[opnfv-tech-discuss] Cancelled: Weekly Technical Discussion #98 @ Thursday, 17 August 2017

[HU, BIN]

AUG


17









"Weekly Technical Discussion #98" has been cancelled









When

   



Thursday, 17 August 2017
01:00 PM to 02:00 PM 
 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time - Dublin / Edinburgh / Lisbon / London 









 Where



+1 (312) 757-3126 / Access Code: 819-733-085




   

Message



https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/819733085
+1 (312) 757-3126 / Access Code: 819-733-085

Hello community:

This is our 98th weekly technical discussion at 6am PDT / 9am EDT Thursday August 17th, 2017, which is 13:00 UTC.

We will discuss “Container Versioning / Naming Schema for x86 and ARM”.

You can find your local time here http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=OPNFV-Technical-Discussion=20170817T13=1.

Please refer to https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/Weekly+Technical+Discussion for details of dialing logistics and tentative agenda.

Please let me know if you want to add anything to agenda for discussion in the community.

For your convenience:
-   GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/819733085
-   You can also dial in using your phone:
o   United States (Long distance): +1 (312) 757-3126 / Access Code: 819-733-085
o   More phone numbers: https://global.gotomeeting.com/819733085/numbersdisplay.html

Thanks
Bin







 

   





 This event invitation was sent from   Yahoo Calendar






invite.ics
Description: application/ics
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Cancelled: Weekly Technical Discussion #98 @ Thursday, 17 August 2017

[HU, BIN]

AUG


17









"Weekly Technical Discussion #98" has been cancelled









When

   



Thursday, 17 August 2017
01:00 PM to 02:00 PM 
 (GMT) Greenwich Mean Time - Dublin / Edinburgh / Lisbon / London 









 Where



+1 (312) 757-3126 / Access Code: 819-733-085




   

Message



https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/819733085
+1 (312) 757-3126 / Access Code: 819-733-085

Hello community:

This is our 98th weekly technical discussion at 6am PDT / 9am EDT Thursday August 17th, 2017, which is 13:00 UTC.

We will discuss “Container Versioning / Naming Schema for x86 and ARM”.

You can find your local time here http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/fixedtime.html?msg=OPNFV-Technical-Discussion=20170817T13=1.

Please refer to https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/Weekly+Technical+Discussion for details of dialing logistics and tentative agenda.

Please let me know if you want to add anything to agenda for discussion in the community.

For your convenience:
-   GoTo Meeting: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/819733085
-   You can also dial in using your phone:
o   United States (Long distance): +1 (312) 757-3126 / Access Code: 819-733-085
o   More phone numbers: https://global.gotomeeting.com/819733085/numbersdisplay.html

Thanks
Bin







 

   





 This event invitation was sent from   Yahoo Calendar






invite.ics
Description: application/ics
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

[Cooper, Trevor]

I added Intel to the table as offering a Pharos POD for the beta trial.

“Only bugs submitted by the beta testers will be reviewed and accepted during 
Beta” … why would we only fix bugs reported by beta testers? ALL reported bugs 
should be investigated and prioritized.

/Trevor

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of SULLIVAN, 
BRYAN L (BRYAN L)
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 10:14 AM
To: Wenjing Chu ; Dave Urschatz 
; Lincoln Lavoie 
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

I added the table for beta participants.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

From: Wenjing Chu [mailto:wenjing@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:44 PM
To: Dave Urschatz >; 
Lincoln Lavoie >; SULLIVAN, 
BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

Here is the Beta test page: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/dovetail/Dovetail+Beta
I think I summarized most of the comments I received so far. Please let me know 
if I missed anything. Additional comments welcome and we’ll discuss in this 
week’s call.
Again, thanks Bryan and Lincoln for your suggestions.

Dave,
On your first two points, please refer to the above wiki page.
For the third point, yes, current testing assumes Pharos pods for the system 
under test.

Wenjing

From: Wenjing Chu
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 4:47 PM
To: 'Dave Urschatz' >; 
Lincoln Lavoie >; SULLIVAN, 
BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

Just an ack that I’ll be populating a wiki page today incorporating discussions 
at last Friday’s call and some of comments in this thread.
Thanks for all the inputs.

Wenjing

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Dave Urschatz
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 10:39 AM
To: Lincoln Lavoie >; 
SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

I missed the call today also.

  *   What timeframe are we planning this for?
  *   How long would the trial be?
  *   Bare Metal Pharos PODs only?  (I think this is yes but want to confirm.)

Best Regards,
Dave

Dave Urschatz
Senior Technical Lead
[cid:image001.jpg@01D316C1.833E8C50]
555 Legget Drive| Tower A | Suite 600| Ottawa ON | K2K 2X3 | 613-963-1201


From: 
>
 on behalf of Lincon Lavoie >
Date: Friday, August 11, 2017 at 11:16 AM
To: "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L)" 
>
Cc: 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

And 3rd party labs. :)

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:14 AM, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
> wrote:
And before I forget, we should also allow end-users to participate in the beta 
program of course!

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

-Original Message-
From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L)
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 8:04 AM
To: 'Lincoln Lavoie' >; 
Christopher Price 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: 

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Topics for Weekly Technical Discussion

[HU, BIN]

Alec,

Thank you for your input, and letting know you won’t be able to make the 
meeting tomorrow.

Mark,

Do you still want to discuss in the meeting tomorrow? (my only concern is the 
attendance, which  may not warrant an effective live discussion.

Or do you think the discussion on mailing list should be good enough?

If we all think the discussion on mailing list is good enough, we don’t need to 
discuss it in the meeting tomorrow.

Thanks
Bin

From: Alec Hothan (ahothan) [mailto:ahot...@cisco.com]
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 5:47 PM
To: HU, BIN ; Beierl, Mark 
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Topics for Weekly Technical Discussion


Mark,

Thanks for updating me on the ARM situation. My only comment is that it could 
have been easier to perhaps have an x86 server/jump host servicing an ARM pod 
given that testing tools do not exactly have to run on the same arch than the 
pod under test, but I guess decision has been made - now we need every test 
tool to also support ARM (that in addition to more work to support 2 arch, more 
test to do…).

On my side, I’ll need to check with the TRex team if they support ARM. If it 
does not work, every data plane test tool that uses TRex will be impacted (at 
least vsperf + nfvbench).
It really seems to me that we could have saved all the extra hassle of ARM 
support with an x86 jump host (VMs is another story but we could have limited 
the overhead to VM artifacts only).

Bin: unfortunately, I won’t be able to make it at the technical discussion 
meeting as it will be in the middle of my Thursday commute.

Thanks

  Alec



From: "HU, BIN" >
Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 5:00 PM
To: "Beierl, Mark" >, "Alec 
Hothan (ahothan)" >
Cc: 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Topics for Weekly Technical Discussion

Good discussion and suggestion, thank you Alec and Mark.

We can discuss this on Thursday. I put it on the agenda “Container Versioning / 
Naming Schema for x86 and ARM”.

Talk to you all on Thursday
Bin

From: Beierl, Mark [mailto:mark.bei...@dell.com]
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 10:23 AM
To: Alec Hothan (ahothan) >
Cc: HU, BIN >; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Topics for Weekly Technical Discussion

Hello, Alec.

Fair questions, but in the ARM pods there are not necessarily x86 servers to 
act as the host for the container.  It is also my desire to support ARM for the 
various pods we have, and not make it difficult for them to run.  We already 
support ARM containers for functest, yardstick, qtip and dovetail, just with a 
different naming scheme than other projects in docker hub.

If you look at the way multiarch alpine structures their tags, yes, it is 
arch-version, so x86-euphrates.1.0 would be the correct way of labelling it.  I 
realize we are getting close to Euphrates release date, so this might be 
postponed to F, but I would like to have a community discussion about this to 
see if it makes sense, or if we want to continue with creating repos to match 
the architecture.

Regards,
Mark

Mark Beierl
SW System Sr Principal Engineer
Dell EMC | Office of the CTO
mobile +1 613 314 8106
mark.bei...@dell.com

On Aug 15, 2017, at 12:03, Alec Hothan (ahothan) 
> wrote:


We need to look at the impact on versioning since the docker container tag 
reflects the release (e.g. euphrates-5.0.0), since this proposal prepends an 
arch field (x86-euphrates-5.0.0 ?).
How many OPNFV containers will have to support more arch than just x86?
I was under the impression that most test containers could manage to run on x86 
only (since we can pick the server where these test containers will run), but I 
am missing the arm context and why (some) test containers need to support ARM… 
Is that a mandate for all OPNFV test containers?

Thanks

  Alec




From: 
>
 on behalf of "Beierl, Mark" >
Date: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 at 8:18 AM
To: "HU, BIN" >
Cc: 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Topics for Weekly Technical Discussion

Hello,

Is this the right place to discuss changing the docker image names from 
containing the architecture to 

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [Auto] Weekly meeting day and time doodle

[Tina Tsou]

Dear all,

The Auto project was approved at TSC meeting this Tuesday.

I would like to doodle poll for the weekly meeting day and time here.

Please say your preference here.
https://doodle.com/poll/tnx9n5thuep5dtem


Thank you,
Tina Tsou
Enterprise Architect
Arm
tina.t...@arm.com
+1 (408)931-3833

IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

[SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L)]

I added the table for beta participants.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

From: Wenjing Chu [mailto:wenjing@huawei.com]
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 10:44 PM
To: Dave Urschatz ; Lincoln Lavoie 
; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 

Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

Here is the Beta test page: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/dovetail/Dovetail+Beta
I think I summarized most of the comments I received so far. Please let me know 
if I missed anything. Additional comments welcome and we’ll discuss in this 
week’s call.
Again, thanks Bryan and Lincoln for your suggestions.

Dave,
On your first two points, please refer to the above wiki page.
For the third point, yes, current testing assumes Pharos pods for the system 
under test.

Wenjing

From: Wenjing Chu
Sent: Monday, August 14, 2017 4:47 PM
To: 'Dave Urschatz' >; 
Lincoln Lavoie >; SULLIVAN, 
BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

Just an ack that I’ll be populating a wiki page today incorporating discussions 
at last Friday’s call and some of comments in this thread.
Thanks for all the inputs.

Wenjing

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Dave Urschatz
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 10:39 AM
To: Lincoln Lavoie >; 
SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

I missed the call today also.

  *   What timeframe are we planning this for?
  *   How long would the trial be?
  *   Bare Metal Pharos PODs only?  (I think this is yes but want to confirm.)

Best Regards,
Dave

Dave Urschatz
Senior Technical Lead
[cid:image001.jpg@01D31678.61A55C70]
555 Legget Drive| Tower A | Suite 600| Ottawa ON | K2K 2X3 | 613-963-1201


From: 
>
 on behalf of Lincon Lavoie >
Date: Friday, August 11, 2017 at 11:16 AM
To: "SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L)" 
>
Cc: 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

And 3rd party labs. :)

On Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 11:14 AM, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) 
> wrote:
And before I forget, we should also allow end-users to participate in the beta 
program of course!

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

-Original Message-
From: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L)
Sent: Friday, August 11, 2017 8:04 AM
To: 'Lincoln Lavoie' >; 
Christopher Price 
>
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11

Wenjing is going to add a page where we can document the plans and results for 
the beta program. Here’s what I suggested:
• We freeze the CVP suite and Dovetail tools prior to start of the beta
• We offer all OPNFV vendor members who produce commercial platforms that are 
applicable the chance to run the tests against their product and produce 
results provided back to OPNFV (in the form that CVP result reviewers will be 
expected to assess)
• We get C to provide a team of result reviewers for the beta
• On the wiki we build a table of those vendors who plan to do this, the 
results of the tests as assessed by the team, and any feedback of the vendor 
(sub-pages as needed depending upon the amount of feedback)
• We do not release until both Dovetail and C are satisfied 

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [VSPERF] [Bottlenecks] VSPERF and StorPerf

[Beierl, Mark]

Hello, Trevor and VSPERF team.

I'd like to get a quick overview of VSPERF and how the metrics are captured.  
Sorry if these are dumb questions :)

First, is there a test that simply pushes packets over the network to see what 
the maximum throughput is, like a saturation test?

Does VSPERF capture periodic metrics, or just a summary report at the end?  If 
I change something in the network while the test is running (such as adding 
more traffic outside of VSPERF), is there a way to see the impact of that while 
the test is running?

The reason behind the questions are for the following scenario:

1) I start up VSPERF on the NICs that represent the tenant network in an 
OpenStack installation.
2) After 10 minutes, start up StorPerf read/write test that should stress the 
OpenStack storage network
3) See if there is a change to the VSPERF throughput.

Alternatively, as StorPerf does have minute by minute metrics, we can do this:

1) Start StorPerf read/write
2) After 10 minutes, start VSPERF to stress the tenant network NICs
3) Look at the change in StorPerf throughput at the time that VSPERF starts.

Thoughts?

Regards,
Mark

Mark Beierl
SW System Sr Principal Engineer
Dell EMC | Office of the CTO
mobile +1 613 314 8106
mark.bei...@dell.com

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [mano-wg] Meeting #41 Summary and plan for Meeting#42 next week

[Prakash Ramchandran]

Hi all,
Please find
Meeting#41 mano-wg Summary (this week Wednesday)
http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-mano/2017/opnfv-mano.2017-08-16-13.57.html

Meeting#42 planed next week Wednesday

Agenda link : https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6827111

Thanks
Prakash
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [StorPerf] 2017-08-16 Meeting Notes

[Beierl, Mark]

Hello, everyone.

Thanks to those who attended today's meeting.  Minutes can be found here [1].

We had a good discussion about approaches for Bottlenecks to run VSPERF and 
StorPerf at the same time.  This resulted in a great idea from Ace about 
enhancing StorPerf to support multiple stacks with multiple jobs running at the 
same time.

Graphite container decomposition is proceeding well, and it was confirmed that 
we will clone the Dockerfile so we can base it on multiarch/alpine to be able 
to support ARM and x86 in the same docker file, as we have started doing for 
Swagger and nginx.

[1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/StorPerf+2017-08-16+Meeting+Notes

Regards,
Mark

Mark Beierl
SW System Sr Principal Engineer
Dell EMC | Office of the CTO
mobile +1 613 314 8106
mark.bei...@dell.com

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] SFC weekly meeting MoMs week 33

[Manuel Buil]

Hi,

Here are the MoMs of today's meeting:

http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-sfc/2017/opnfv-
sfc.2017-08-16-14.00.html

Regards,
Manuel___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Doctor] Integration with VNFM

[Paul Vaduva]

Hi Ifat,

We have a minor modification to the script zabbix_vitrage.py. It’s just at line 
83 we split only for the first ‚=’  as sometimes the expression value may 
contain „=” and it confuses the split function.

Best Regards,
Paul



From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com]
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 4:47 PM
To: Ciprian Barbu 
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; Paul Vaduva ; 
Cristina Pauna 
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Doctor] Integration with VNFM

Hi,

Please see my comments inline.

Best regards,
Ifat


From: Ciprian Barbu >
Date: Monday, 31 July 2017 at 16:09
To: "Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava)" 
>
Cc: 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>,
 Paul Vaduva >, Cristina 
Pauna >
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Doctor] Integration with VNFM

Hi,

Thank you for the details. We managed to replicate the scenario where 
nova-compute is killed, Zabbix detects the process down and Vitrage will 
eventually receive the „alarm” from Zabbix.

There are a couple of things though:

1.   Vitrage takes a long time to process the alarm from Zabbix, from what 
I can tell the Zabbix driver in Vitrage works by polling the Zabbix hosts at 
regular intervals, but we couldn’t exactly figure how to set that polling time

[Ifat] The Zabbix driver can work in one of two modes: poll Zabbix 
periodically, or receive push notifications. Of course, push is the preferred 
option. If you configure Zabbix to send notification to Vitrage for every 
trigger change[1], Vitrage will react immediately.



2.   The nova service is forced down, this can be seen in 
/var/log/nova/nova-api.log and in Vitrage Topology, but we couldn’t figure out 
yet how to verify an alarm is triggered on Nova side. I’m not too familiar with 
the Ceilometer and Aodh architecture, should there be an Aodh alarm generated, 
which can be later consumed by a VFM, like Tacker?
[Ifat] You can check nova service status also by executing ‘nova service-list’.
Regarding the Aodh alarm: Nova should send a notification to the OpenStack 
message bus. I’m not sure how this is tracked. To see the alarm in Aodh, you 
should do the following:

· Configure Ceilometer (or Panko in newer versions?) to create an event 
based on this notification

· Create an Aodh event-alarm that is triggered once this event is 
received.
I’m not so familiar with the details. I had it working in an older OpenStack 
version, but I’m not sure how to configure it in Pike.


[1] https://docs.openstack.org/vitrage/latest/contributor/zabbix_vitrage.html - 
see “Zabbix web UI configuration”


Any help is greatly appreciated,
/Ciprian

From: Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava) [mailto:ifat.a...@nokia.com]
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2017 2:43 PM
To: Ciprian Barbu >
Cc: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Doctor] Integration with VNFM

Hi,

Two corrections:


· In vitrage.conf, it should be ‘notifiers’ and not ‘Notifiers’:

[DEFAULT]

notifiers = nova


· In order to make the Nova notifier call Nova force-down API you 
should add a mark_down action in one of Vitrage templates. You can see an 
example in the template sample: 
https://github.com/openstack/vitrage/blob/master/etc/vitrage/templates.sample/host_down_scenarios.yaml

For additional explanations: 
https://docs.openstack.org/vitrage/latest/contributor/vitrage-template-format.html

Best Regards,
Ifat.

From: 
>
 on behalf of "Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava)" 
>
Date: Sunday, 30 July 2017 at 10:16
To: Ciprian Barbu >
Cc: 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: Suspected SPAM - Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Doctor] Integration with 
VNFM

Hi Ciprian,

You understood correctly. The call to Nova API is done by the Vitrage Nova 
notifier, if it is enabled. To enable it add you /etc/vitrage/vitrage.conf:

[DEFAULT]
Notifiers = nova

Best Regards,
Ifat.


From: Ciprian Barbu >
Date: Friday, 28 July 2017 at 13:34
To: "Afek, Ifat (Nokia - IL/Kfar Sava)" 
>
Cc: 

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [vsperf] Agenda for VSPERF weekly meeting - 16 Aug 2017

[Cooper, Trevor]

Previous Minutes

-  ww32 
http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-vswitchperf/2017/opnfv-vswitchperf.2017-08-09-14.45.html

-  ww31 
http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-vswitchperf/2017/opnfv-vswitchperf.2017-08-02-14.55.html

-  ww30 
http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-vswitchperf/2017/opnfv-vswitchperf.2017-07-26-15.03.html

Agenda

1.   Opens and proposed topics

2.   Release milestones

3.   CI POD Tuning

4.   TREX integration

5.   Test API

6.   IMIX / traffic dictionary

7.   PCAP analysis tools

8.   Latency histograms

9.   Noisy neighbor VMs
Time: Wednesday UTC 15h00, Ireland (UTC/GMT +1) 16h00, PDT 8h00 (UTC/GMT -7) 
... Currently observing daylight saving

IRC: freenode https://freenode.net/ channel: #opnfv-vswitchperf 
http://webchat.freenode.net/?channels=opnfv-vswitchperf

Audio: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/391235029
You can also dial in using your phone.  United States: +1 (571) 317-3116  
Access Code: 391-235-029
Phone numbers from other countries are here ... 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings

/Trevor
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

[SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L)]

I usually mean “ports” (distinct ethernet connections) when I say “NIC” so by I 
expect production-grade servers to typically come with 4 onboard ports, often 
configured as 2 10GB and 2 1GB.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Alec Hothan 
(ahothan)
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 6:57 AM
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) ; Bryan Sullivan 
; Fatih Degirmenci ; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware


Few comments:
•  Would it be possible to distinguish between NICs and ports? When I 
see “2 NICs” or “4 NICs” I suppose these are 10G ports?
•  I’d recommend using DPDK compliant NICs everywhere, best is to use 
NICs that are known to work well with DPDK (e.g. Intel X710 NIC has 4x10G ports)
•  What is the total ingress (or outgress) tenant bandwidth required 
for compute nodes? 10G or 20G? This will determine how many ports are required 
for tenant traffic
•  Is there a need to also support SRIOV? This will require extra ports
•  If possible, I’d recommend using 2 NICs per server – 1 on each NUMA 
socket for a total of 8x10G ports
•  How many top of rack switches are there per vPOD? 1 or 2 configured 
in HA?
•  Please also make sure the jump host for each vPOD has at least 2 x 
10G ports connected on the vPOD top of rack switch(es) and dedicated for tenant 
traffic – this is *very* important in order to run software traffic generator 
(e,g TRex) on the jumphost! Without this it will be very difficult to get any 
data plane performance using tools like NFVbench

Thanks

  Alec



From: 
>
 on behalf of "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" 
>
Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 6:44 AM
To: Bryan Sullivan >, Fatih 
Degirmenci 
>, 
"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 
>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

True. A 2port 10GE NIC is ~500 $US. I’ve already updated the wiki ☺

Thanks again, Frank

From: Bryan Sullivan [mailto:bls...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 16. August 2017 15:36
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) >; 
Fatih Degirmenci 
>; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Re budget I don't think 2 or 4 NICs will have much impact given the type of 
servers we are talking about here (datacenter, production-grade servers). Most 
I have seen come with 4 NICs onboard and often dedicated IPMI.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) >
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 3:36 AM
To: Bryan Sullivan; Fatih Degirmenci; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Bryan,

Thanks for raising an important point. IMHO 2 NICs are the minimal setup. This 
allows for performance focused setups (i.e. traffic enters on one NIC and 
leaves on another NIC), and it also allows for setups where you use the NICs 
for different purposes (e.g. dedicate a NIC to the kernel, and another one to 
VPP).

We can of course handle all three “types” of networks (admin, public, 
tenant/private) using VLAN/VLAN-ranges – but for some deployments a physical 
decoupling might ease things.

Per your suggestion: In order to allow for better flexibility, let’s plan with 
3 NICs for now. We can always scale back in case there are budget constraints.

Lights-out-management is something that is often vendor specific – and it may, 
or may not require a dedicated port (IPMI 2.0 even runs over VLANs) – but as 
part of the requirements list, we should spell out that lights-out-management 
is something we absolutely require. I’ll update the wiki accordingly.

Thanks, Frank



From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Sullivan
Sent: Dienstag, 15. August 2017 22:58
To: Fatih Degirmenci 
>; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Fatih,

Do "2 x 10 Gbps NICs" suffice for Pharos POD servers? I thought 

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

[Alec Hothan (ahothan)]

Few comments:
•  Would it be possible to distinguish between NICs and ports? When I 
see “2 NICs” or “4 NICs” I suppose these are 10G ports?
•  I’d recommend using DPDK compliant NICs everywhere, best is to use 
NICs that are known to work well with DPDK (e.g. Intel X710 NIC has 4x10G ports)
•  What is the total ingress (or outgress) tenant bandwidth required 
for compute nodes? 10G or 20G? This will determine how many ports are required 
for tenant traffic
•  Is there a need to also support SRIOV? This will require extra ports
•  If possible, I’d recommend using 2 NICs per server – 1 on each NUMA 
socket for a total of 8x10G ports
•  How many top of rack switches are there per vPOD? 1 or 2 configured 
in HA?
•  Please also make sure the jump host for each vPOD has at least 2 x 
10G ports connected on the vPOD top of rack switch(es) and dedicated for tenant 
traffic – this is *very* important in order to run software traffic generator 
(e,g TRex) on the jumphost! Without this it will be very difficult to get any 
data plane performance using tools like NFVbench

Thanks

  Alec



From:  on behalf of "Frank 
Brockners (fbrockne)" 
Date: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 at 6:44 AM
To: Bryan Sullivan , Fatih Degirmenci 
, "opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 

Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

True. A 2port 10GE NIC is ~500 $US. I’ve already updated the wiki ☺

Thanks again, Frank

From: Bryan Sullivan [mailto:bls...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 16. August 2017 15:36
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) ; Fatih Degirmenci 
; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Re budget I don't think 2 or 4 NICs will have much impact given the type of 
servers we are talking about here (datacenter, production-grade servers). Most 
I have seen come with 4 NICs onboard and often dedicated IPMI.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) >
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 3:36 AM
To: Bryan Sullivan; Fatih Degirmenci; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Bryan,

Thanks for raising an important point. IMHO 2 NICs are the minimal setup. This 
allows for performance focused setups (i.e. traffic enters on one NIC and 
leaves on another NIC), and it also allows for setups where you use the NICs 
for different purposes (e.g. dedicate a NIC to the kernel, and another one to 
VPP).

We can of course handle all three “types” of networks (admin, public, 
tenant/private) using VLAN/VLAN-ranges – but for some deployments a physical 
decoupling might ease things.

Per your suggestion: In order to allow for better flexibility, let’s plan with 
3 NICs for now. We can always scale back in case there are budget constraints.

Lights-out-management is something that is often vendor specific – and it may, 
or may not require a dedicated port (IPMI 2.0 even runs over VLANs) – but as 
part of the requirements list, we should spell out that lights-out-management 
is something we absolutely require. I’ll update the wiki accordingly.

Thanks, Frank



From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Sullivan
Sent: Dienstag, 15. August 2017 22:58
To: Fatih Degirmenci 
>; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Fatih,

Do "2 x 10 Gbps NICs" suffice for Pharos POD servers? I thought the NIC 
requirements were more substantial. IMO we should require at least IPMI + 3 
NICs (Admin/PXE, Private, Public).

The lab we are building as described at 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/joid/MAAS+as+Lab+Admin+Server will be designed 
that way. Our vision for how we will use this lab (initially, for internal 
development/CI activities only) is very similar to your vision for LaaS dynamic 
assignment of server resources. We plan to use MAAS, Ansible, and Jenkins to 
manage the admin and distribution of development/CI/etc activities across these 
servers.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 
>
 on behalf of Fatih Degirmenci 
>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 1:02 PM
To: 

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

True. A 2port 10GE NIC is ~500 $US. I've already updated the wiki :)

Thanks again, Frank

From: Bryan Sullivan [mailto:bls...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Mittwoch, 16. August 2017 15:36
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) ; Fatih Degirmenci 
; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Re budget I don't think 2 or 4 NICs will have much impact given the type of 
servers we are talking about here (datacenter, production-grade servers). Most 
I have seen come with 4 NICs onboard and often dedicated IPMI.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) >
Sent: Wednesday, August 16, 2017 3:36 AM
To: Bryan Sullivan; Fatih Degirmenci; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: RE: [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Bryan,

Thanks for raising an important point. IMHO 2 NICs are the minimal setup. This 
allows for performance focused setups (i.e. traffic enters on one NIC and 
leaves on another NIC), and it also allows for setups where you use the NICs 
for different purposes (e.g. dedicate a NIC to the kernel, and another one to 
VPP).

We can of course handle all three "types" of networks (admin, public, 
tenant/private) using VLAN/VLAN-ranges - but for some deployments a physical 
decoupling might ease things.

Per your suggestion: In order to allow for better flexibility, let's plan with 
3 NICs for now. We can always scale back in case there are budget constraints.

Lights-out-management is something that is often vendor specific - and it may, 
or may not require a dedicated port (IPMI 2.0 even runs over VLANs) - but as 
part of the requirements list, we should spell out that lights-out-management 
is something we absolutely require. I'll update the wiki accordingly.

Thanks, Frank



From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Sullivan
Sent: Dienstag, 15. August 2017 22:58
To: Fatih Degirmenci 
>; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Fatih,

Do "2 x 10 Gbps NICs" suffice for Pharos POD servers? I thought the NIC 
requirements were more substantial. IMO we should require at least IPMI + 3 
NICs (Admin/PXE, Private, Public).

The lab we are building as described at 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/joid/MAAS+as+Lab+Admin+Server will be designed 
that way. Our vision for how we will use this lab (initially, for internal 
development/CI activities only) is very similar to your vision for LaaS dynamic 
assignment of server resources. We plan to use MAAS, Ansible, and Jenkins to 
manage the admin and distribution of development/CI/etc activities across these 
servers.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 
>
 on behalf of Fatih Degirmenci 
>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 1:02 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Hi,

Please see the proposal regarding the number of servers and hardware specs for 
LaaS from the links below.

*   Number of x86 and ARM servers: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Lab+as+a+Service#LabasaService-LaaS-NumberofServers
*   Definition of hardware for x86 and ARM: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Lab+as+a+Service#LabasaService-LaaSHardware

Please share your thoughts, comments and questions either by replying to this 
mail, directly on Wiki page, or by joining the Infra WG Meeting on August 21st 
where this topic will be discussed.

/Fatih

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [StorPerf] Weekly Meeting

[Beierl, Mark]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Eastern Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0400
TZOFFSETTO:-0500
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0500
TZOFFSETTO:-0400
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN="Beierl, Mark":MAILTO:mark.bei...@emc.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=opnfv-tech
 -disc...@lists.opnfv.org:MAILTO:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:When: Wednesday\, August 16\, 2017 10:00 AM-11:0
 0 AM. (UTC-05:00) Eastern Time (US & Canada)\nWhere: https://meet.emc.com/
 mark.beierl/69MEZFLU\n\n*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*\n\nHello\,\n\nPlease join us f
 or the weekly StorPerf team meeting starting in 1.5 hours.\n\nhttps://meet
 .emc.com/mark.beierl/69MEZFLU\n\nFind a local number:\nhttp://www.emcconfe
 rencing.com/globalaccess/\n\nConference ID: 58108948\n\nhttps://wiki.opnfv
 .org/display/meetings/Storperf\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:[StorPerf] Weekly Meeting
DTSTART;TZID=Eastern Standard Time:20170816T10
DTEND;TZID=Eastern Standard Time:20170816T11
UID:955400D7-B224-4AA9-A75F-E22E44B1909E
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20170816T123722Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://meet.emc.com/mark.beierl/69MEZFLU 
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:2115536732
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT5M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Bryan,

Thanks for raising an important point. IMHO 2 NICs are the minimal setup. This 
allows for performance focused setups (i.e. traffic enters on one NIC and 
leaves on another NIC), and it also allows for setups where you use the NICs 
for different purposes (e.g. dedicate a NIC to the kernel, and another one to 
VPP).

We can of course handle all three "types" of networks (admin, public, 
tenant/private) using VLAN/VLAN-ranges - but for some deployments a physical 
decoupling might ease things.

Per your suggestion: In order to allow for better flexibility, let's plan with 
3 NICs for now. We can always scale back in case there are budget constraints.

Lights-out-management is something that is often vendor specific - and it may, 
or may not require a dedicated port (IPMI 2.0 even runs over VLANs) - but as 
part of the requirements list, we should spell out that lights-out-management 
is something we absolutely require. I'll update the wiki accordingly.

Thanks, Frank



From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Bryan Sullivan
Sent: Dienstag, 15. August 2017 22:58
To: Fatih Degirmenci ; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Fatih,

Do "2 x 10 Gbps NICs" suffice for Pharos POD servers? I thought the NIC 
requirements were more substantial. IMO we should require at least IPMI + 3 
NICs (Admin/PXE, Private, Public).

The lab we are building as described at 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/joid/MAAS+as+Lab+Admin+Server will be designed 
that way. Our vision for how we will use this lab (initially, for internal 
development/CI activities only) is very similar to your vision for LaaS dynamic 
assignment of server resources. We plan to use MAAS, Ansible, and Jenkins to 
manage the admin and distribution of development/CI/etc activities across these 
servers.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 
>
 on behalf of Fatih Degirmenci 
>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2017 1:02 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [infra] Proposal for LaaS Hardware

Hi,

Please see the proposal regarding the number of servers and hardware specs for 
LaaS from the links below.

*   Number of x86 and ARM servers: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Lab+as+a+Service#LabasaService-LaaS-NumberofServers
*   Definition of hardware for x86 and ARM: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Lab+as+a+Service#LabasaService-LaaSHardware

Please share your thoughts, comments and questions either by replying to this 
mail, directly on Wiki page, or by joining the Infra WG Meeting on August 21st 
where this topic will be discussed.

/Fatih

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [Bottlenecks] Bottlenecks weekly meeting August 17th 2017

[Yuyang (Gabriel)]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:W. Australia Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T00
TZOFFSETFROM:+0800
TZOFFSETTO:+0800
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T00
TZOFFSETFROM:+0800
TZOFFSETTO:+0800
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=Yuyang (Gabriel):MAILTO:gabriel.yuy...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=opnfv-tech
 -discuss:MAILTO:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN="Brattain, 
 Ross B":MAILTO:ross.b.bratt...@intel.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN="'S, Deepak
 '":MAILTO:deepa...@intel.com
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=zh-CN:Hi\,\n\nThe Bottlenecks weekly meeting will be h
 eld at 1:00-2:00 UTC\, Thursday\, 9:00-10:00 Beijing Time\, Thursday\, PDT
  18:00-19:00 Wednesday.\nWelcome to join our discussion. Details of this m
 eeting are shown below.\n\nAgenda:\n   1.   Discussion with Yardstick abou
 t the scaling test\n   2.   Stress testing Discussion\n   3.   Bottlenecks
  E Rel. Discussion\n   4.   Action Item Review\n\nMeeting Resources\nPleas
 e join the meeting from your computer\, tablet or smartphone.\nhttps://glo
 bal.gotomeeting.com/join/391235029\n   You can also dial in using your pho
 ne.\n   United States (Toll-free): 1 877 309 2070\n   United States : +1 (
 312) 757-3119\n\n\nAccess Code: 882-532-573\n\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=zh-CN:[Bottlenecks] Bottlenecks weekly meeting August 17th
  2017
DTSTART;TZID=W. Australia Standard Time:20170817T09
DTEND;TZID=W. Australia Standard Time:20170817T10
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E008705DD1DFB816D301000
 01343D156F4C8A943A8F66AFE500CB7F0
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20170816T095540Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=zh-CN:https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/391235029
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:-1502574623
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss