Re: [openstack-dev] [tripleo] [neutron] Current containerized neutron agents introduce a significant regression in the dataplane

2018-02-13 Thread Armando M.
On 13 February 2018 at 14:02, Brent Eagles wrote: > Hi, > > The neutron agents are implemented in such a way that key functionality is > implemented in terms of haproxy, dnsmasq, keepalived and radvd > configuration. The agents manage instances of these services but, by >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] cycle highlights for sub-projects

2018-02-08 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2018 at 13:33, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi neutrinos, > > RC1 is fast approaching and this time we can add highlights to the release > files [1]. If I can ask you anyone interested in contributing to the > highlights: please review [2]. > >

[openstack-dev] [neutron] cycle highlights for sub-projects

2018-02-02 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, RC1 is fast approaching and this time we can add highlights to the release files [1]. If I can ask you anyone interested in contributing to the highlights: please review [2]. Miguel and I will make sure they are compiled correctly. We have time until Feb 9 to get this done. Many

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][lbaas][neutron-lbaas][octavia] Announcing the deprecation of neutron-lbaas and neutron-lbaas-dashboard

2018-01-31 Thread Armando M.
On 31 January 2018 at 09:50, Michael Johnson wrote: > Today we are announcing the start of the deprecation cycle for > neutron-lbaas and neutron-lbaas-dashboard. As part of the neutron > stadium evolution [1], neutron-lbaas was identified as a project that > should spin out

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][neutron-lib]Service function defintion files

2017-12-29 Thread Armando M.
On 29 December 2017 at 11:00, Ian Wells wrote: > On 28 December 2017 at 06:57, CARVER, PAUL wrote: > >> It was a gating criteria for stadium status. The idea was that the for a >> stadium project the neutron team would have review authority over the API

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][neutron-lib]Service function defintion files

2017-12-28 Thread Armando M.
On 27 December 2017 at 18:56, Ian Wells wrote: > Hey, > > Can someone explain how the API definition files for several service > plugins ended up in neutron-lib? I can see that they've been moved there > from the plugins themselves (e.g. networking-bgpvpn has >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] performance issue between virtual networks

2017-12-27 Thread Armando M.
On 27 December 2017 at 05:39, Kim-Norman Sahm wrote: > Hi, > > i've detected a performance issue by accessing an floating ip in a > different openstack network (same tenant). > > example: > i have one tenant with two internal networks. > each network has its own vrouter which

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][networking-ovn] Stable branch maintainers for networking-ovn

2017-12-20 Thread Armando M.
to help us handle issues quicker > and at > the same time, in a controlled manner. > > Best, > Miguel Ángel. > > On Tue, Dec 19, 2017 at 5:48 PM Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On 19 December 2017 at 08:21, Lucas Alvares Gomes <lucasago...@gmail.com> >> wro

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][networking-ovn] Stable branch maintainers for networking-ovn

2017-12-19 Thread Armando M.
On 19 December 2017 at 08:21, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote: > Hi all, > > Just sending this email to try to understand the model for stable branch > maintenance in networking-ovn (potentially other neutron drivers too). > > Right now, only members of the

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Stepping down from core

2017-12-15 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, To some of you this email may not come as a surprise. During the past few months my upstream community engagements have been more and more sporadic. While I tried hard to stay committed and fulfill my core responsibilities I feel like I failed to retain the level of quality and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Propose Slawek Kaplonski for Neutron core

2017-11-29 Thread Armando M.
On 29 November 2017 at 12:27, Korzeniewski, Artur < artur.korzeniew...@intel.com> wrote: > +1 from me , (even though my vote does not count) > > I know Slawek since Tokyo summit and I’m impressed of his knowledge and > hands-on experience to improve Neutron quality and functionality! > > It is

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][infra][zuul][zuulv3][horizon][neutron] project-specific release job templates

2017-10-24 Thread Armando M.
On 24 October 2017 at 13:13, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote: > On 2017-10-24 11:31:56 -0700 (-0700), Armando M. wrote: > [...] > > the work on neutron-lib is slowly progressing but it's not close enough > to > > allow us to break the dependency that re

