a channel on there for these
discussions too.
opnfv.slack.com<http://opnfv.slack.com>
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Tue, Jul 7, 2020 at 11:02 AM Alec via
lists.opnfv.org<http://lists.opnfv.org>
mailto:cisco@lists.opnfv.org>> wrote:
Thanks Jack/Al
I’ll try to attend if possible (6am Monday mor
://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/Weekly+Technical+Discussion
On 7/6/20 8:58 AM, Alec via lists.opnfv.org wrote:
Hi Jim,
I am interested in this topic but have no information about “Monday
tech-discuss meeting”. Can you provide pointer and in case I cannot make the
time is there/can we have an email
Hi Jim,
I am interested in this topic but have no information about “Monday
tech-discuss meeting”. Can you provide pointer and in case I cannot make the
time is there/can we have an email discussion on this topic?
There has been on and off informal hallway discussion on the topic of
+1
“A bit more user friendly” is an understatement.
I’ve been around quite a bit and I’m personally allergic to IRC. I was
disappointed about IRC use when I started to interact with OPNFV about 5y ago.
We need to realize that the new generation of younger developers tends to favor
more modern
It is still an improvement as PTLs no longer need to submit a review to the
releng repo to have the branch created (and remember or find out which change
to make there).
This is a good step towards less process/overhead, more simplicity and more
trust to the project owners.
Thanks for all who
not be too difficult
to get accepted.
Thanks
Alec
From: on behalf of "Alec via
Lists.Opnfv.Org"
Reply-To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)"
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2019 at 9:06 AM
To: Trevor Bramwell
Cc: "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org"
Subject: Re: [opnfv-te
process and for these cases we should
just trust PTLs and let then manage their repo directly.
Thanks
Alec
Regards,
Trevor Bramwell
On Sun, Dec 15, 2019 at 04:56:20PM +, Alec via Lists.Opnfv.Org wrote:
HI Ollivier, thanks for the offer to help. We could try to fix these with jjb
but
HI Ollivier, thanks for the offer to help. We could try to fix these with jjb
but I think the problem is bigger and would need attention from the TSC.
The only reason this dockerhub state is not too much of a problem for the
project is that all users currently build their own containers
I would propose that PTLs are given permission to manage the branches for their
repos directly. Those who prefer to go through jjb can do so, but we should not
force everybody to go thorough JJB.
I have same concern for
* OPNFV dockerhub repo. I cannot manage my container versions and the
W
configuration. You can see the attached PR for more details about this.
https://github.com/cntt-n/CNTT/pull/535
中国移动研究院
网络与IT技术研究所
付乔 15901025951
From: Alec via Lists.Opnfv.Org<mailto:ahothan=cisco@lists.opnfv.org>
Date: 2019-11-14 23:58
To: Rao, Sr
Hi Sridhar
[+tech discuss list]
From my knowledge, very few NFVi installers know how to configure the TOR(s)
and instead just assume that some admin will go and configure the TORs in a way
that is compatible with the installer’s own networking blueprint – this is one
of the main areas were
Hello Harsh,
I don’t have any Mellanox NIC to test this with however you are welcome to
provide a patch to add support for this NIC if you have one available for
checking.
I can provide you help in building the VM image if needed.
Thanks
Alec
From: on behalf of Harsh Kotak
Date:
pnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>> on behalf of Alec
via Lists.Opnfv.Org
mailto:ahothan=cisco@lists.opnfv.org>>
Sent: Tuesday, July 9, 2019 5:53 PM
To: Manuel Buil
Cc: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Can installers use CircleCI?
Hi Pierrick,
Thanks for sending this detailed report.
I think the anomalies you are seeing may be due to the choice of NIC card. Not
that the Mellanox NIC is bad but it is a NIC that not many people have tested
NFVbench with yet.
I am copying Michael as he may have used this same Mellanox NIC
Hi Sridhar,
Unfortunately I may not be able to join at the Wednesday morning slot.
I really wish there was more email discussion in the test working group about
any topic like this one.
If you can provide meeting minutes that would be helpful.
Thanks
Alec
From: "Rao, Sridhar"
Date:
ite.yml
https://git.opnfv.org/releng/tree/jjb/functest/functest-kubernetes.yaml
@Alec: please add me as reviewer of your changes in releng.
Cédric
Le ven. 7 juin 2019 à 22:21, Alec via Lists.Opnfv.Org<http://Lists.Opnfv.Org>
mailto:cisco@lists.opnfv.org>> a écrit :
I would be in
I would be interested to participate (NFVbench project). I am actually willing
to try anything that moves us away from releng repo and JJB.
I would like to point out that the current CI/CD based on Jenkins is not
providing sufficient permission for PTLs to customize as almost every aspect of
I’d like to nominate Cedric Ollivier for the “Testing” and “Integration”
categories.
Cedric has been leading the Functest project and made it the most solid and
widely used opnfv test project in and outside OPNFV. This is not easy task as
it integrates a number of other open source projects
Thanks for finding this, I missed updating the version in Dockerfile and I need
to push the 0.8 qcow2 image to the opnfv google storage as well.
I am fixing it but just noticed that the CI/CD for building the VM and
uploading to google storage is not triggering any more ;-(
So need to fix that
Hi Francois,
The packet passing traffic verification code checks that we receive at least
one packet from each VNF on each port. This check is done by getting the packet
src MAC and comparing against the VNF MAC in local list (otherwise obtained
from Openstack API or from a config).
This works
I have opened a ticket for this.
I thought this was a general login policy for all projects. Thanks for help me
realize this is specific to my project!
Alec
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#23188):
Is there any specific issue to allow access of OPNFV Jira
(https://jira.opnfv.org) to the public or does anybody remember why this is
currently reserved for registered opnfv users?
I think it would be nice to have public read only access if we want to
encourage more participation from outside
Hi Francois,
Just a general follow up on the feature patchset review, I think it would be
great to extend support for an L3 router on the packet path, that would work
independently of how the devices in the packet path are brought up (either by
nfvbench using PVP/PVVP or externally with EXT
David,
I would like to point out that practically all links provided in the tables
point to master branch, for example:
https://git.opnfv.org/fuel/tree/docs
when it should be most likely be
https://git.opnfv.org/fuel/tree/docs?h=stable%2Fhunter
Unless it is implicit that all these links
Hi Francois,
Quite possible a side effect of remove socketIO.
We mostly use centos/rhel distro to test NFVbench and I have not tested the
latest commits on ubuntu so this may be specific to Ubuntu docker images.
Unfortunately a simple gerrit verification to just run nfvbench with trex
requires
Hi David,
I have not created a hunter branch for nfvbench because I‘m not sure of how
useful it would be for this project.
The nfvbench project already has its own versioning and container deliverables
versioned accordingly in dockerhub at a pace that is a lot faster than the
typical opnfv
Hi Francois,
Upgrading TRex to a newer version has been done about a month ago in a private
workspace but not upstreamed yet as it was using a private Trex branch provided
by the Trex team. It was not the latest as of today but definitely a version
that had the reorg of the Trex libraries.
I
elow.
From: test...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:test...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of
Alec via Lists.Opnfv.Org
Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 8:19 PM
To: MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) ; David McBride
; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Cc: test...@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [test-wg] Future Testing WG meeti
Hi Francois,
You are welcome to submit a patch for this,
Thanks
Alec
From: on behalf of François-Régis MENGUY
Date: Thursday, February 21, 2019 at 7:37 AM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" , GRALL Xavier TGI/OLN
Cc: "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org"
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss]
The detection of config changes requiring Trex restart is ideal but is a bit
tricky. Let me try to describe the various ramification of such change.
A nfvbench container can operate in 2 modes: cli only or cli + rest server.
Most of the code is common between cli and rest, but the bootstrap is
Is there a recurring meeting invite still ongoing? I don’t see the meeting in
my calendar any more (last one was Dec 27).
Alec
From: on behalf of Al Morton
Date: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 at 3:09 PM
To: David McBride ,
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org"
Cc: "Foley, Emma L" , "Yuyang
Hi Francois,
Thanks for the information and good to see it is working with 2 instances.
Note that you no longer need to provide the interface speed in the nfvbench
configuration as it is automatically discovered from the NIC driver.
Thanks for the commit, it looks good and has been just
Hi Francois,
Can you provide some results on how you could scale trex (i.e. how many
instances and how many cores per instance, how well you could scale the pps
with/without optimization).
Thanks
Alec
From: "francoisregis.men...@orange.com"
Date: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 at 6:33 AM
enable it in Functest.
Cédric
De : opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org [opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org] de
la part de Alec via Lists.Opnfv.Org [ahothan=cisco@lists.opnfv.org]
Envoyé : samedi 9 février 2019 04:08
À : Manuel Buil; Cristina Pauna; opnfv-tech-disc
I do not disagree on the general benefits of having multiple reviewers for
every commit, no question about it. If you can afford it – go for it.
However, I would like to point out that for most low-key or “niche” projects
with few committers, a rule to enforce dual review and forbid self
Inline…
From: "francoisregis.men...@orange.com"
Date: Tuesday, January 15, 2019 at 1:24 AM
To: "Alec Hothan (ahothan)"
Cc: "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org"
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] #nfvbench Add TRex parameters to tune
performance and allocate ressources
In fact we had the case
That is an interesting use case although we need to make clear that running
multiple instances on the same server will likely not provide linear
performance increase.
Can you provide more information about your concurrency target? I.e. how many
instances are you planning to run and on what
Hi Francois,
Thanks for your commit! https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/66299/
I have added a new tag 3.0.5 to trigger a build of a new container image with
your changes in dockerhub.
Best Regards,
Alec
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
Hi Francois,
I think that would be a good enhancement.
Adding new config options to enforce certain values and skip some openstack API
calls looks fine. I would just add that recent changes in NFVbench (starting
2.0) allow now to pass an explicit AZ or hostname (so there is no longer any
code
er
On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 12:26 PM Alec via
Lists.Opnfv.Org<http://secure-web.cisco.com/1D2bmfJeCdgnrw42z-2J8fWhakFtfjEDERgEqDVZEVmUY1IyZ7B4bcR1EID7vVp7_W4oOGH6akP7hJuqgDjcLI_zMAqNlJa468qj
olution: Labs
Hi All,
Responses in line below as well.
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alec via
Lists.Opnfv.Org<http://secure-web.cisco.com/1AnOHp9f7ZkElBLwoF1maNGM796Xhi5r2121IPnxRD270gbM5DYAoJC-L3g_F9TYGmn8QvbW33LGtbnl92bRgyxrQhw3iP8ZCPfhoHt9YTZvs3g3fwogIX1ulH-JV-87ED
Hi All,
Responses in line below as well.
Cheers,
Lincoln
On Fri, Dec 7, 2018 at 12:33 PM Alec via
Lists.Opnfv.Org<http://secure-web.cisco.com/1QDOy77mw30DyO09FK3MkceVCMtCJ4gLVYN_RPMqmErDebfi_AaUxOOLWZN_K__Lwn26phigDszFkEHnXxpK24GjfFTTV96ARycXFfP_pu6b9d6R1oNMr6H5lZzF4yU3Bj5PJy5opIaRs
Thanks Aric!
Good to see that it is not restricted to any specific project.
Alec
> On Dec 10, 2018, at 11:30 AM, Aric Gardner via RT
> wrote:
>
> Hi Francois,
>
> I've sent you an invitation to join the opnfv-gerrit-contributors group. Once
> you accept you should have permissions to
Hi Trevor,
Inline…
From: on behalf of Trevor Bramwell
Date: Thursday, December 6, 2018 at 4:47 PM
To: "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org"
Subject: [SUSPICIOUS] [opnfv-tech-discuss] Infra Evolution: Labs
Hi all,
The TSC tasked the Infra-WG to create a proposal for evolving the
Hello,
Could you please add Francois as a new contributor to the nfvbench project.
His LF account: fmenguy
Full Name: Francois Regis Menguy
Email: francoisregis.men...@orange.com
Thank You
Alec
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online
I’d like to add some comments on the LaaS side.
I have been frustrated about how difficult it is to run simple data plane
benchmarks on any OPNFV openstack deployment. There is a large diversity of
hardware, wiring blueprints, installers, with different lab teams that makes it
difficult to
I’d like to announce the participation of the NFVbench project to the Hunter
release / continuous delivery track.
Thank You
Alec
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#22293):
Hi Frederic,
see inline...
On Tue, Sep 25, 2018 at 03:32 PM, Frederic Dang Tran wrote:
>
> [sorry for the duplicate email]
>
> Hello:
>
> I run into the following problems with NFVbench:
>
>
> * negative drop rates in NDR/PDR mode:
>
>
>
> When using nfvbench in ndr_pdr mode with a
(please ignore – just testing the hashtag)
Alec
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#22087):
https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/22087
Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/26224745/21656
Mute #nfvbench:
Many thanks to Trevor, I accept the nomination.
Alec
From: David McBride
Date: Thursday, September 6, 2018 at 4:11 PM
To: trevor cooper , "Alec Hothan (ahothan)"
Cc: TSC OPNFV , TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
, Heather Kirksey
, Tim Irnich ,
"tim.irn...@suse.com"
Subject: [SUSPICIOUS] Re:
I would like to nominate Trevor Cooper (Intel) and Fatih Degirmenci (Ericsson)
to the TSC.
Both Trevor and Fatih have shown excellent interaction across projects and
expertise in testing and release management. I am confident they will provide
the best guidance to the TSC.
Thank You
Alec
There was a joint workgroup to compare 3 different benchmarking tool on the
system under test used by VSPERF that is running an OVS-DPDK vswitch.
The 3 tools were: VSPERF, NFVbench, External tool by Redhat
The goal was to:
* See how different tools differ in their results when measuring the
suggest that you put together some slides to present to the weekly technical
discussion meeting; get feedback; then make a proposal to the TSC. Thanks.
David
On Thu, Aug 16, 2018 at 10:25 AM Alec via
Lists.Opnfv.Org<http://Lists.Opnfv.Org>
mailto:cisco@lists.opnfv.org>> wrote:
T
Thanks for pointing that out Mark, I have been asking for this for almost 2
years and we’re finally able to do that.
TBH I’m not sure what the TSC can say other than approve it since that is in
direct alignment with a former TSC decision to promote the use of OPNFV project
outside of OPNFV
Thanks for starting this discussion Trevor.
There are several purposes of test projects in OPNFV (with some test projects
serving multiple purposes)
* Gate an OPNFV releases (meaning they are used to validate OPNFV releases
of installers and features), example: Functest
* Test an
please do not divert pod19, it is planned to be used for testing projects. We
can certainly share it with Auto when not in use.
The main requirement for pod19 is that we can rely on having a stable bare
metal installer/openstack on it so we can regress on test projects – i.e. pod19
should not
56 matches
Mail list logo
