Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][policy] Group Based Policy - Renaming

2014-08-07 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Ryan, point well taken. I am paraphrasing the discussion from today's GBP sub team meeting on the options considered and the eventual proposal for policy-point and policy-group: 18:36:50 SumitNaiksatam_ so regarding the endpoint terminology 18:36:53 SumitNaiksatam_ any suggestions? 18:36:56

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Jay, To extend Ivar's response here, the core resources and core plugin configuration does not change with the addition of these extensions. The mechanism to implement the GBP extensions is via a service plugin. So even in a deployment where a GBP service plugin is deployed with a driver which

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [third-party] Freescale CI log site is being blocked

2014-08-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Actually I am able to access the logs in this CI over the internet and through my service provider. I have copy-pasted the log from the latest freescale run here (to validate if this is indeed the latest run): http://paste.openstack.org/show/92229/ But good point Kevin, when I was trying to post

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][policy] Group Based Policy - Renaming

2014-08-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks Jay for your constructive feedback on this. I personally think that 'policy-target' is a good option. I am not sure what the rest of the team thinks, perhaps they can chime in. On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 8:43 AM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/07/2014 01:17 PM, Ronak Shah wrote:

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 12:45 PM, Armando M. arma...@gmail.com wrote: On 8 August 2014 10:56, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote: There is an enforcement component to the group policy that allows you to use the current APIs and it's the reason that group policy is integrated into the neutron

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Simple proposal for stabilizing new features in-tree

2014-08-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Fri, Aug 8, 2014 at 1:21 PM, Robert Kukura kuk...@noironetworks.com wrote: [Note - I understand there are ongoing discussion that may lead to a proposal for an out-of-tree incubation process for new Neutron features. This is a complementary proposal that describes how our existing

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-12 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Per the blueprint spec [1], what has been proposed are optional extensions which complement the existing Neutron core resources' model: The main advantage of the extensions described in this blueprint is that they allow for an application-centric interface to Neutron that complements the

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Which changes need accompanying bugs?

2014-08-13 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 5:43 PM, Angus Lees g...@inodes.org wrote: On Wed, 13 Aug 2014 11:11:51 AM Kevin Benton wrote: Is the pylint static analysis that caught that error prone to false positives? If not, I agree that it would be really nice if that were made part of the tox check so these

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][FWaaS]Firewall Web Services Research Thesis and OpenStack Applicability - UPDATED

2014-08-13 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Michael, Thanks for keeping us in the loop on the progress at your end. This is very nice work. I quickly read through the section you referenced in your email, and it does capture the current state of the work in OpenStack/Neutron. ~Sumit. On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 6:05 PM, Michael Grima

Re: [openstack-dev] Network/Incubator proposal (was Re: [Octavia] Minutes from 8/13/2014 meeting)

2014-08-19 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
+1 for neutron-labs! ;-) On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 10:35 AM, Stefano Maffulli stef...@openstack.org wrote: On 08/19/2014 08:39 AM, Eichberger, German wrote: Just to be clear: We all think the incubator is a great idea and if some things are ironed out will be a good way to onboard new projects

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Incubator concerns from packaging perspective

2014-08-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 7:28 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 21, 2014 at 5:12 AM, Ihar Hrachyshka ihrac...@redhat.com wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 On 20/08/14 18:28, Salvatore Orlando wrote: Some comments inline. Salvatore On 20 August

[openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Group-based Policy next steps

2014-09-03 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, There's been a lot of lively discussion on GBP a few weeks back and we wanted to drive forward the discussion on this a bit more. As you might imagine, we're excited to move this forward so more people can try it out. Here are the options: * Neutron feature branch: This presumably allows

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Group-based Policy next steps

2014-09-09 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
, Sumit Naiksatam *sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com* sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, There's been a lot of lively discussion on GBP a few weeks back and we wanted to drive forward the discussion on this a bit more. As you might imagine

Re: [openstack-dev] Group-Based Policy Understanding and Queries

2014-09-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks for your interest in GBP, responses inline. On Sun, Sep 21, 2014 at 11:35 PM, Sachi Gupta sachi.gu...@tcs.com wrote: Hi All, Request you all to provide inputs on below understanding: Openstack: Group-based policy is a blueprint for Juno-3 release of Openstack. It will extend

Re: [openstack-dev] [qa][FWaaS][Neutron]Firewall service disabled on gate

2013-12-30 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Yair, The FWaaS tempest tests were not planned for H release. They are planned for the current release (hence the blueprint) and some of us were working towards them. This is also a standing discuss item this during the the FWaaS sub team meetings. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Sun, Dec 29, 2013 at 2:41

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Multiple config files for neutron server

2014-01-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Just thinking aloud - would it make sense to have a meta-configuration file; this file can hold the names of the configuration files to load. This would allow being a little more granular than picking up everything from a directory (if we had to go the route of using a directory name). ~Sumit.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron]Contributing code to Neutron (ML2)

2014-01-29 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
I believe the current recommendation is also to not vote -1 automatically, see: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/63478 On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 4:41 AM, Rossella Sblendido rosse...@midokura.com wrote: Hi Trinath, you can find more info about third party testing here [1] Every new driver or

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Nominate Oleg Bondarev for Core

2014-02-11 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
+1 Sumit. On Feb 10, 2014 3:33 PM, Mark McClain mmccl...@yahoo-inc.com wrote: All- I'd like to nominate Oleg Bondarev to become a Neutron core reviewer. Oleg has been valuable contributor to Neutron by actively reviewing, working on bugs, and contributing code. Neutron cores please reply

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [group-policy] Changing the meeting time

2014-02-11 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Kyle, The new time sounds good to me as well, thanks for initiating this. ~sumit. On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 9:02 AM, Stephen Wong s3w...@midokura.com wrote: Hi Kyle, Almost missed this - sounds good to me. Thanks, - Stephen On Mon, Feb 10, 2014 at 7:30 PM, Kyle Mestery

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Urgent questions on Service Type Framework for VPNaaS

2014-02-16 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Paul, Our plan with FWaaS was to get it to parity with LBaaS as far as STF is concerned. That way any changes to STF can be explored in the context of all services, and the migration can also be performed for all services. Accordingly, Gary Duan has been actively working on the patch:

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Policy questions

2014-02-16 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, Apologies for chiming in late on this. Yes, we have been incubating the service insertion and chaining features [2] for some time now. The plan was to have a FW-VPN chain working by Icehouse release. Towards that end the first step was to introduce the notion of a service insertion context

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Using network services with network policies

2014-02-16 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks Mohammad for bringing this up. I responded in another thread: http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2014-February/027306.html ~Sumit. On Sun, Feb 16, 2014 at 7:27 AM, Mohammad Banikazemi m...@us.ibm.com wrote: During the last IRC call we started talking about network

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Using network services with network policies

2014-02-18 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
becoming more apparent as to why these constructs are required in Neutron. Mohammad [image: Inactive hide details for Sumit Naiksatam ---02/17/2014 02:12:12 AM---Thanks Mohammad for bringing this up. I responded in anot]Sumit Naiksatam ---02/17/2014 02:12:12 AM---Thanks Mohammad for bringing

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][FWaaS] Rescheduling this week's IRC meeting

2014-02-25 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, On account of the ongoing RSA conference, some members of our neutron firewall sub-team will not be able to attend this Wednesday's IRC. So we will have the meeting on Feb 28th (Friday) at 1800 UTC on: #openstack-meeting Hope you can attend. Thanks, ~Sumit.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][FWaaS] Rescheduling this week's IRC meeting

2014-03-01 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks, Carlos Goncalves On 25 Feb 2014, at 23:49, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi, On account of the ongoing RSA conference, some members of our neutron firewall sub-team will not be able to attend this Wednesday's IRC. So we will have the meeting on Feb 28th (Friday

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Advanced Services Common requirements IRC meeting

2014-03-12 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, This is a reminder - we will be having this meeting in #openstack-meeting-3 on March 13th (Thursday) at 18:00 UTC. The proposed agenda is as follows: * Flavors/service-type framework * Service insertion/chaining * Group policy requirements * Vendor plugins for L3 services We can also decide

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Advanced Services Common requirements IRC meeting

2014-03-14 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
backend provider (and might end up being specific to that deployment) * Name of this abstraction, we did not discuss this ** Service Insertion/Chaining (topic lead: Sumit Naiksatam) * Service context - general agreement on what is being introduced in: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/62599 * Service

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-docs] [Neutron] Docs for new plugins

2014-03-18 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
I believe we need to be looking at the trunk for the Icehouse related documentation: http://docs.openstack.org/trunk/config-reference/content/networking-options-plugins.html Mohammad, IBM plugin config does show up here as does the ODL mech driver. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Mon, Mar 17, 2014 at 9:58

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-08 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, We had a VPNaaS meeting yesterday and it was felt that we should have a separate meeting to discuss the topics common to all services. So, in preparation for the Icehouse summit, I am proposing an IRC meeting on Oct 14th 22:00 UTC (immediately after the Neutron meeting) to discuss common

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Service VM discussion - Use Cases

2013-10-09 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Rudra, We tried to separate policy from mechanism for this blueprint, and are trying to address the latter. I believe the logic for scaling, and or clustering multiple service VMs to map to a logical service instance would lie in the service plugin which realizes the logical service instance.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Service VM discussion - Use Cases

2013-10-09 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Harshad, I agree with you that the service instance terminology might be a little confusing here. The way it was phrased in the original email, I believe it was meant to suggest an association with the corresponding Neutron logical service (the XaaS to be precise). That said (and to your

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Service VM discussion - Use Cases

2013-10-09 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks Bob, I agree this is an important aspect of the implementation. However, apart from being able to specify which network(s) the VM has interfaces on, what more needs to be done specifically in the proposed library to achieve the tenant level isolation? Thanks, ~Sumit. On Tue, Oct 8, 2013

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-13 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, For the next of phase of FWaaS development we will be considering a number of features. I am proposing an IRC meeting on Oct 16th Wednesday 18:00 UTC (11 AM PDT) to discuss this. The etherpad for the summit session proposal is here: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/icehouse-neutron-fwaas

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-14 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
to propose a more convenient time for everyone involved for a meeting next week. Meanwhile, we can continue to use the mailing list, etherpad, and/or comment on the specific proposals. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Tue, Oct 8, 2013 at 8:30 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, We had

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-16 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
join. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, For the next of phase of FWaaS development we will be considering a number of features. I am proposing an IRC meeting on Oct 16th Wednesday 18:00 UTC (11 AM PDT) to discuss

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-17 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
/NeutronAdvancedServices Hope you can make it and participate. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 8:15 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Thanks all for attending the IRC meeting today for the Neutron advanced services discussion. We have an etherpad for this: https

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
and anything else you may want to discuss in this context. Meeting wiki page (has pointer to the first meeting logs): https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices Thanks, ~Sumit. On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 12:02 AM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, We will have

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
, Oct 21, 2013 at 11:08 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, This is a reminder for the next IRC meeting on Tuesday (Oct 22nd) 15.30 UTC (8.30 AM PDT) on the #openstack-meeting-alt channel. The proposed agenda is: * Service insertion and chaining * Service agents

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS zone proposal - seeking feedback

2013-10-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, The Neutron FWaaS team would like to solicit your feedback on a proposal for supporting Zones as a part of firewall support. The common definition for zones involves the use of interfaces. In Neutron interfaces have a one-to-one correspondence with Neutron ports. The current proposal is

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
to bring up for discussion during the summit. https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/FWaaS Thanks, ~Sumit. On Sun, Oct 13, 2013 at 1:56 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, For the next of phase of FWaaS development we will be considering a number of features. I am

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS] LBaaS plans for Icehouse

2013-10-23 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
So is it at 8 AM PDT, or 10 AM PDT? Thanks, ~Sumit. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 4:18 AM, Eugene Nikanorov enikano...@mirantis.comwrote: Hi Sam, Yes, I meant 8:00AM PDT, 10:00-12:00 AM PDT works for me as well. Looks like this time is not convenient for Yongsheng, unfortunately, but I think we

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-23 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Log from today's meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_fwaas/2013/networking_fwaas.2013-10-23-18.02.log.html Action items for some of the folks included. Please join us for the meeting next week. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 2:00 PM, Sumit Naiksatam

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-24 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
but this is a decision we should leave to end customers. We should allow configuring zones in bump-in-the-wire mode as well. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: Log from today's meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_fwaas/2013

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-28 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, This is a reminder for the next IRC meeting on Tuesday (Oct 29th) 15.30 UTC (8.30 AM PDT) on the #openstack-meeting-alt channel. Meeting agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices Thanks, ~Sumit. On Tue, Oct 22, 2013 at 9:55 AM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Common requirements for services' discussion

2013-10-29 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
28, 2013 at 3:14 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, This is a reminder for the next IRC meeting on Tuesday (Oct 29th) 15.30 UTC (8.30 AM PDT) on the #openstack-meeting-alt channel. Meeting agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices Thanks

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-29 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, Reminder - we will have the Neutron FWaaS IRC meeting tomorrow Wednesday 18:00 UTC (11 AM PDT). Agenda - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/FWaaS Thanks, ~Sumit. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Log from today's meeting: http

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-30 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
connected to LAN and Router. The there are cases where the end-users apply same zones on both sides but this is a decision we should leave to end customers. We should allow configuring zones in bump-in-the-wire mode as well. On Wed, Oct 23, 2013 at 12:08 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] FWaaS IceHouse summit prep and IRC meeting

2013-10-30 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Log from today's meeting: http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/networking_fwaas/2013/networking_fwaas.2013-10-30-18.03.log.html We next meet at the summit, see you there. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 5:08 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.comwrote: Hi All, Reminder

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][group-based-policy] GP mapping driver

2014-06-12 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Carlos, I noticed that the point you raised here had not been followed up. So if I understand correctly, your concern is related to sharing common configuration information between GP drivers, and ML2 mechanism drivers (when used in the mapping)? If so, would a common configuration file

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][group-based-policy] GP mapping driver

2014-06-12 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Carlos, I noticed that the point you raised here had not been followed up. So if I understand correctly, your concern is related to sharing common configuration information between GP drivers, and ML2 mechanism drivers (when used in the mapping)? If so, would a common configuration file

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] [FWaaS] [sequritygroup] [Development]

2014-06-16 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Inline... ~Sumit. On Sun, Jun 15, 2014 at 9:25 AM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com wrote: Hi Israel, please find my answers inline. I'm not really an expert in this area, but I hope these answers are helpful, and, hopefully, correct! Salvatore On 15 June 2014 14:55, Israel Ziv

[openstack-dev] [neutron] Specs repo

2014-07-03 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Is this still the right repo for this: https://github.com/openstack/neutron-specs The latest commit on the master branch shows June 25th timestamp, but we have had a lots of patches merging after that. Where are those going? Thanks, ~Sumit. ___

Re: [openstack-dev] DVR and FWaaS integration

2014-07-07 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
To level set, the FWaaS model was (intentionally) made agnostic of whether the firewall was being subject to the E-W or N-S traffic (or both). The possibility of having to use a different strategy/implementation to handle the two sets of traffic differently, is an artifact of the backend

Re: [openstack-dev] [congress] mid-cycle policy summit

2014-07-11 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks for initiating this discussion. We would be happy to participate and host this at the Cisco office as well if need be. ~Sumit. On Fri, Jul 11, 2014 at 12:32 PM, Sean Roberts seanrobert...@gmail.com wrote: I need feedback from the congress team on which two days works for you. 11-12

[openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group-based Policy code sprint

2014-07-15 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, The Group Policy team is planning to meet on July 24th to focus on making progress with the pending items for Juno, and also to facilitate the vendor drivers. The specific agenda will be posted on the Group Policy wiki: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/GroupPolicy Prasad Vellanki

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Flavor framework proposal

2014-07-16 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
To the earlier question on whether we had defined what we wanted to solve with the flavors framework, a high level requirement was captured in the following approved spec for advanced services: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/92200 On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 5:18 AM, Eugene Nikanorov

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group-based Policy code sprint

2014-07-17 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Just sending me a unicast reply that you are coming should be good. Thanks for your interest. Sumit. On Jul 17, 2014 12:26 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote: Is there somewhere we should RSVP to this? On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote

Re: [openstack-dev] will juno support IPSet ?

2014-07-28 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
There is an approved blueprint spec for this: http://docs-draft.openstack.org/24/101124/12/check/gate-neutron-specs-docs/d7bacf5/doc/build/html/specs/juno/add-ipset-to-security.html On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Israel Ziv israel@huawei.com wrote: Hi! I wonder if it is planned to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][policy] Group-based Policy code sprint

2014-07-29 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Neutron/GroupPolicy Thanks, ~Sumit (on behalf of GBP team). On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: Hi All, The Group Policy team is planning to meet on July 24th to focus on making progress with the pending items for Juno, and also

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][policy] Group-based Policy weekly meeting invite and agenda

2014-07-31 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Greetings! This is a reminder for the weekly IRC Sub-team meeting occurring on Thursdays at 1800 UTC on #openstack-meeting-3 [1]. Tomorrow's agenda is posted here: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy#July_31st.2C_2014 In particular, we propose to focus on two items: *

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][policy] Bridging the 2-group gap in group policy

2014-07-31 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks Kevin and others for the input here. We have put this on today's Group Policy IRC meeting agenda: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy#July_31st.2C_2014 On Wed, Jul 30, 2014 at 11:59 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote: I agree. Ryan, can you propose a patch

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][policy] Long standing -2 on Group-based policy patch

2014-08-04 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
The first patch[1] of this high priority approved blueprint[2][3] targeted for Juno-3 has been blocked by a core reviewer’s (Mark McClain) -2 since July 2nd. This patch was at patch-set 13 then, and has been repeatedly reviewed and updated to the current patch-set 22. However, there has been no

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
That's right Kevin, EPG (and its association to the L2/3_Policy) capture the attributes which would represent the network-template being referenced here. Jay, what Bob mentioned here was an option to use the endpoint as a one-to-one replacement for the option of using a Neutron port. This is more

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-05 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
plain old concepts, not networking guru arcanum. Best, -jay On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com mailto:sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: That's right Kevin, EPG (and its association to the L2/3_Policy) capture the attributes which would represent

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Tue, Aug 5, 2014 at 11:46 PM, Gary Kotton gkot...@vmware.com wrote: Correct, this work is orthogonal to the parity work, which I understand is coming along very nicely. Agree Gary and Kevin. I think the topic of Nova integration has created confusion in people’s mind (at least the

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Edgar, you seemed to have +2'ed this patch on July 2nd [1]: Edgar Magana Jul 2 8:42 AM Patch Set 13: Code-Review+2 All looks good to me! I am not approving yet because Nachi was also reviewing this code and I would like to see his opinion as well. That would suggest that you were happy with

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
, there is always a smartest reviewer catching out the facts that you don¹t. Edgar On 8/6/14, 10:55 AM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: Edgar, you seemed to have +2'ed this patch on July 2nd [1]: Edgar Magana Jul 2 8:42 AM Patch Set 13: Code-Review+2 All looks good to me! I am

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote: I believe the referential security group rules solve this problem (unless I'm not understanding): I think the disconnect is that you are comparing the way to current mapping driver implements things for the reference

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/06/2014 04:13 PM, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote: I believe the referential security group rules solve this problem (unless I'm not understanding): I

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:52 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/06/2014 04:36 PM, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 1:27 PM, Jay Pipes jaypi...@gmail.com wrote: On 08/06/2014 04:13 PM, Sumit Naiksatam wrote: On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Kevin Benton blak

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
I would reword that to: '/your_application_may_break_after_juno_if_you_use_this/' in the event of the possibility that it doesn't break. ;-) On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 3:47 PM, Kevin Benton blak...@gmail.com wrote: I think we should merge it and just prefix the API for now with

Re: [openstack-dev] How to improve the specs review process (was Re: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and the way forward)

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
I definitely agree that such cross-pollination across projects is ideal. However, I think (and not to deviate from the general discussion on making blueprint specs review more effective), Kevin's question was specifically in the context of the GBP blueprint. It is not clear in that case that a

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][third-party] Arista CI hits 10, 000 runs this morning

2014-08-06 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Nice work Sukhdev, worth commending! Thanks for sharing!! On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 7:06 PM, Baohua Yang yangbao...@gmail.com wrote: Woo~ Really nice work! On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:09 AM, Sukhdev Kapur sukhdevka...@gmail.com wrote: Folks, Just wanted to share with you that Arista CI has

Re: [openstack-dev] Fwd: FW: [Neutron] Group Based Policy and theway forward

2014-08-07 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
And while we are on this, just wanted to remind all those interested to attend the weekly GBP meeting later today: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/Neutron_Group_Policy On Wed, Aug 6, 2014 at 8:12 PM, Mike Cohen co...@noironetworks.com wrote: Its good to see such a lively debate about

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Bug squashing day

2014-08-07 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Indeed, thanks much Eugene for taking on this critical activity. Please let me know if I can help in any way as well. On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 7:39 AM, Kyle Mestery mest...@mestery.com wrote: On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 9:31 AM, Eugene Nikanorov enikano...@mirantis.com wrote: Hi neutron folks,

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Neutron BP review process for Juno

2014-04-15 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
What's the convention for adding images to the patch? The following directory structure seemed logical to me (but the current UT will not allow it): specs/juno/bp-name/bp-name.rst specs/juno/bp-name/images/image1.png Thanks, ~Sumit. On Tue, Apr 15, 2014 at 3:35 PM, Carl Baldwin

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [group-based-policy] Moving the meeting time

2014-04-17 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
We realized it the hard way that we didn't have the entire one hour slot on -meeting-alt at 17:30 on Thursdays. So, we have to move this meeting again. Based on the opinion of those present in today's meeting, there was a consensus for the following time: Thursdays at 1800 UTC on

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Service VMs

2014-04-22 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Edgar, There is a weekly IRC meeting to discuss to discuss Neutron advanced services related topics - https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices Service insertion and chaining is one of them, and there is a sub team working on it. Per the PTL, there will soon be a standing item in

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron] Flavor(?) Framework

2014-04-24 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
The BP spec has been posted (thanks Eugene): https://review.openstack.org/#/c/90070/1 The topic of flavors is also discussed in the weekly Neutron advanced services' meeting: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings/AdvancedServices ~Sumit. On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:13 AM, Eugene Nikanorov

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] status of VPNaaS and FWaaS APIs in Icehouse

2014-04-26 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
The so called multivendor work is dependent now on the flavors framework. Patches were presented in the Icehouse release to enable multivendor support using the service-type-framework, however there were concerns on the use of that framework, and hence those patches were not approved in time. A

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][FWaaS]Firewall Web Services Research Thesis Applicability to the OpenStack Project

2014-05-07 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Mike, Thanks for your input and welcome to the OpenStack community! Your research area is pretty interesting, and you are right, we are kind of in unchartered territory as far as the definition of Firewall as a Service (FWaaS) in an IaaS context is concerned. Our FWaaS API has evolved based on

Re: [openstack-dev] [Openstack-dev][Neutron] Port Mirroring Extension in Neutron

2014-05-17 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, Unfortunately I could not participate in this discussion. As requested in this thread earlier, it would be good to get a summary of the discussion. We, in the advanced services team in Neutron, have long discussed[1] the possibility of accommodating a tap service. So I would like to

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][NFV] NFV BoF at design summit

2014-05-18 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks for initiating this conversation. Unfortunately I was not able to participate during the summit on account of overlapping sessions. As has been identified in the wiki and etherpad, there seem to be obvious/potential touch points with the advanced services' discussion we are having in

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][group-based-policy] Should we revisit the priority of group-based policy?

2014-05-23 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Paul good points, and I am very happy to read that your expectations are very closely aligned with the direction we have taken (in terms of decoupling of the group policy layer from the underlying building blocks). Thanks also Kyle for your earlier email. I believe the team has always been

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][group-based-policy] Should we revisit the priority of group-based policy?

2014-05-23 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi Bob, The approach towards having the neutron.manager.NeutronManager provide access to the Controller classes seems like something worth exploring for the shorter term. Thanks, ~Sumit. On Fri, May 23, 2014 at 12:31 PM, Robert Kukura kuk...@noironetworks.com wrote: On 5/23/14, 12:46 AM,

Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron][group-based-policy] GP mapping driver

2014-05-27 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
There seems to be a fair bit of confusion with the PoC/prototype patches. As such, and per reviewer feedback to introduce the Endpoint Group related patch sooner than later, we will start a new series. You will see this first patch land shortly, and we can incrementally make progress from there.

[openstack-dev] [Neutron][Advanced Services] Requesting reviewers

2014-05-30 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
During the Neutron Advanced Services' meeting this week [1], we discussed a plan to make the review process more predictable and accountable (as an experiment within this sub-team). We are soliciting reviewers who will commit to reviewing at least the prioritized blueprints [2] on a weekly basis

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][Advanced Services] Requesting reviewers

2014-05-31 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
at 11:50 PM, Ivar Lazzaro ivarlazz...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Sumit, Review commitment sound like a good idea. Is this aiming core reviewers only? What number of cores / non cores are you ideally trying to reach? Thanks, Ivar. On Fri, May 30, 2014 at 7:21 PM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa

Re: [openstack-dev] [infra] Nominating Andreas Jaeger for project-config-core

2014-09-26 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
+1, Andreas has been very responsive, prompt, and helpful in his reviews. On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Sergey Lukjanov slukja...@mirantis.com wrote: +1 On Fri, Sep 26, 2014 at 10:45 AM, Anita Kuno ante...@anteaya.info wrote: On 09/26/2014 11:35 AM, James E. Blair wrote: I'm pleased to

Re: [openstack-dev] [controller-dev] Group-Based Policy Understanding and Queries

2014-09-26 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
:Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com To:OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org Date:09/23/2014 04:33 AM Subject:Re: [openstack-dev] Group-Based Policy Understanding and Queries

[openstack-dev] [Group-based Policy] Today's IRC meeting summary and renaming of resources

2014-10-02 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, For the past couple of weeks one of the agenda items on our weekly IRC meetings [1][2] has been to finalize on resources' naming convention to avoid any conflict/confusion in the future. Based on community feedback we had earlier agreed to rename Endpoints and Endpoint Groups to Policy

[openstack-dev] [Group-based Policy] Review of patches

2014-10-14 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, We are meeting in the #openstack-gbp channel today (10/14) 18.00 UTC to jointly review some of the pending patches: https://review.openstack.org/#/q/status:open+project:stackforge/group-based-policy+branch:master,n,z Please join if you would like to provide feedback. Thanks, ~Sumit.

Re: [openstack-dev] [Neutron][LBaaS][Octavia] Octavia's API becoming spun out LBaaS

2014-10-26 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Several people have been requesting that we resume the Advanced Services' meetings [1] to discuss some of the topics being mentioned in this thread. Perhaps it might help people to have a focussed discussion on the topic of advanced services' spin-out prior to the design summit session [2] in

[openstack-dev] [Policy][Group-based Policy] Review meeting for service redirect/chain patches

2014-10-27 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, We will be meeting in the #openstack-gbp channel on 10/28 at 16.00 UTC to jointly review some of the pending patches: https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128559/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128551/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128552/ https://review.openstack.org/#/c/128555/

[openstack-dev] [Policy][Group-based-policy] GBP Juno/Kilo next steps meeting

2014-11-05 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi, We had a productive design session discussion on Tuesday. However, we could not get to the point where we discussed all the next steps and specific action items for Juno/Kilo GBP releases. We will be meeting tomorrow (Thursday) morning from in the Le Meridian to cover these. Time: 10 to 11

[openstack-dev] [neutron][advanced services] Weekly IRC meeting day/time change

2014-11-09 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Hi All, Following up from the discussions during the Kilo Summit, we will be resuming the Advanced Services' meetings [1]. The new day/time will be Tuesday 17.00 UTC on #openstack-meeting-4 to follow the LBaaS meeting [2]. Hope you can join. Thanks, ~Sumit. [1]

Re: [openstack-dev] [Policy][Group-based-policy] GBP Juno/Kilo next steps meeting

2014-11-11 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
steering? Is there some place or etherpad with a summary of what was discussed/outlined? The breakout session used the same etherpad as the design summit session: https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/kilo-gbp-design-summit-topics Thanks, ~Sumit. Cheers, On 5 November 2014 17:22, Sumit Naiksatam

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][neutron] Proposal to split Neutron into separate repositories

2014-11-18 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Mohammad Hanif mha...@brocade.com wrote: I agree with Paul as advanced services go beyond just L4-L7. Today, VPNaaS deals with L3 connectivity but belongs in advanced services. Where does Edge-VPN work belong? We need a broader definition for advanced

Re: [openstack-dev] [tc][neutron] Proposal to split Neutron into separate repositories

2014-11-18 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
that would not be accurate (in the context of any of existing three services, or proposed new services). On Wed, Nov 19, 2014 at 11:10 AM, Sumit Naiksatam sumitnaiksa...@gmail.com wrote: On Tue, Nov 18, 2014 at 4:44 PM, Mohammad Hanif mha...@brocade.com wrote: I agree with Paul as advanced services

Re: [openstack-dev] Configuring Quantum REST Proxy Plugin

2013-06-21 Thread Sumit Naiksatam
Thanks Salvatore. That's right, the configuration for server and port resides in: etc/quantum/plugins/bigswitch/restproxy.ini Let us know if you need further help. ~Sumit. On Fri, Jun 21, 2013 at 8:37 AM, Salvatore Orlando sorla...@nicira.com wrote: Hi Julio, If I get your message correctly,

  1   2   >