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][infra][zuul][zuulv3][horizon][neutron] project-specific release job templates

2017-10-24 Thread Armando M.
On 24 October 2017 at 10:35, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Jeremy Stanley's message of 2017-10-24 15:05:34 +: > > On 2017-10-24 09:42:25 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote: > > [...] > > > It looks like the publish-to-pypi-neutron template modifies > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][vpnaas] pike rc

2017-08-08 Thread Armando M.
On 8 August 2017 at 14:21, Takashi Yamamoto <yamam...@midokura.com> wrote: > On Wed, Aug 9, 2017 at 12:35 AM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 8 August 2017 at 02:34, Akihiro Motoki <amot...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][ptl] tools for creating new releases

2017-08-08 Thread Armando M.
On 8 August 2017 at 06:30, Doug Hellmann wrote: > We realized recently that we haven't publicized some of the tools > in the releases repository very well. One tool that will be useful > this week as you prepare your release candidates is the 'new-release' > command, which

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][vpnaas] pike rc

2017-08-08 Thread Armando M.
On 8 August 2017 at 02:34, Akihiro Motoki wrote: > I proposed a project-config patch to allow us to release neutron-vpnaas. > https://review.openstack.org/#/c/491670/ > There is a missing configuration when neutron-vpnaas was pushed out > from the neutron stadium. > Once the

[openstack-dev] [neutron] RC1 week

2017-08-07 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, Today RC week starts [0] and I have prepared release patch [1]. For the project you're liasion, please review the patch for accuracy and make sure we tag RC1/create a stable branch with the git commit hash you are OK with. Many thanks, Armando [0]

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][ptls] HELP! Thawing the requirements repo

2017-08-07 Thread Armando M.
On 6 August 2017 at 23:33, Akihiro Motoki wrote: > 2017-08-07 11:59 GMT+09:00 Tony Breeds : > > Hi All, > > So as you all know we've frozen the requirements repo and it will > > stay frozen until after all the cycle-with-milestones projects have >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Do we still support core plugin not based on the ML2 framework?

2017-06-22 Thread Armando M.
aster/neutron/ > services/timestamp/timestamp_plugin.py#L32 > [4] https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/neutron/ > services/service_base.py#L27 > > Édouard. > > On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Do we still support core plugin not based on the ML2 framework?

2017-06-21 Thread Armando M.
On 21 June 2017 at 17:40, Édouard Thuleau wrote: > Hi, > > @Chaoyi, > I don't want to change the core plugin interface. But I'm not sure we > are talking about the same interface. I had a very quick look into the > tricycle code and I think it uses the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Do we still support core plugin not based on the ML2 framework?

2017-06-21 Thread Armando M.
On 20 June 2017 at 00:09, Kevin Benton wrote: > The issue is mainly developer resources. Everyone currently working > upstream doesn't have the bandwidth to keep adding/reviewing the layers of > interfaces to make the DB optional that go untested. (None of the projects > that

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][barbican][congress][designate][neutron][zaqar] missing pike-2 milestone releases

2017-06-09 Thread Armando M.
On 9 June 2017 at 06:36, Doug Hellmann wrote: > We have several projects with deliverables following the > cycle-with-milestones release model without pike 2 releases. Please > check the list below and prepare those release requests as soon as > possible. Remember that

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova] [glance] [cinder] [neutron] - Global Request ID progress

2017-06-06 Thread Armando M.
On 6 June 2017 at 04:49, Sean Dague wrote: > Some good progress has been made so far on Global Request ID work in the > core IaaS layer, here is where we stand. > > STATUS > > oslo.context / oslo.middleware - everything DONE > > devstack logging additional global_request_id -

Re: [openstack-dev] [nova][vlan trunking] Guest networking configuration for vlan trunk

2017-05-24 Thread Armando M.
On 24 May 2017 at 08:53, Robert Li (baoli) wrote: > Hi Kevin, > > > > In that case, I will start working on it. Should this be considered a RFE > or a regular bug? > There have been discussions in the past about this [1]. The conclusion of the discussion was: Nova should have

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][heat] - making Neutron more friendly for orchestration

2017-05-19 Thread Armando M.
On 19 May 2017 at 14:54, Clark Boylan wrote: > On Fri, May 19, 2017, at 02:03 PM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > I split this conversation off of the "Is the pendulum swinging on PaaS > > layers?" thread [1] to discuss some improvements we can make to Neutron > > to > > make

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] multi-site forum discussion

2017-05-12 Thread Armando M.
ms at coordinating independent neutron systems that exist in separated openstack deployments. Making Neutron cell-aware will work in the context of the same openstack deployment. > > > Regards, > > Victor Morales > > > > *From: *"Armando M." <arma...@gmail

[openstack-dev] [neutron]

2017-05-12 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, At the summit we had a discussion on how to expand get-me-a-network [1]. A few main points were collected during the session: * Make get-me-a-network work with Horizon; * Make get-me-a-network able to auto-assign floating IPs; * Make get-me-a-network able to work with any network

[openstack-dev] [neutron] diagnostics

2017-05-12 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, At the summit we had a forum session [1] to gather feedback on the current diagnostics proposal [2] and help the neutron developer team drive the first implementation of the API proposal. Two main points were brought for discussion: 1) which diagnostics checks to provide to start

[openstack-dev] [neutron] multi-site forum discussion

2017-05-12 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, At the summit we had a discussion on how to deploy a single neutron system across multiple geographical sites [1]. You can find notes of the discussion on [2]. One key requirement that came from the discussion was to make Neutron more Nova cells friendly. I filed an RFE bug [3] so that

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] keeping on top of neutron reviews

2017-04-20 Thread Armando M.
On 20 April 2017 at 17:20, Kevin Benton wrote: > Thanks! Do you have the link to where that script lives? It would be good > to have it in the neutron devref. > It's here: https://docs.openstack.org/developer/neutron/devref/ effective_neutron.html#code-review > > On Thu,

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][networking-l2gw] openstack vtep setup missing docs

2017-04-04 Thread Armando M.
://github.com/openstack/networking-l2gw/blob/master/doc/source/images/L2GW_deployment.png [2] https://github.com/openstack/networking-l2gw/blob/master/specs/kilo/l2-gateway-api-implementation.rst [3] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpilpgPnYrE > > thank you > > Saverio > > > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][networking-l2gw] openstack vtep setup missing docs

2017-03-30 Thread Armando M.
On 30 March 2017 at 08:47, Saverio Proto wrote: > Hello, > > I am trying to use the neutron l2gw plugin, but I am not using a bare > metal switch to bridge. > > I am using a server with Openvswitch. > I am not aware of any effort to implement L2GW purely in software, in

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][networking-l2gw] database tables for neutron l2gw plugin

2017-03-30 Thread Armando M.
On 30 March 2017 at 08:08, Saverio Proto wrote: > Hello, > > I am testing the neutron l2gw in our staging env. > > Because I cant redeploy everything, to retry the installation of the > l2gw, to clean the database I drop the following tables from the neutron > database:

Re: [openstack-dev] Is there some way to run specific unittest in neutron?

2017-03-22 Thread Armando M.
On 22 March 2017 at 22:19, Sam wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm working on neutron, I add some code into ovs_neutron_agent.py, and I > extend test_ovs_neutron_agent.py. > > Is there some way to run test_ovs_neutron_agent.py or run related module > only? > > Thank you. > You should

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - adjusting Monday IRC meeting time and drivers meeting time

2017-03-22 Thread Armando M.
On 22 March 2017 at 21:39, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 21 March 2017 at 02:00, Kevin Benton <ke...@benton.pub> wrote: > >> Hi everyone, >> >> The recent DST switch has caused several conflicts for the Monday IRC >> meeting tim

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] - adjusting Monday IRC meeting time and drivers meeting time

2017-03-22 Thread Armando M.
On 21 March 2017 at 02:00, Kevin Benton wrote: > Hi everyone, > > The recent DST switch has caused several conflicts for the Monday IRC > meeting time and the drivers meeting time. > > I am going to adjust the Monday meeting time to 1 hour earlier[1] and the > drivers meeting

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][sfc][release] stable/ocata version

2017-03-06 Thread Armando M.
On 5 March 2017 at 23:24, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > With https://review.openstack.org/#/c/437699/ in, stadium projects > will no longer have any other option but to follow the common > schedule. That change is new for Pike+ so we may still see some issues > with Ocata release

[openstack-dev] [neutron] networking-ofagent officially

2017-03-03 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, As stated a while back [1], it's about time to pull the trigger on the retirement of networking-ofagent. Please find the retirement patches available at [2]. Users of this repo must use the neutron OVS agent with of_interface set to native to retain the same level of capability.

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Ocata postmortem

2017-02-23 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, Now that Ocata is officially releases, I'd like to get a moment of your time to double check our postmortem document [1], and provide as much information as you can on the state of work assigned to you or work you have been involved with during the Ocata timeframe. Your old PTL and

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Alternative approaches for L3 HA

2017-02-22 Thread Armando M.
On 13 February 2017 at 23:23, Kosnik, Lubosz wrote: > So from my perspective I can tell that problem is completely in > architecture and even without something outside of Neutron we cannot solve > that. > Two releases ago I started to work on hardening that feature but

Re: [openstack-dev] [release][all] HELP NEEDED: test failures blocking requirements ocata branch and opening of pike

2017-02-09 Thread Armando M.
On 9 February 2017 at 05:16, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Doug Hellmann's message of 2017-02-08 23:54:06 -0500: > > The patch to update the XStatic package versions [1] is blocked by a > > patch to remove nova-docker from the requirements project sync list [2], > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [All] IRC Mishaps

2017-02-09 Thread Armando M.
On 9 February 2017 at 07:43, Morales, Victor wrote: > One of my favorites is the usage of #undo command during the meetings for > fixing a quick copy & paste link. Should be necessary to include more > information in this wiki entry[1] > Yes, I can't count the number

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [stadium] subprojects on independent release cycle

2017-02-08 Thread Armando M.
ase not too far after Openstack. > The date of March 10th looks reasonable as a target, and we'll stick to > that. > > Excellent, thanks for the update. Cheers, Armando Best, > > -Thomas > > > > On 2 February 2017 at 16:09, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [stadium] subprojects on independent release cycle

2017-02-08 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2017 at 16:09, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi neutrinos, > > I have put a number of patches in the merge queue for a few sub-projects. > We currently have a number of these that are on an independent release > schedule. In particular: > &

[openstack-dev] [neutron] [stadium] subprojects on independent release cycle

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, I have put a number of patches in the merge queue for a few sub-projects. We currently have a number of these that are on an independent release schedule. In particular: - networking-bagpipe - networking-bgpvpn - networking-midonet - networking-odl - networking-sfc

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Drivers meeting cancelled today

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
Hi, With the release coming up, it's best to spend the time to polish what we have. Sorry for the short notice. Thanks, Armando __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2017 at 13:36, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > On Thu, Feb 2, 2017 at 7:44 AM, Matthew Treinish > wrote: > > Yeah, I'm curious about this too, there seems to be a big jump in Newton > for > > most of the project. It might not a be a single

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
handle concurrent > > connections, which is the entire purpose of the library, no? > > > > On Feb 2, 2017 13:53, "Sean Dague" <s...@dague.net> wrote: > >> > >> On 02/02/2017 03:32 PM, Armando M. wrote: > >> > > >> > > &

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2017 at 12:50, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: > On 02/02/2017 03:32 PM, Armando M. wrote: > > > > > > On 2 February 2017 at 12:19, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net > > <mailto:s...@dague.net>> wrote: > &g

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2017 at 12:19, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: > On 02/02/2017 02:28 PM, Armando M. wrote: > > > > > > On 2 February 2017 at 10:08, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net > > <mailto:s...@dague.net>> wrote: > &g

