Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][IPAM] Arbitrary JSON blobs in ipam db tables

> On Nov 5, 2015, at 1:24 PM, Shraddha Pandhe > wrote: > > Hi, > > I agree with all of you about the REST Apis. > > As I said before, I had to bring up the idea of JSON blob because based on > previous discussions, it looked like neutron community was not willing to > enhance the schemas fo

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [Tempest] where fwaas tempest tests should be?

> On Oct 19, 2015, at 5:33 PM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > >> On 16 Oct 2015, at 10:50, Takashi Yamamoto wrote: >> >> if i move fwaas tests from neutron to neutron-fwaas, [1] >> is there easy way to run them together with the rest of neutron api tests >> for gate-neutron-dsvm-api job? > > Before

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

'be considered to cleaned up’ i meant OR, not to. But I note that armax’s patch already clarified this, so I’ll go back to my jetlag stupor. :-) Thanks, doug > On Oct 24, 2015, at 9:07 PM, Doug Wiegley > wrote: > > As an alternative, to be considered to cleaned up, note tha

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Gerrit permissions and Merge rights

As an alternative, to be considered to cleaned up, note that octavia, also a neutron stadium project, puts its specs in its own repo, runs its own doc jobs, etc. Pros and cons, but just pointing out that its out there. Thanks, doug > On Oct 22, 2015, at 2:47 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > On We

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] New cycle started. What are you up to, folks?

> On Oct 1, 2015, at 8:59 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > >> On 01 Oct 2015, at 17:42, Sean M. Collins wrote: >> >> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 11:05:29AM EDT, Kyle Mestery wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 1, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Sean M. Collins wrote: >>> On Thu, Oct 01, 2015 at 10:02:24AM EDT, Ihar Hrachy

Re: [openstack-dev] [all] -1 due to line length violation in commit messages

> On Sep 28, 2015, at 3:00 PM, Assaf Muller wrote: > > > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2015 at 12:40 PM, Zane Bitter > wrote: > On 28/09/15 05:47, Gorka Eguileor wrote: > On 26/09, Morgan Fainberg wrote: > As a core (and former PTL) I just ignored commit message -1s unless ther

Re: [openstack-dev] [lbaas] [octavia] Proposing new meeting time Wednesday 16:00 UTC

Works for me. Doug > On Sep 25, 2015, at 5:58 PM, Eichberger, German > wrote: > > All, > > In our last meeting [1] we discussed moving the meeting earlier to > accommodate participants from the EMEA region. I am therefore proposing to > move the meeting to 16:00 UTC on Wednesday. Please res

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] - Heat support for LbaasV2

Hi Sergey, I agree with the previous comments here. While supporting several APIs at once, with one set of objects, is a noble goal, in this case, the object relationships are *completely* different. Unless you want to get into the business of redefining your own higher-level API abstractions i

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] - Heat support for LbaasV2

The other option would be to change the namespace. (Os::Lbaas instead of Os::Neutron). The neutron CLI does something similar with neutron-lb-* versus neutron-lbaas-*, e.g. One wrinkle with heat supporting both is that neutron doesn’t support both running at the same time, which certainly hur

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Proposing Michael Johnson for neutron-lbaas core team

like to share my +1 about Michael. > > Cheers, > > Edgar > > > > > On 9/16/15, 3:33 PM, "Doug Wiegley" wrote: > > >Hi all, > > > >As the Lieutenant of the advanced services, I nominate Michael Johnson to be > >a member of the

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Proposing Michael Johnson for neutron-lbaas core team

Hi all, As the Lieutenant of the advanced services, I nominate Michael Johnson to be a member of the neutron-lbaas core reviewer team. Review stats are in line with other cores[2], and Michael has been instrumental in both neutron-lbaas and octavia. Existing cores, please vote +1/-1 for his ad

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron][devstack] New proposed 'default' network model

Sorry, didn’t mean that to come down as a triple pile-on, with me doing it twice. My bad, I’m sorry. Thanks, doug > On Sep 15, 2015, at 6:11 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote: > > On 2015-09-15 8:06 PM, Doug Wiegley wrote: >> >> “Neutron doesn’t get it and never will.” >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron][devstack] New proposed 'default' network model

Hi all, If I can attempt to summarize this thread: “We want simple networks with VMs” Ok, in progress, start here: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/get-me-a-network “It should work with multiple networks” Same sp

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron][devstack] New proposed 'default' network model

> On Sep 15, 2015, at 4:11 PM, Mathieu Gagné wrote: > >> On 2015-09-15 2:00 PM, Fox, Kevin M wrote: >> We run several clouds where there are multiple external networks. the "just >> run it in on THE public network" doesn't work. :/ >> >> I also strongly recommend to users to put vms on a priv

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][neutron][devstack] New proposed 'default' network model

Hi all, One solution to this was a neutron spec that was added for a “get me a network” api, championed by Jay Pipes, which would auto-assign a public network on vm boot. It looks like it was resource starved in Liberty, though: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/get-me-a-network <

Re: [openstack-dev] custom lbaas driver

Just to add a little flavor and a slightly different twist from what Stephen wrote: - The logging noop driver is indeed a good first place to start. - The haproxy reference driver is the *only* driver that utilizes the lbaas-agent, and it’s being deprecated soon, so… Most vendor implementation

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] L7 - Tasks

I think that if we’ve got someone identified to do the ref implementation, and that is code complete by 8/31, we can apply for a feature freeze exception. If we don’t have someone assigned to that task, it’ll slip. doug > On Aug 26, 2015, at 7:22 AM, Samuel Bercovici wrote: > > Hi, > > I thi

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][api] - attaching arbitrary key/value pairs to resources

; > After thinking about it, an out-of-tree driver abusing tags is a much better > place for us to be than monkey-patching code. At least with tags it's obvious > that it's bolted on metadata rather than entirely different API behavior > monkey-patched in. > > On Mon,

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][api] - attaching arbitrary key/value pairs to resources

> I took advantage of it to prototype a feature her That right there is the crux of the objections so far. Don’t get me wrong, I’d love this, and would abuse it within an inch of its life regularly. The alternative is sometimes even worse than a vendor extension or plugin. Take for example, wa

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] I am pleased to propose two new Neutron API/DB/RPC core reviewers!

New guys have to plan the liberty summit get together, right? :) Doug > On Aug 22, 2015, at 2:06 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > It's been over a week, so I'd like to welcome Brandon and Russell to the > API/DB/RPC team in Neutron! > > Kyle > >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2015 at 6:45 AM, Kyle Mestery wr

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Etherpad from the Ops Meetup

To expand on that a bit, I think the DVR complaints were vague because of the simple fact that the overwhelming majority were or wanted to run linuxbridge, not OVS, so DVR was a theoretical thing for them. doug > On Aug 19, 2015, at 2:21 PM, Salvatore Orlando wrote: > > The etherpad contains

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] I am pleased to propose two new Neutron API/DB/RPC core reviewers!

A big +1 to both!! Doug > On Aug 12, 2015, at 6:45 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > It gives me great pleasure to propose Russell Bryant and Brandon Logan as > core reviewers in the API/DB/RPC area of Neutron. Russell and Brandon have > both been incredible contributors to Neutron for a while no

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Horizon support for neutron-lbaas v2

create a project under openstack. > designate-dashboard project takes this approach, > and the core team of the project is both horizon-core and designate-core. > We can do the similar approach. Thought? > > I have one question. > Do we have a separate place forever or do we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Fuel] Abandon changesets which hang for a while without updates

Just adding an experience from another project, Neutron. We had similar debates, and prepping for the long apocalyptic winter of changeset death, Kyle decimated the world and ran the abandon script. The debates were far more intense than the reality, and my large stockpile of Rad-X and Nuka Col

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Horizon support for neutron-lbaas v2

h. Thought? > > I have one question. > Do we have a separate place forever or do we want to merge horizon repo > once the implementation are available. > If we have a separate repo for LBaaS v2 panel, we need to release it > separately. > > I am not sure I am availabl

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] What does flavor mean for a network?

That begins to looks like nova’s metadata tags and scheduler, which is a valid use case. The underpinnings of flavors could do this, but it’s not in the initial implementation. doug > On Jul 15, 2015, at 12:38 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > Wouldn't it be valid to assign flavors to groups of pro

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Proposing Cedric Brandily to Neutron Core Reviewer Team

+1 > On Jul 15, 2015, at 1:07 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > +1, Cedric has been a great contributor for a while now! > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2015 at 1:47 PM, Carl Baldwin > wrote: > As the Neutron L3 Lieutenant along with Kevin Benton for control > plane, and Assaf Muller

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] What does flavor mean for a network?

> On Jul 15, 2015, at 9:54 AM, Neil Jerram wrote: > > I've been reading available docs about the forthcoming Neutron flavors > framework, and am not yet sure I understand what it means for a network. > > Is it a way for an admin to provide a particular kind of network, and then > for a tenant

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Horizon support for neutron-lbaas v2

Can we setup a short IRC meeting to sync up on details? 1600utc on thursday, maybe? Other? Thanks, doug > On Jul 13, 2015, at 4:02 PM, Praveen Yalagandula > wrote: > > Hi Vivek, > > I can help on this effort. Thanks for leading this! > > We had done some work to add "Certificates" support

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Horizon support for neutron-lbaas v2

I’d be good submitting it to the neutron-lbaas repo, under a horizon/ directory. We can iterate there, and talk with the Horizon team about how best to integrate. Would that work? Thanks, doug > On Jul 13, 2015, at 3:05 PM, Jain, Vivek wrote: > > Hi German, > > We integrated UI with LBaaS v2

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Linux Bridge CI status report

Great work. Doug > On Jul 7, 2015, at 8:01 PM, Sean M. Collins wrote: > > Hi, > > At the risk of jinxing it, I'd like to report that with the merge of a > couple patches to fix race conditions[1][2] and DevStack[3] - we're looking > at promising results for experimental runs for the Linux Br

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Proposing Al Miller for neutron-lbaas core team

Since all cores have responded, I’m going to end this early. Welcome to the core team, Al. Thanks, doug > On Jul 5, 2015, at 6:27 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > +1 for Al! > > On Thu, Jul 2, 2015 at 5:16 PM, Doug Wiegley <mailto:doug...@parksidesoftware.com>> wrot

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Proposing Al Miller for neutron-lbaas core team

Hi all, As the Lieutenant of the advanced services, I would like to nominate Al Miller to be a member of the neutron-lbaas core reviewer team. Review stats are in line with other cores[2] and feedback on patches has been great. Additionally, he has been instrumental in our devstack support and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] - breaking changes for plugins/drivers

> On Jun 30, 2015, at 11:22 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > Hi, > > We have had at least two breaking changes merge this week for out-of-tree > drivers/plugins. These are just the two I noticed that broke the Big Switch > CI (the one I keep an eye on since I had set it up): > > 1. Removed test_l

Re: [openstack-dev] [openstack-infra] [neutron] Third Party CI Voting

Hi, I agree, and only vote +1 myself, but I don’t agree on mandating it. If someone has invested enough in their CI to be confident, we just supply rope. Thanks, doug > On Jun 25, 2015, at 8:08 AM, John Davidge (jodavidg) > wrote: > > Hi all, > > Recent neutron third party CI issues have g

Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] and [lbaas] - GSLB API and backend support

Hi all, We don’t have a rough draft API doc yet, so I’m suggesting that we postpone tomorrow morning’s meeting until next week. Does anyone have any other agenda items, or want the meeting tomorrow? Thanks, doug > On Jun 2, 2015, at 10:52 AM, Doug Wiegley > wrote: > > Hi a

Re: [openstack-dev] Liberty mid-cycle meetups?

I believe that this is supposed to be the main source: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Sprints Thanks, doug > On Jun 15, 2015, at 4:34 PM, Geoff Arnold wrote: > > I’ve been trying to pull together a list of Liberty mid-cycle meetups from > emails, E

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Proposing Ann Kamyshnikova for the API & DB core reviewer team

I wasn’t on your list, but I’m thinking positive thoughts, that rhyme with “+1”. Ann’s db reviews are always extremely helpful. doug > On Jun 11, 2015, at 10:27 AM, Carl Baldwin wrote: > > +1! > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Henry Gessau wrote: >> As one of the Lieutenants [1] for the

Re: [openstack-dev] [global-requirements][pbr] tarball and git requirements no longer supported in requirements.txt

> On Jun 8, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > > On 2015-06-08 13:29:50 +1200 (+1200), Robert Collins wrote: > [...] >> However, we are going to move from test-requirements.txt to setup.cfg >> eventually, but thats a separate transition - and one could still use >> test-requirements.txt t

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] No LBaaS agent?

Hi, Ok, so you just need a noop driver, which you can find in the review link I posted a few emails back. Thanks, doug > On Jun 2, 2015, at 6:23 PM, Wanjing Xu wrote: > > Doug > > Our current event consumer is listening to the queue with the topic specified > in neutron.conf as notificatio

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] No LBaaS agent?

Hi, If you have an existing event consumer that you want to stick with, you could write a driver that just generates events. There are some error status warts that you’d either have to live with or handle, but you could do that later. Thanks, doug > On Jun 2, 2015, at 1:05 PM, Wanjing Xu wrot

Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] and [lbaas] - GSLB API and backend support

t 1600UTC > > > -Original Message- > From: Doug Wiegley [mailto:doug...@parksidesoftware.com] > Sent: Thursday, May 28, 2015 10:37 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] and [lbaas] - GSLB API and backend

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] No LBaaS agent?

I missed the part about wanting to do your own event handling. Brandon is right, the right thing to do is to make yourself a driver. You can start with the noop_driver in this review, though some of the import paths will need fixing up: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/56187/

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] No LBaaS agent?

The reference implemenation for lbaas (using haproxy with namespaces) requires the agent. There are vendor implementations that are agent-less, but not the reference. There is a non-agent ref driver for lbaas v2, but there is no horizon support for v2, and that driver is unsupported beyond dev

Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] and [lbaas] - GSLB API and backend support

ilto:v.jain...@gmail.com>; >>do...@a10networks.com <mailto:do...@a10networks.com> >>*Subject:* Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] and [lbaas] - GSLB >> API and backend support >> >>__ __ >> >>Hi, >&g

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Assaf Muller for the Neutron Core Reviewer Team

+1 Doug > On May 28, 2015, at 7:42 AM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > Folks, I'd like to propose Assaf Muller to be a member of the Neutron core > reviewer team. Assaf has been a long time contributor in Neutron, and he's > also recently become my testing Lieutenant. His influence and knowledge in

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - dnsmasq 'dhcp-authoritative' option broke multiple DHCP servers

ed to get NAKs, it was added to make it respond to renewals before > they timeout. > > > 1. http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/docs/dnsmasq-man.html > <http://www.thekelleys.org.uk/dnsmasq/docs/dnsmasq-man.html> > > > On Mon, May 25, 2015 at 7:44 PM, Doug Wiegley

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - dnsmasq 'dhcp-authoritative' option broke multiple DHCP servers

Option 4, turn off authoritative if we don’t want NAK’s? doug > On May 25, 2015, at 7:35 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > Hi, > > A recent change[1] to pass '--dhcp-authoritative' to dnsmasq has caused > DHCPNAK messages when multiple agents are scheduled to a network [2]. > > This was back-porte

Re: [openstack-dev] [designate] and [lbaas] - GSLB API and backend support

Of those two options, Friday would work better for me. Thanks, doug > On May 22, 2015, at 9:33 PM, ki...@macinnes.ie wrote: > > Hi Kunal, > > Thursday/Friday works for me - early morning PT works best, as I'm based in > Ireland. > > I'll find some specific times the Designate folks are availa

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Stepping down from Neutron core team

> On May 21, 2015, at 9:14 AM, Armando M. wrote: > > > > On 21 May 2015 at 08:58, Salvatore Orlando > wrote: > After putting the whole OpenStack networking contributors community through > almost 8 cycles of pedant comments and annoying "what if" questions, it is

Re: [openstack-dev] [lbaas] [octavia] [barbican] Relationship between Octavia and Barbican and Octavia 1.0 questions

Hi Maish, Thanks for the feedback, some answers below. Please also be aware of the lbaas use cases session tomorrow at 9am (yuck, I know), https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/YVR-neutron-lbaas-use-cases > On May 19, 2015, at 12:05 A

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas]LBaaSv2 movies / links

d be fine. > > From: Vijay Venkatachalam [mailto:vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com] > Sent: Friday, May 15, 2015 6:03 PM > To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions); Evgeny > Fedoruk; Adam Harwell; Kyle Mestery; Brandon Logan; Johnson, Michael (HP > Cloud

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia] what are the main differences between the two

y 4, 2015, at 10:14 PM, Daniel Comnea wrote: > > Thanks a bunch Doug, very clear & helpful info. > > so with that said those who run IceHouse or Juno are (more or less :) ) dead > in the water as the only option is v1 ...hmm > > Dani > > On Mon, May 4, 2015 at 10

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][octavia] what are the main differences between the two

lbaas v1: This is the original Neutron LBaaS, and what you see in Horizon or in the neutron CLI as “lb-*”. It has an haproxy backend, and a few vendors supporting it. Feature-wise, it’s basically a byte pump. lbaas v2: This is the “new” Neutron LBaaS, and is in the neutron CLI as “lbaas-*” (i

Re: [openstack-dev] [octavia] Joining Neutron under the big tent

+1 Governance patch filed: https://review.openstack.org/179417 Thanks, doug > On May 1, 2015, at 9:58 AM, Jorge Miramontes > wrote: > > Good stuff. Thanks everyone for your hard work on getting Octavia to this > point! > > Cheers, > --Jorge > > From: Brandon Logan

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] A big tent home for Neutron backend code

My take on the “where does it fit” yardstick: Does it stand on its own and add value? Then consider it a standalone project, *or* part of neutron if you and neutron agree that it fits. Does it *require* neutron to be useful? Then consider having it under the neutron umbrella/stadium/tent/yurt.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] A10 CI

I'm sorry, checking now. Thanks for letting me know. Doug > On Apr 25, 2015, at 8:01 PM, Eugene Nikanorov wrote: > > Hi folks, > > who is responsible for A10 CI? > It keeps spamming with CI results on many patches that are not being updated. > Also it spins sometimes, producing tens and hun

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] A big tent home for Neutron backend code

> On Apr 23, 2015, at 1:42 PM, Russell Bryant wrote: > > On 04/23/2015 03:23 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: >> On Thu, Apr 23, 2015 at 2:18 PM, Doug Wiegley >> mailto:doug...@parksidesoftware.com>> wrote: >> >> >>> On Apr 23, 2015, at 11:57 AM, Russel

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] A big tent home for Neutron backend code

> On Apr 23, 2015, at 11:57 AM, Russell Bryant wrote: > > On 04/23/2015 01:19 PM, Armando M. wrote: >> >> >> On 23 April 2015 at 09:58, Russell Bryant > > wrote: >> >>On 04/23/2015 12:14 PM, Armando M. wrote: >>> >>> >>> On 23 April 2015 at 07:32, Russell Brya

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] adding lbaas core

It’s been a week, welcome Phil. Thanks, doug > On Apr 13, 2015, at 2:39 PM, Doug Wiegley > wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to nominate Philip Toohill as a neutron-lbaas core. Good guy, did a > bunch of work on the ref impl for lbaasv2, and and I'll

Re: [openstack-dev] [Nova][Neutron] Linuxbridge as the default in DevStack [was: Status of the nova-network to Neutron migration work]

> On Apr 17, 2015, at 8:53 PM, Monty Taylor wrote: > > On 04/17/2015 06:48 PM, Rochelle Grober wrote: >> I know the DevStack issue seems to be solved, but I had to >> respond.inline >> >> From: Fox, Kevin M [mailto:kevin@pnnl.gov] Sent: Friday, April >> 17, 2015 12:28 To: OpenStack Deve

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] Meeting timings

Hi Ganesh, The Tuesday meeting on -4 is the our slot, but it is suspended until further notice while we experiment with covering our agenda during the neutron and octavia meetings. If there ends up being a lot to cover, we will resume. Is there something you need to discuss? Please feel free t

Re: [openstack-dev] Help Needed!!! In response to China's first OpenStack Hackathon held this week.

Hi, Just a suggestion, but if in that etherpad you could put the bug subject/project, it’d help folks scan for relevant reviews. It’s a bit many links to click through. Thanks, doug > On Apr 15, 2015, at 9:27 PM, Bhargava, Ruchi wrote: > > Hello, > > Parts of the OpenStack community in

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][barbican] default certificate manager

> On Apr 13, 2015, at 3:38 PM, Brandon Logan > wrote: > > I'm of the opinion, which may not be the popular opinion, that barbican is > the secret store for openstack. It is in openstack, it is meant to be used > by other openstack services. v1 lives in the same code base as v2. Version >

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] adding lbaas core

Hi all, I'd like to nominate Philip Toohill as a neutron-lbaas core. Good guy, did a bunch of work on the ref impl for lbaasv2, and and I'll let the numbers[1] speak for themselves. Existing lbaas cores, please vote. All three of us. :-) [1] http://stackalytics.com/report/contribution/neutro

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [QoS] QoS weekly meeting

> On Apr 6, 2015, at 10:45 PM, Miguel Ángel Ajo wrote: > > On Tuesday, 7 de April de 2015 at 3:14, Kyle Mestery wrote: >> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Salvatore Orlando > > wrote: >> >> >> On 7 April 2015 at 00:33, Armando M. > > wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] The Evolution of core developer to maintainer?

> On Apr 1, 2015, at 7:19 PM, Jay Pipes wrote: > > On 04/01/2015 12:31 PM, Duncan Thomas wrote: >> On 1 April 2015 at 10:04, Joshua Harlow > > wrote: >> >>+1 to this. There will always be people who will want to work on fun >>stuff and those who don't; it's

Re: [openstack-dev] The Evolution of core developer to maintainer?

> On Apr 1, 2015, at 3:52 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote: > > Joe Gordon wrote: >> On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:46 PM, Dean Troyer > > wrote: >> >>On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 5:30 PM, Joe Gordon >> wrote: >> >>Do you feel like a core d

Re: [openstack-dev] The Evolution of core developer to maintainer?

> On Mar 31, 2015, at 6:24 PM, John Griffith wrote: > > > > On Tue, Mar 31, 2015 at 4:30 PM, Joe Gordon > wrote: > I am starting this thread based on Thierry's feedback on [0]. Instead of > writing the same thing twice, you can look at the rendered html from th

Re: [openstack-dev] [OpenStack-Dev] [third-party-ci] Clarifications on the goal and skipping tests

A few reasons, I’m sure there are others: - Broken tests that hardcode something about the ref implementation. The test needs to be fixed, of course, but in the meantime, a constantly failing CI is worthless (hello, lbaas scenario test.) - Test relies on some “optional” feature, like overlapping

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] canceling meeting

> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) > > > > > > Make sense to me. Susanne > > > > On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Doug Wiegley > > wrote: > > Hi lbaas'ers, > > > > Now that lbaasv2 has &q

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Invalid import in tempest v2 api tests

Hi Vijay, That works because we pin the version of tempest that we run against, via tox. If you're using devstack-gate in your CI, note the two hooks found here: https://github.com/openstack/neutron-lbaas/blob/master/neutron_lbaas/tests/contrib/ If not, you need to mimic the behavior of the pos

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Deprecating the use_namespaces option - Now's the time to speak up!

Tempest tests fail when not using namespaces, so I'm not sure how well we're even testing that codepath anymore. doug > On Mar 20, 2015, at 3:19 PM, Brian Haley wrote: > > On 03/20/2015 02:57 PM, Assaf Muller wrote: >> Hello everyone, >> >> The use_namespaces option in the L3 and DHCP Neutro

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] canceling meeting

Hi lbaas'ers, Now that lbaasv2 has "shipped", the need for a regular weekly meeting is greatly reduced. I propose that we cancel the regular meeting, and discuss neutron-y things during the neutron on-demand agenda, and octavia things in the already existing octavia meetings. Any objections/al

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Neutron extenstions

Hi Gary, First I’m seeing these, but I don’t see that they’re required on input, unless I’m mis-reading those reviews. Additional of new output fields to a json object, or adding optional inputs, is not generally considered to be backwards incompatible behavior in an API. Does OpenStack have a

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] v2 vendor drivers

Hi all, LBaaS v2 is going out in Kilo, and we have quite a few vendor drivers ready to merge, but most are waiting for the tempest tests/job to be done before they can satisfy their third-party CI requirements. Because that job is likely to be done so close to FF for Kilo, I am proposing that

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposal to add Ihar Hrachyshka as a Neutron Core Reviewer

+1 > On Mar 4, 2015, at 12:42 PM, Kyle Mestery wrote: > > I'd like to propose that we add Ihar Hrachyshka to the Neutron core reviewer > team. Ihar has been doing a great job reviewing in Neutron as evidence by his > stats [1]. Ihar is the Oslo liaison for Neutron, he's been doing a great job

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

> On Mar 2, 2015, at 1:13 PM, James E. Blair wrote: > > Stefano branched this thread from an older one to talk about > auto-abandon. In the previous thread, I believe I explained my > concerns, but since the topic split, perhaps it would be good to > summarize why this is an issue. > > 1) A co

Re: [openstack-dev] auto-abandon changesets considered harmful (was Re: [stable][all] Revisiting the 6 month release cycle [metrics])

> On Mar 2, 2015, at 11:44 AM, James E. Blair wrote: > > Duncan Thomas writes: > >> Why do you say auto-abandon is the wrong tool? I've no problem with the 1 >> week warning if somebody wants to implement it - I can see the value. A >> change-set that has been ignored for X weeks is pretty muc

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS - question about drivers

Same project, shiny new repo. doug > On Feb 20, 2015, at 4:05 PM, Sławek Kapłoński wrote: > > Hello, > > Thx for tips. I have one more question. You point me fo neutron-fwaas project > which for me looks like different project then neutron. I saw fwaas service > plugin directly in neutron i

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas]Topics and possible fomats for LBaaS in OpenStack/Vancouver

Hi all, I requested a session for future lbaas features and prioritizing (and attaching contributors to those features.) Assuming that happens, I started an etherpad here, starting with Sam’s info: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/lbaas-vancouver-planning

Re: [openstack-dev] Use of egg snapshots of neutron code in neutron-*aas projects/distributing openstack

There's no need for additional neutron packaging. The real trick is that the neutron-*aas packages need to have a package dependency of neutron, and whichever release of openstack they're all cut with, they just have to match. Put another way, use your existing neutron package from the same rel

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Can entity calls be made to driver when entities get associated/disassociated with root entity?

no DEFERRED stage. > > But, this restricts pool in one listener. Basically reusing of a pools across > listeners and loadbalancers is not possible now. > > The use case of creating both a HTTPS vip and HTTP vip for the same pool is > lost. > > Basically

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Can entity calls be made to driver when entities get associated/disassociated with root entity?

I’d recommend taking a look at Brandon’s review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144834/ which aims to simplify exactly what you’re describing. Please leave feedback there. Thanks, doug > On Feb 3, 2015, at 7:13 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam > wrote: >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Can entity calls be made to driver when entities get associated/disassociated with root entity?

I’d recommend taking a look at Brandon’s review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144834/ which aims to simplify exactly what you’re describing. Please leave feedback there. Thanks, doug On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 7:13 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam < vijay.venkatacha...@citrix.com> wrote: > Hi: > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Can entity calls be made to driver when entities get associated/disassociated with root entity?

I’d recommend taking a look at Brandon’s review: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/144834/ which aims to simplify exactly what you’re describing. Please leave feedback there. Thanks, doug > On Feb 3, 2015, at 7:13 AM, Vijay Venkatachalam > wrote: >

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] meeting canceled next week (2/3)

Since most of us will be at the lbaas mid-cycle, next week’s meeting is canceled. Thanks, Doug __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:un

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Trying to set up LBaaS V2 on Juno with DVR

Get ready to vomit. The lbaasv2 code you’re pulling is a non-agent driver. Meaning, it runs haproxy on the *neutron controller* node, and only the controller node. It’s meant to be a POC for single node systems, not something you can deploy. In the upcoming mid-cycle, the driver will be agent-if

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Next week's meeting is cancelled (and some other notes)

It’s not pretty, but if the topic has been set correctly, this finds everything open with a Kilo-2 blueprint: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/project:openstack/neutron+status:open+(topic:bp/wsgi-pecan-switch+OR+topic:bp/plugin-interface-perestroika+OR+topic:bp/reorganize-unit-test-tree+OR+topic:

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] meetings during holidays

Canceled. The next lbaas meeting will be 1/6. Happy holidays. Thanks, doug On 12/19/14, 11:33 AM, "Doug Wiegley" wrote: >Hi all, > >Anyone have big agenda items for the 12/23 or 12/30 meeting? If not, I’d >suggest we cancel those two meetings, and bring up anything small

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] meetings during holidays

Hi all, Anyone have big agenda items for the 12/23 or 12/30 meeting? If not, I’d suggest we cancel those two meetings, and bring up anything small during the on-demand portion of the neutron meetings. If I don’t hear anything by Monday, we will cancel those two meetings. Thanks, Doug __

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Querries Regarding Blueprint for LBaaS API and Object Model improvement

Adding tags for [neutron][lbaas] Juno lbaas (v1) has pool as the root model, with VIP. Kilo lbaas (v2), you are correct, vip is splitting into loadbalancer and listener, and loadbalancer is the root object. And yes, the new objects get new URIs. Both v1 and v2 plugins will be available in Kilo

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][oslo][neutron] Managing oslo-incubator modules after project split

Hi all, Ihar and I discussed this on IRC, and are going forward with option 2 unless someone has a big problem with it. Thanks, Doug On 12/15/14, 8:22 AM, "Doug Wiegley" wrote: >Hi Ihar, > >I’m actually in favor of option 2, but it implies a few things about your >time

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][fwaas][oslo] Common code between VMWare neutron plugin and services plugins

On 12/15/14, 8:20 AM, "Kobi Samoray" wrote: >Hi, >Some files in neutron are common infrastructure to the VMWare neutron >L2/L3 plugin, and the services plugins. >These files wrap VMWare NSX and provide a python API to some NSX services. > >This code is common to: >- VMWare L2/L3 plugin, which a

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][oslo][neutron] Managing oslo-incubator modules after project split

e to fix a bug in >one place only is *highly* anticipated. [OK, I'm quite selfish on that >one too.] >- - it's a delusion that there will be no neutron-main syncs that will >break neutron-*aas repos ever. There can still be problems due to >incompatibility between neutron m

[openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas] Canceling lbaas meeting 12/16

Unless someone has an urgent agenda item, and due to the mid-cycle for Octavia, which has a bunch of overlap with the lbaas team, let’s cancel this week. If you have post-split lbaas v2 questions, please find me in #openstack-lbaas. The only announcement was going to be: If you are waiting to re-s

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Services are now split out and neutron is open for commits!

Hi all, Neutron grenade jobs have been failing since late afternoon Thursday, due to split fallout. Armando has a fix, and it’s working it’s way through the gate: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/141256/ Get your rechecks ready! Thanks, Doug From: Douglas Wiegley mailto:do...@a10networks.co

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Services are now split out and neutron is open for commits!

Hi all, I’d like to echo the thanks to all involved, and thanks for the patience during this period of transition. And a logistical note: if you have any outstanding reviews against the now missing files/directories (db/{loadbalancer,firewall,vpn}, services/, or tests/unit/services), you must

[openstack-dev] [neutron][third-party] failing CIs

Hi all, Most of the Neutron third-party Cis are failing at the moment, and it’s because of the ongoing services split. The patch to get devstack working again will likely merge tomorrow. We will send another ML message when the split is “finished”. Thanks, Doug _

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] services split starting today

To all neutron cores, Please do not approve any gerrit reviews for advanced services code for the next few days. We will post again when those reviews can resume. Thanks, Doug On 12/8/14, 8:49 AM, "Doug Wiegley" wrote: >Hi all, > >The neutron advanced services split i

<    1   2   3   >