup

2014-06-10 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-06-08 16:44:58 -0700: Hi, it looks that there is no more activity on the survey for mid-cycle dates so I went forward to evaluate it. I created a table view into the etherpad [0] and results are following: * option1 (Jul 28 - Aug 1): 27

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Flavio Percoco
On 09/06/14 19:31 +, Kurt Griffiths wrote: Folks, this may be a bit of a bombshell, but I think we have been dancing around the issue for a while now and we need to address it head on. Let me start with some background. Back when we started designing the Marconi API, we knew that we wanted

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo] oslo-specs approval process

2014-06-10 Thread Flavio Percoco
On 09/06/14 20:59 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 5:56 PM, Ben Nemec openst...@nemebean.com wrote: Hi all, While the oslo-specs repository has been available for a while and a number of specs proposed, we hadn't agreed on a process for actually approving them (i.e. the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-10 Thread Clint Byrum
Excerpts from Vijay Venkatachalam's message of 2014-06-09 21:48:43 -0700: My vote is for option #2 (without the registration). It is simpler to start with this approach. How is delete handled though? Ex. What is the expectation when user attempts to delete a certificate/container which

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Mark McLoughlin
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 20:14 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Eoghan Glynn egl...@redhat.com wrote: Based on the discussion I'd like to propose these options: 1. Cinder-certified driver - This is an attempt to move the certification to the project level. 2.

[openstack-dev] [nova] Diagnostics spec

2014-06-10 Thread Gary Kotton
Hi, Any chance of getting a review on https://review.openstack.org/84691. Thanks Gary ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Mark McLoughlin
On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 19:31 +, Kurt Griffiths wrote: Lately we have been talking about writing drivers for traditional message brokers that will not be able to support the message feeds part of the API. I’ve started to think that having a huge part of the API that may or may not “work”,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][ml2] Too much shim rest proxy mechanism drivers in ML2

2014-06-10 Thread Irena Berezovsky
Hi Luke, Please see my comments inline. BR, Irena From: Luke Gorrie [mailto:l...@tail-f.com] Sent: Monday, June 09, 2014 12:29 PM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][ml2] Too much shim rest proxy mechanism drivers in ML2 On 6

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] Re: NFV in OpenStack use cases and context

2014-06-10 Thread MENDELSOHN, ITAI (ITAI)
Shall we continue this discussion? Itai On 6/9/14 8:54 PM, Steve Gordon sgor...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Steve Gordon sgor...@redhat.com To: ITAI MENDELSOHN (ITAI) itai.mendels...@alcatel-lucent.com, OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage Just adding

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][ServiceVM] servicevm IRC meeting minutes (June 10 Tuesday 5:00(AM)UTC-)

2014-06-10 Thread Isaku Yamahata
Meeting minutes of June 10 * Announcement - started to create repos in stackforge review is on-going * nfv follow up blueprints - VLAN-aware-VLAN, l2-gateway, network-truncking https://review.openstack.org/#/c/97714/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/94612/

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][ml2] Too much shim rest proxy mechanism drivers in ML2

2014-06-10 Thread Luke Gorrie
Hi Irena, Thanks for the very interesting perspective! On 10 June 2014 10:57, Irena Berezovsky ire...@mellanox.com wrote: *[IrenaB] The DB access approach was previously used by OVS and LinuxBridge Agents and at some point (~Grizzly Release) was changed to use RPC communication.* That is

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Diagnostics spec

2014-06-10 Thread John Garbutt
We have stopped reviewing specs (at least that was the plan), to get Juno-1 out the door before Thursday. Hopefully on Friday, it will be full steam ahead with nova-specs reviews. John On 10 June 2014 09:44, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote: Hi, Any chance of getting a review on

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] mocking policy

2014-06-10 Thread Maxime Vidori
+1 for the use of mock. Is mox3 really needed? Or can we move our tests for python3 to mock, and use this library for every tests for python3? - Original Message - From: David Lyle david.l...@hp.com To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Flavio Percoco
On 10/06/14 09:48 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 19:31 +, Kurt Griffiths wrote: Lately we have been talking about writing drivers for traditional message brokers that will not be able to support the message feeds part of the API. I’ve started to think that having a huge

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] [Ironic] [Heat] Mid-cycle collaborative meetup

2014-06-10 Thread Tomas Sedovic
On 10/06/14 10:25, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-06-08 16:44:58 -0700: Hi, it looks that there is no more activity on the survey for mid-cycle dates so I went forward to evaluate it. I created a table view into the etherpad [0] and results are following:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] DRBD integration as volume driver

2014-06-10 Thread Philipp Marek
So, I now tried to push the proof-of-concept driver to Gerrit, and got this: Downloading/unpacking dbus (from -r /home/jenkins/workspace/gate- cinder-pep8/requirements.txt (line 32)) http://pypi.openstack.org/openstack/dbus/ uses an insecure transport scheme (http). Consider using https if

Re: [openstack-dev] [Cinder] DRBD integration as volume driver

2014-06-10 Thread Philipp Marek
Hrmpf, sent too fast again. I guess https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Requirements is the link I was looking for. Sorry for the noise. ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] Gate still backed up - need assistance with nova-network logging enhancements

2014-06-10 Thread Michael Still
https://review.openstack.org/99002 adds more logging to nova/network/manager.py, but I think you're not going to love the debug log level. Was this the sort of thing you were looking for though? Michael On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 11:45 PM, Sean Dague s...@dague.net wrote: Based on some back of

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] AggregateMultiTenancyIsolation scheduler filter - bug, or new feature proposal?

2014-06-10 Thread Jesse Pretorius
On 10 June 2014 12:11, John Garbutt j...@johngarbutt.com wrote: There was a spec I read that was related to this idea of excluding things that don't match the filter. I can't seem to find that, but the general idea makes total sense. As a heads up, the scheduler split means we are wanting to

[openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Dina Belova
Hello, stackers! Oslo.messaging is future of how different OpenStack components communicate with each other, and really I’d love to start discussion about how we can make this library even better then it’s now and how can we refactor it make more production-ready. As we all remember,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS support RST document on Gerrit

2014-06-10 Thread Evgeny Fedoruk
Hi All, Carlos, Vivek, German, thanks for reviewing the RST doc. There are some issues I want to pinpoint final decision on them here, in ML, before writing it down in the doc. Other issues will be commented on the document itself. 1. Support/No support in JUNO Referring to summit's

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Julien Danjou
On Mon, Jun 09 2014, Doug Hellmann wrote: We went with a single large storage API in ceilometer initially, but we had some discussions at the Juno summit about it being a bad decision because it resulted in storing some data like alarm definitions in database formats that just didn't make

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-10 Thread Clark, Robert Graham
It looks like this has come full circle and we are back at the simplest case. # Containers are immutable # Changing a cert means creating a new container and, when ready, pointing LBaaS at the new container This makes a lot of sense to me, it removes a lot of handholding and keeps Barbican and

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Davanum Srinivas
Dina, Alexey, Do you mind filing some spec(s) please? http://markmail.org/message/yqhndsr3zrqcfwq4 http://markmail.org/message/kpk35uikcnodq3jb thanks, dims On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 7:03 AM, Dina Belova dbel...@mirantis.com wrote: Hello, stackers! Oslo.messaging is future of how different

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO][Fuel] relationship btw TripleO and Fuel

2014-06-10 Thread Mike Scherbakov
That's right, we (Fuel devs) are contributing to the TripleO. Our devs contributes into all areas where overlap occurs, and these include TripleO, Ironic and other projects. As we work with the TripleO team, the Fuel team will continue to enhance Fuel based on users demand. Since Fuel has been

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Dina Belova
Dims, No problem with creating the specs, we just want to understand if the community is OK with our suggestions in general :) If so, I'll create the appropriate specs and we'll discuss them :) Thanks -- Dina On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 3:31 PM, Davanum Srinivas dava...@gmail.com wrote: Dina,

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Flavio Percoco
On 10/06/14 15:03 +0400, Dina Belova wrote: Hello, stackers! Oslo.messaging is future of how different OpenStack components communicate with each other, and really I’d love to start discussion about how we can make this library even better then it’s now and how can we refactor it make more

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Gordon Sim
On 06/10/2014 09:48 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: Perhaps the first point to get super clear on is why drivers for traditional message brokers are needed. What problems would such drivers address? Who would the drivers help? Would the Marconi team recommend using any of those drivers for a

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Gordon Sim
On 06/09/2014 08:31 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote: Lately we have been talking about writing drivers for traditional message brokers that will not be able to support the message feeds part of the API. Could you elaborate a little on this point? In some sense of the term at least, handling message

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Alexei Kornienko
Hi, Please find some answers inline. Regards, Alexei On 06/10/2014 03:06 PM, Flavio Percoco wrote: On 10/06/14 15:03 +0400, Dina Belova wrote: Hello, stackers! Oslo.messaging is future of how different OpenStack components communicate with each other, and really I'd love to start

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Gordon Sim
On 06/10/2014 12:03 PM, Dina Belova wrote: Hello, stackers! Oslo.messaging is future of how different OpenStack components communicate with each other, and really I’d love to start discussion about how we can make this library even better then it’s now and how can we refactor it make more

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Using saltstack as orchestrator for fuel

2014-06-10 Thread Mike Scherbakov
Interesting stuff. Do you think that we can get rid of Astute at some point being purely replaced by Salt? And listening for the commands from Fuel? Can you please clarify, does the suggested approach implies that we can have both puppet SaltStack? Even if you ever switch to anything different,

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Duncan Thomas
On 10 June 2014 09:33, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Avoiding dragging the project into those sort of politics is something I'm really keen on, and why I think the word certification is best avoided so we can focus on what we're actually trying to achieve. Avoiding those sorts of

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Anita Kuno
On 06/10/2014 04:33 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 20:14 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Eoghan Glynn egl...@redhat.com wrote: Based on the discussion I'd like to propose these options: 1. Cinder-certified driver - This is an attempt to move the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Kyle Mestery
On Mon, Jun 9, 2014 at 9:22 PM, Luke Gorrie l...@tail-f.com wrote: Howdy Kyle, On 9 June 2014 22:37, Kyle Mestery mest...@noironetworks.com wrote: After talking with various infra folks, we've noticed the Tail-f CI system is not voting anymore. According to some informal research, the last

Re: [openstack-dev] [oslo][messaging] Further improvements and refactoring

2014-06-10 Thread Alexei Kornienko
On 06/10/2014 03:59 PM, Gordon Sim wrote: On 06/10/2014 12:03 PM, Dina Belova wrote: Hello, stackers! Oslo.messaging is future of how different OpenStack components communicate with each other, and really I’d love to start discussion about how we can make this library even better then it’s

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Mark McLoughlin
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 14:06 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote: On 10 June 2014 09:33, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Avoiding dragging the project into those sort of politics is something I'm really keen on, and why I think the word certification is best avoided so we can focus on what

Re: [openstack-dev] [TripleO] [Ironic] [Heat] Mid-cycle collaborative meetup

2014-06-10 Thread Jaromir Coufal
On 2014/10/06 10:25, Clint Byrum wrote: Excerpts from Jaromir Coufal's message of 2014-06-08 16:44:58 -0700: Hi, it looks that there is no more activity on the survey for mid-cycle dates so I went forward to evaluate it. I created a table view into the etherpad [0] and results are following:

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-sdk-php] Transport Clients, Service Clients, and state

2014-06-10 Thread Matthew Farina
Those are some good questions and I pondered them last night even before I read your email. Right now, if no transport layer is passed in a default one is used for them. The don't make me think implementation is already there. If you want to use something other than the default one than you need

[openstack-dev] [NFV] Sub-team Meeting Reminder - Wednesday June 11 @ 1400 utc

2014-06-10 Thread Steve Gordon
Hi all, Just a reminder that the next meeting of the NFV sub-team is scheduled for Wednesday June 11 @ 1400 UTC in #openstack-meeting-alt. Agenda: * Review actions from last week * russellb: NFV topic on ML * russellb: #openstack-nfv setup * bauzas: gerrit dashboard * cdub: Review use

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Luke Gorrie
Howdy! Here is a successful Sandbox test from right now: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99061/. I don't immediately see how to list all historical sandbox tests. (The previous ones are from before the Summit anyway.) I enabled the CI for the openstack/neutron Gerrit feed now. Here is a change

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-sdk-php] Pending reviews

2014-06-10 Thread Matthew Farina
The reviews are in and they are both merged. Thanks for the reminder. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 3:12 AM, Jamie Hannaford jamie.hannaf...@rackspace.com wrote: Hey folks, Could we get these two patches reviewed either today or tomorrow? The first is array syntax:

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory allocation ratio out of scheduler

2014-06-10 Thread Solly Ross
Response inline - Original Message - From: Alex Glikson glik...@il.ibm.com To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Sent: Monday, June 9, 2014 3:13:52 PM Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] Proposal: Move CPU and memory

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa] shared review dashboard proposal

2014-06-10 Thread David Kranz
On 06/09/2014 02:24 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/09/2014 01:38 PM, David Kranz wrote: On 06/02/2014 06:57 AM, Sean Dague wrote: Towards the end of the summit there was a discussion about us using a shared review dashboard to see if a common view by the team would help accelerate people looking

[openstack-dev] [neutron] BPs and bugs for Juno-1

2014-06-10 Thread Kyle Mestery
Neutron devs: The list of targeted BPs and bugs for Juno-1 is here [1, as we discussed in the team meeting yesterday [2]. Per discussion with ttx today, of the 4 remaining BPs targeted for Juno-1, any which do not have code in flight to be merged by EOD today will be re-targeted for Juno-2. For

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Duncan Thomas
On 10 June 2014 15:07, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Exposing which configurations are actively tested is a perfectly sane thing to do. I don't see why you think calling this certification is necessary to achieve your goals. What is certification except a formal way of saying 'we

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] - follow up on scheduling discussion

2014-06-10 Thread Tim Hinrichs
Hi all, I see that many of the use cases require information from different OS components, e.g. networking, compute, and storage. One thing to think about is where those constraints are written/stored and how the data the constraints depend on is pulled together. The Congress project might

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Ilya Shakhat
Hi! Tail-f driver seems to be configured correctly. DriverLog will poll Gerrit in the next 4 hours and update driver details screen. Regarding green mark on summary screen - it is shown for those drivers that have configured CI and CI ran at least once. But it doesn't take into account when the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Kyle Mestery
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:15 AM, Ilya Shakhat ishak...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi! Tail-f driver seems to be configured correctly. DriverLog will poll Gerrit in the next 4 hours and update driver details screen. Regarding green mark on summary screen - it is shown for those drivers that have

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] - follow up on scheduling discussion

2014-06-10 Thread ramki Krishnan
Hi Tim, Agree, Congress is a good place to store the scheduling constraints. Thanks, Ramki -Original Message- From: Tim Hinrichs [mailto:thinri...@vmware.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 10, 2014 8:21 AM To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Cc: Norival Figueira;

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] - follow up on scheduling discussion

2014-06-10 Thread Yathiraj Udupi (yudupi)
Hi Tim, In our current implementation of Smart (Solver) Scheduler, the constraints are defined as pluggable modules (just like filter definitions in the filter scheduler) and are pulled in together when necessary to solve the scheduling decision. And regarding the data that we get from

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Collins, Sean
On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 10:33:49AM EDT, Luke Gorrie wrote: Howdy! Here is a successful Sandbox test from right now: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/99061/. I don't immediately see how to list all historical sandbox tests. (The previous ones are from before the Summit anyway.) One of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Luke Gorrie
Hi Sean, On 10 June 2014 18:09, Collins, Sean sean_colli...@cable.comcast.com wrote: One of the links that is posted in that review comment for the Tail-f NCS Jenkins timed out for me. http://egg.snabb.co:8080/job/jenkins-ncs/19/ I notice that there is another link included in that review

[openstack-dev] Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Jay Pipes
Sorry, replied to wrong ML... Original Message Subject: Re: [openstack-tc] [openstack-dev] use of the word certified Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 11:37:38 -0400 From: Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com To: openstack...@lists.openstack.org On 06/10/2014 09:53 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On

[openstack-dev] [oslo] versioning and releases

2014-06-10 Thread Doug Hellmann
As part of the push to release code from the oslo incubator in stand-alone libraries, we have had several different discussions about versioning and release schedules. This is an attempt to collect all of the decisions we have made in those discussions and to lay out the rationale for the approach

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] Re: NFV in OpenStack use cases and context

2014-06-10 Thread Steve Gordon
- Original Message - From: Stephen Wong stephen.kf.w...@gmail.com To: ITAI MENDELSOHN (ITAI) itai.mendels...@alcatel-lucent.com, OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Hi, Perhaps I have missed it somewhere in the email

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][ml2] Too much shim rest proxy mechanism drivers in ML2

2014-06-10 Thread Irena Berezovsky
Hi Luke, Very impressive solution! I do not think there is a problem to keep agent out of the tree in a short term, but would highly recommend to put it upstream in a longer term. You will benefit from quite valuable community review. And most important it will allow to keep your code as much

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Kurt Griffiths
What are 'message feeds' in the Marconi context, in more detail? And what aspect of them is it that message brokers don't support? Great question. When I say “feeds” I mean a “feed” in the sense of RSS or Atom. People do, in fact, use Atom to implement certain messaging patterns. You can think

[openstack-dev] [requirements] Odd behavior from requirements checks

2014-06-10 Thread Kevin L. Mitchell
I've been seeing failures from the requirements gating check on changes proposed by the requirements bot. It's actually complaining that the proposed changes don't match what's in global-requirements.txt, even though they are textually identical. An example is here:

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Jay Pipes
On 06/10/2014 12:32 PM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/10/2014 11:37 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: On 06/10/2014 09:53 AM, Sean Dague wrote: On 06/10/2014 09:14 AM, Anita Kuno wrote: On 06/10/2014 04:33 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: On Mon, 2014-06-09 at 20:14 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote: On Mon, Jun 9, 2014

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Boris Renski
Thanks Jay. Whatever inaccuracies or errors you see with DriverLog, please file a bug or an update request: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/DriverLog#How_To:_Add_a_new_driver_to_DriverLog. Also, we are more than happy to hear any suggestions on what information to display and how to call what.

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Ben Nemec
On 06/10/2014 10:09 AM, Duncan Thomas wrote: On 10 June 2014 15:07, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Exposing which configurations are actively tested is a perfectly sane thing to do. I don't see why you think calling this certification is necessary to achieve your goals. What is

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Sean Dague
Sorry, I do feel like it's kind of crazy and irresponsible to throw data out there with something as wrong as 'OpenStack doesn't test QEMU' and then follow that up with 'Oh, file a bug to fix it!'. Then promote it to something as prominent as stackalytics. I mean... guys... seriously? :)

Re: [openstack-dev] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Mark McLoughlin
On Tue, 2014-06-10 at 16:09 +0100, Duncan Thomas wrote: On 10 June 2014 15:07, Mark McLoughlin mar...@redhat.com wrote: Exposing which configurations are actively tested is a perfectly sane thing to do. I don't see why you think calling this certification is necessary to achieve your

Re: [openstack-dev] nova-compute vfsguestfs

2014-06-10 Thread abhishek jain
Hi Rich I'm able to solve the problem regarding PAPR in libguestfs on my powerpc ubuntu.By default the libguestfs was configuring pseries machine and afterwards I changed it to my original machine i.e ppce500 .The changes are performed in ./src/guestfs-internal.h file. However still my VM is

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Gordon Sim
On 06/10/2014 05:27 PM, Kurt Griffiths wrote: I think the crux of the issue is that Marconi follows the REST architectural style. As such, the client must track the state of where it is in the queue it is consuming (to keep the server stateless). So, it must be given some kind of marker,

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Kurt Griffiths
Will Marconi only support HTTP as a transport, or will it add other protocols as well? We are focusing on HTTP for Juno, but are considering adding a lower-level, persistent transport (perhaps based on WebSocket) in the K cycle. Can anyone describe what is unique about the Marconi design with

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [driverlog] Tail-f CI and it's lack of running and it's DriverLog status

2014-06-10 Thread Collins, Sean
Cool, Thanks. -- Sean M. Collins ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Jay Pipes
On 06/10/2014 01:00 PM, Sean Dague wrote: Sorry, I do feel like it's kind of crazy and irresponsible to throw data out there with something as wrong as 'OpenStack doesn't test QEMU' and then follow that up with 'Oh, file a bug to fix it!'. Then promote it to something as prominent as

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS support RST document on Gerrit

2014-06-10 Thread Carlos Garza
Ok but we still need input from Stephen Balukoff and Jorge to see how this will integrate with the API being proposed. I'm not sure if they were intending to use the attributes your discussing as well as which object was going to contain them. On Jun 10, 2014, at 6:13 AM, Evgeny Fedoruk

[openstack-dev] [marconi] RabbitMQ (AMQP 0.9) driver for Marconi

2014-06-10 Thread Janczuk, Tomasz
I the last few days I attempted to implement a RabbitMQ (AMQP 0.9) storage driver for Marconi. These are the take-aways from this experiment. High level, it showed that current Marconi APIs *cannot* be mapped onto the AMQP 0.9 abstractions. In fact, currently it is not even possible to support

[openstack-dev] [TC] [Murano] Follow up on cross-project session

2014-06-10 Thread Ruslan Kamaldinov
Hi community and TC members! First a little bit of history: Murano applied for incubation in February 2014 [1]. TC discussion [2] finished the following resolution (quote from ttx): Murano is slightly too far up the stack at this point to meet the measured progression of openstack as a whole

Re: [openstack-dev] [DriverLog] What to fix and when

2014-06-10 Thread Anita Kuno
On 06/10/2014 01:58 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: Stackers, OK, we are fully aware that there are problems with the early DriverLog data that is shown in the dashboard. Notably, the Nova driver stuff is not correct for the default virt drivers. We will work on fixing that ASAP. Our focus to date

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Stefano Maffulli
On 06/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: We've been begging for input on this stuff at the board and dev list level for a while now. And people are all ear now and leaving comments, which is good :) I think adding a clear warning on stackalytics.com that the data from DriverLog may not be

Re: [openstack-dev] [NFV] Re: NFV in OpenStack use cases and context

2014-06-10 Thread MENDELSOHN, ITAI (ITAI)
#5 is a good reference point for the type of apps we can encounter in NFV. I guess it's a good idea to start with it. Itai Sent from my iPhone On Jun 10, 2014, at 7:16 PM, Steve Gordon sgor...@redhat.com wrote: - Original Message - From: Stephen Wong stephen.kf.w...@gmail.com To:

Re: [openstack-dev] [horizon] Name proposals

2014-06-10 Thread Radomir Dopieralski
Hello everyone. We have collected a fine number of name proposals for the library part of Horizon, and now it is time to vote for them. I have set up a poll on CIVS, and if you contributed to Horizon within the last year, you should receive an e-mail with the link that lets you vote. If you

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Implementing new LBaaS API

2014-06-10 Thread Brandon Logan
Any core neutron people have a chance to give their opinions on this yet? Thanks, Brandon On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 15:28 +, Buraschi, Andres wrote: Thanks, Kyle. Great. -Original Message- From: Kyle Mestery [mailto:mest...@noironetworks.com] Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2014 11:27 AM

Re: [openstack-dev] [TC] [Murano] Follow up on cross-project session

2014-06-10 Thread Thierry Carrez
Ruslan Kamaldinov wrote: Hi community and TC members! [...] Please only follow-up on -dev! This shall keep this thread consistent. -- Thierry Carrez (ttx) ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-10 Thread Stephen Balukoff
Adam-- Wouldn't the user see the duplicate key/cert copy in their barbican interface, or are you proposing storing these secrets in a not-assigned-to-the-tenant kind of way? In any case, it strikes me as misleading to have an explicit delete command sent to Barbican not have the effect of making

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS support RST document on Gerrit

2014-06-10 Thread Stephen Balukoff
I responded in the other thread just now, but I did want to say: The problem with a dangling reference is this might mean that the associated Listener breaks at some random time after the barbican container goes away. While this is intuitive and expected behavior if it happens shortly after the

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: Re: [openstack-tc] use of the word certified

2014-06-10 Thread Jay Pipes
On 06/10/2014 02:57 PM, Stefano Maffulli wrote: On 06/10/2014 10:39 AM, Jay Pipes wrote: We've been begging for input on this stuff at the board and dev list level for a while now. And people are all ear now and leaving comments, which is good :) I think adding a clear warning on

Re: [openstack-dev] [Horizon] [UX] Design for Alarming and Alarm Management

2014-06-10 Thread Martinez, Christian
Here my feedback regarding the designs: Page 2: * I think that the admin would probably want to filter alarms per user, project, name, meter_name, current_alarm_state(ok=alarm ready; insufficient data = alarm not ready; alarm =alarm triggered), but we don't have all that columns on

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] TLS support RST document on Gerrit

2014-06-10 Thread Stephen Balukoff
Hi Evgeny, Comments inline. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 4:13 AM, Evgeny Fedoruk evge...@radware.com wrote: Hi All, Carlos, Vivek, German, thanks for reviewing the RST doc. There are some issues I want to pinpoint final decision on them here, in ML, before writing it down in the doc.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-10 Thread Adam Harwell
Doug: The reasons a LB might be reprovisioned are fairly important — mostly around HA, for fail overs or capacity — exactly the times we're trying avoid a failure. Stephen: yes, I am talking about storing the copy in a non-tenant way (on the tenant-id for the LBaaS Service Account, not visible

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][ML2] Modular L2 agent architecture

2014-06-10 Thread Mohammad Banikazemi
Following the discussions in the ML2 subgroup weekly meetings, I have added more information on the etherpad [1] describing the proposed architecture for modular L2 agents. I have also posted some code fragments at [2] sketching the implementation of the proposed architecture. Please have a look

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Implementing new LBaaS API

2014-06-10 Thread Susanne Balle
What was discussed at yesterday's Neutron core meeting? On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 3:38 PM, Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.com wrote: Any core neutron people have a chance to give their opinions on this yet? Thanks, Brandon On Thu, 2014-06-05 at 15:28 +, Buraschi, Andres wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Implementing new LBaaS API

2014-06-10 Thread Stephen Balukoff
Yep, I'd like to know here, too-- as knowing the answer to this unblocks implementation work for us. On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 12:38 PM, Brandon Logan brandon.lo...@rackspace.com wrote: Any core neutron people have a chance to give their opinions on this yet? Thanks, Brandon On Thu,

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-10 Thread Stephen Balukoff
Hi Adam, If nothing else, we could always write a garbage collector process which periodically scans for shadow containers that are not in use by any listeners anymore and cleans them up. I suppose that's actually not a difficult problem to solve. Anyway, yes, I'm liking your suggestion quite a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Barbican Neutron LBaaS Integration Ideas

2014-06-10 Thread Doug Wiegley
Doug: The reasons a LB might be reprovisioned are fairly important — mostly around HA, for fail overs or capacity — exactly the times we're trying avoid a failure. Certainly the ticking time bomb is a bad idea, but HA seems cleaner to do in the backend, rather than at the openstack API

[openstack-dev] [nova][pci] A couple of questions

2014-06-10 Thread Robert Li (baoli)
Hi Yunhong Yongli, In the routine _prepare_pci_devices_for_use(), it’s referring to dev[‘hypervisor_name’]. I didn’t see code that’s setting it up, or the libvirt nodedev xml includes hypervisor_name. Is this specific to Xen? Another question is about the issue that was raised in this review:

Re: [openstack-dev] [marconi] Reconsidering the unified API model

2014-06-10 Thread Janczuk, Tomasz
Using processes to isolate tenants is certainly possible. There is a range of isolation mechanisms that can be used, from VM level isolation (basically a separate deployment of the broker per-tenant), to process level isolation, to sub-process isolation. The higher the density the lower the

  1   2   >