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2017 at 10:08, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net> wrote: > On 02/02/2017 12:49 PM, Armando M. wrote: > > > > > > On 2 February 2017 at 08:40, Sean Dague <s...@dague.net > > <mailto:s...@dague.net>> wrote: > > > > On 02/02/2017 1

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-02 Thread Armando M.
On 2 February 2017 at 08:40, Sean Dague wrote: > On 02/02/2017 11:16 AM, Matthew Treinish wrote: > > > > > > > We definitely aren't saying running a single worker is how we recommend > people > > run OpenStack by doing this. But it just adds on

[openstack-dev] [neutron] [release] misleading release notes

2017-02-01 Thread Armando M.
Hi, There is something puzzling about release notes. I don't see 8.0.0 [1], and it looks like features released in Mitaka are being advertised as Newton features [2]. For instance, [3] 'Agent availability zones' shows as a Newton feature when I am pretty positive that it went in Mitaka [4]. I

[openstack-dev] [infra] [gate] [all] openstack services footprint lead to oom-kill in the gate

2017-02-01 Thread Armando M.
Hi, [TL;DR]: OpenStack services have steadily increased their memory footprints. We need a concerted way to address the oom-kills experienced in the openstack gate, as we may have reached a ceiling. Now the longer version: We have been experiencing some

Re: [openstack-dev] [requirements][neutron] bot bumping patches off gate queue

2017-02-01 Thread Armando M.
On 1 February 2017 at 07:29, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > Hi all, > > lately I see the requirements bot proposing new rebases for its > patches (and bumping existing patch sets from the gate queue) every > second hour, at least for Neutron [1], which makes it impossible to >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron CI team meeting

2017-01-31 Thread Armando M.
k-infra/project-config/blob/ > master/jenkins/jobs/python-jobs.yaml#L17 > > > PS: Congrats Ihar for your new role > > > > From: "Armando M." <arma...@gmail.com> > Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" < > op

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron CI team meeting

2017-01-31 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, Recently [1], a new meeting has been setup to give the neutron team a dedicated time to discuss any upstream CI matter (gate issues, testing strategies, etc), as well as an overflow space to be used after the main team meeting section [3]. Kudos to Ihar for being our first chair.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Ocata Feature Freeze

2017-01-26 Thread Armando M.
On 26 January 2017 at 12:53, Dariusz Śmigiel wrote: > Dear Neutrinos, > Feature Freeze day arrived! Ocata-3 has been released, so it means > that no new features will be allowed to current release... The only > patches approved to be merged should be: release critical

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] PTL Candidacy

2017-01-24 Thread Armando M.
On 24 January 2017 at 12:46, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2017-01-24 10:51:39 -0800 (-0800), Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > > On Tue, Jan 24, 2017 at 12:50 AM, Kevin Benton wrote: > > > I'm on board with getting visibility into the drivers with > improvements to > >

[openstack-dev] [neutron] PTL Candidacy

2017-01-24 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, No, it's not what you might be thinking...I am just delighted to see two excellent candidates willing to take the reins of the project going forward [1,2]. I couldn't hope for more enthusiasm; best of luck to both candidates and anyone else who is going to step up! This is

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] grenade failures in the gate

2017-01-23 Thread Armando M.
On 23 January 2017 at 13:50, Jeremy Stanley <fu...@yuggoth.org> wrote: > On 2017-01-23 13:38:58 -0800 (-0800), Armando M. wrote: > > We spotted [1] in the gate. Please wait for its resolution until pushing > > patches into the merge queue. > > https://review

[openstack-dev] [neutron] grenade failures in the gate

2017-01-23 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, We spotted [1] in the gate. Please wait for its resolution until pushing patches into the merge queue. Thanks, Armando [1] https://bugs.launchpad.net/neutron/+bug/1658806 __ OpenStack Development Mailing List

Re: [openstack-dev] (dis)Continuation of Neutron VPNaaS

2017-01-19 Thread Armando M.
On 19 January 2017 at 13:41, Bruno L wrote: > Hi, > > November last year the Neutron team has announced that VPN as a Service > will be no longer part of Neutron[1]. > > We run a public cloud based in New Zealand called Catalyst Cloud[2]. Our > customers find the VPN

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Confusion around the complexity

2017-01-13 Thread Armando M.
On 13 January 2017 at 15:01, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > Excerpts from Armando M.'s message of 2017-01-13 11:39:33 -0800: > > On 13 January 2017 at 10:47, Clint Byrum <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > > > > > Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2017

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Confusion around the complexity

2017-01-13 Thread Armando M.
On 13 January 2017 at 10:47, Clint Byrum wrote: > Excerpts from Joshua Harlow's message of 2017-01-12 22:38:46 -0800: > > Kevin Benton wrote: > > > If you don't want users to specify network details, then use the get me > > > a network extension or just have them boot to a

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Confusion around the complexity

2017-01-12 Thread Armando M.
On 12 January 2017 at 15:07, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 12 January 2017 at 14:46, Joshua Harlow <harlo...@fastmail.com> wrote: > >> So I don't want to start to much of a flame-war and am really just trying >> to understand things that may

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Confusion around the complexity

2017-01-12 Thread Armando M.
On 12 January 2017 at 14:46, Joshua Harlow wrote: > So I don't want to start to much of a flame-war and am really just trying > to understand things that may be beyond me (so treat me nicely, ha). > > The basic question that I've been wondering revolves around the

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron Pike PTG

2017-01-12 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, The time for the PTG is approaching and if you are wondering about topics and various agenda arrangements, you should consider the PTG more like a mid-cycle on steroids: each project will be working on its own agenda, usually via etherpads, and publish updates over the ML, up until

[openstack-dev] [neutron] networking-sfc stable/newton branch broken

2017-01-11 Thread Armando M.
Hi, Please have a look at [1]. The branch has been broken for some time now. Thanks, Armando [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:openstack/networking-sfc+branch:stable/newton __ OpenStack Development

[openstack-dev] [neutron] PTL nominations deadline and non-candidacy

2017-01-09 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, The PTL nomination week is fast approaching [0], and as you might have guessed by the subject of this email, I am not planning to run for Pike. If I look back at [1], I would like to think that I was able to exercise the influence on the goals I set out with my first self-nomination

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Team and drivers meetings

2017-01-09 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, A reminder that from this week on it is business as usual. Therefore the calendar for team and drivers meetings is back up and running. Cheers, Armando __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage

[openstack-dev] [neutron] team meeting calendar

2016-12-22 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, Due to the holiday period we'll cancel the following meeting occurrences: Dec 26 Jan 3 We'll meet again on Jan 9. Happy holidays! Armando __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

[openstack-dev] [neutron] drivers meeting calendar

2016-12-22 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, Due to the holiday period we'll cancel the following meeting occurrences: Dec 22 Dec 29 Jan 5 We'll meet again on Jan 12. Happy holidays! Armando __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] multinode CI jobs in the gate

2016-12-18 Thread Armando M.
Once it merges, we'll have a DVR+HA gate in the > experimental queue. > Excellent! thanks for the update, John! Cheers, Armando > > John. > > [1]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/383742/ > [2]: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/383827/ > > On Fri, Dec 16, 2016 at 2:23 AM,

[openstack-dev] [neutron] multinode CI jobs in the gate

2016-12-15 Thread Armando M.
Hi Neutrinos, Infra patch proposed in [1] got me thinking again about what we shall do when it comes to multinode testing in the gate and how to focus our testing and CI efforts upstream going forward. My line of thinking has always been that multinode resources should be devoted to

[openstack-dev] [neutron] proposing Ryan Tidwell and Nate Johnston as service LTs

2016-12-15 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, I would like to propose Ryan and Nate as the go-to fellows for service-related patches. Both are core in their repos of focus, namely neutron-dynamic-routing and neutron-fwaas, and have a good understanding of the service framework, the agent framework and other bits and pieces.

Re: [openstack-dev] [architecture][api][Nova][Neutron][Cinder] nova-compute's architecture/API

2016-12-15 Thread Armando M.
On 16 December 2016 at 00:01, Clint Byrum wrote: > So, I've been quietly ranting in hallways about this for a while. I may > be way way off base here. I want to kick the discussion off, so I've > submitted a proposal to the arch-wg about it. Please if you're interested > in how

[openstack-dev] [neutron] proposing Miguel Lavalle as neutron core and Brian Haley as L3 Lt

2016-12-15 Thread Armando M.
Hi neutrinos, Miguel Lavalle has been driving the project forward consistently and reliably. I would like to propose him to be entrusted with +2/+A rights in the areas he's been most prolific, which are L3 and DHCP. At the same time, I'd like to propose Brian Haley as our next Chief L3 Officer.

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Abhishek Raut as neutronclient core

2016-12-15 Thread Armando M.
On 15 December 2016 at 09:50, Akihiro Motoki <amot...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 > Welcome to the team Abhishek! > > 2016-12-14 10:22 GMT+09:00 Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com>: > >> Hi folks, >> >> Abhishek Raut's recent involvement in OSC and python-neu

[openstack-dev] [neutron] drivers meeting cancellation today

2016-12-15 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, Due to conflicts, we are unable to host the drivers meeting today. Apologies for the short notice. Thanks, Armando __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe:

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Proposing Abhishek Raut as neutronclient core

2016-12-13 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, Abhishek Raut's recent involvement in OSC and python-neutronclient has helped moving a few efforts along in the right direction. I would like to suggest we double down on core firepower for the neutronclient repo alongside Akihiro [1]. This not only will help speed up our transition to

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] trunk api performance and scale measurments

2016-12-10 Thread Armando M.
On 8 December 2016 at 20:55, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On 5 December 2016 at 07:59, Bence Romsics <bence.roms...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I measured how the new trunk API scales with lots of subports. You can >> find

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] trunk api performance and scale measurments

2016-12-08 Thread Armando M.
On 5 December 2016 at 07:59, Bence Romsics wrote: > Hi, > > I measured how the new trunk API scales with lots of subports. You can > find the results here: > > https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron_Trunk_API_Performance_and_Scaling > > Hope you find it useful. There

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] broken rally gate

2016-12-08 Thread Armando M.
On 8 December 2016 at 16:40, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi folks > > Chasing down why [1] accidentally broke rally. Please do not recheck, and > the failure is persistent. > > Thanks, > Armando > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/408020 > htt

[openstack-dev] [neutron] broken rally gate

2016-12-08 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks Chasing down why [1] accidentally broke rally. Please do not recheck, and the failure is persistent. Thanks, Armando [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/408020 __ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Vlan aware VMs or trunking

2016-12-07 Thread Armando M.
nown to the trunk plugin only at the time a parent port is bound and we hadn't come up with a clean and elegant way to developer a validator that took into account of it. I'll file a bug report to make sure this won't fall through the cracks. It'll be tagged with 'trunk'. [1] https://review.opens

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][Dynamic Routing] Plans for scenario testing?

2016-12-06 Thread Armando M.
On 6 December 2016 at 14:44, Tidwell, Ryan wrote: > This is at the top of my list to look at. I've been thinking a lot about > how to implement some tests. For instance, do we need to actually stand up > a BGP peer of some sort to peer neutron with and assert the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][Dynamic Routing] Plans for scenario testing?

2016-12-06 Thread Armando M.
On 6 December 2016 at 14:36, Assaf Muller wrote: > Hi all, > > General query - Is there anyone in the Dynamic Routing community that > is planning on contributing a scenario test? As far as I could tell, > none of the current API tests would fail if, for example, the BGP >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Vlan aware VMs or trunking

2016-12-06 Thread Armando M.
On 6 December 2016 at 08:49, Vasyl Saienko wrote: > Hello Neutron Community, > > > I've found that nice feature vlan-aware-vms was implemented in Newton [0]. > However the usage of this feature for regular users is impossible, unless > I'm missing something. > > As I

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] trunk api performance and scale measurments

2016-12-05 Thread Armando M.
On 5 December 2016 at 08:07, Jay Pipes wrote: > On 12/05/2016 10:59 AM, Bence Romsics wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I measured how the new trunk API scales with lots of subports. You can >> find the results here: >> >>

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Allowing Teams Based on Vendor-specific Drivers

2016-12-02 Thread Armando M.
On 30 November 2016 at 02:23, Kevin Benton wrote: > >I'll let someone from the Neutron team fill in the details behind their > >decision, > because I don't want to misrepresent them. > > I can shed a bit of light on this since I'm a core and had been working > for a driver

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Allowing Teams Based on Vendor-specific Drivers

2016-12-02 Thread Armando M.
On 29 November 2016 at 10:08, Doug Hellmann wrote: > Excerpts from Zane Bitter's message of 2016-11-29 12:36:03 -0500: > > On 29/11/16 10:28, Doug Hellmann wrote: > > > Excerpts from Chris Friesen's message of 2016-11-29 09:09:17 -0600: > > >> On 11/29/2016 08:03 AM, Doug

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Allowing Teams Based on Vendor-specific Drivers

2016-12-02 Thread Armando M.
On 29 November 2016 at 09:36, Zane Bitter wrote: > On 29/11/16 10:28, Doug Hellmann wrote: > >> Excerpts from Chris Friesen's message of 2016-11-29 09:09:17 -0600: >> >>> On 11/29/2016 08:03 AM, Doug Hellmann wrote: >>> I'll rank my preferred solutions, because I don't

[openstack-dev] [neutron] core and driver teams attrition

2016-12-01 Thread Armando M.
Hi Neutrinos, By now a few of us have noticed that the neutron core and driver teams have lost a number of very talented and experienced engineers: well...this sucks there's no more polite way to put it!! These engineers are the collective memory of the project, know the kinks and gotchas of the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][octavia] Neutron LBaaS governance change and Octavia to the big tent

2016-12-01 Thread Armando M.
to make sure we have a coordinated access to lbaas backports (i.e. tweaking gerrit ACLs). Cheers, Armando > > Michael > > On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 7:30 AM, Brian Haley <brian.ha...@hpe.com> wrote: > > On 12/01/2016 08:54 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka wrote: > >> > >

Re: [openstack-dev] [All][neutron-vpnaas] Finish test job transition to Ubuntu Xenial

2016-12-01 Thread Armando M.
On 1 December 2016 at 07:45, Andreas Jaeger wrote: > On 11/15/2016 12:30 AM, Clark Boylan wrote: > > [...] > >> Just a friendly reminder that this is still happening. We will be >> updating any jobs running on Trusty that should be running on Xenial on >> December 6th. I have seen

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Exposing project team's metadata in README files

2016-11-30 Thread Armando M.
.org/#/c/402878/ > [2] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-lib/blob/ > master/doc/source/readme.rst > Thanks Steve, we'll follow suit! Cheers, Armando > > On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 2:44 PM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 30 Novembe

Re: [openstack-dev] [all][tc] Exposing project team's metadata in README files

2016-11-30 Thread Armando M.
On 30 November 2016 at 08:53, Michael Johnson wrote: > Hi Flavio, > > These tags don't seem to be rendering/laying out well for octavia: > https://github.com/openstack/octavia/blob/master/README.rst > > Any pointers to get this corrected or is this part of the backend >

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [vpnaas] vpnaas no longer part of the neutron governance

2016-11-30 Thread Armando M.
On 27 November 2016 at 20:50, Takashi Yamamoto <yamam...@midokura.com> wrote: > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi > > > > As of today, the project neutron-vpnaas is no longer part of the neutron > > govern

[openstack-dev] [neutron][octavia] Neutron LBaaS governance change and Octavia to the big tent

2016-11-30 Thread Armando M.
Hi folks, A few hours ago a governance change [1] has been approved by TC members. This means that from now on, the efforts for Load Balancing as a Service efforts rest officially in the hands of the Octavia PTL and the Octavia core team. I will work with the help of the respective core teams to

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >