Open Stack

On Nov 13, 2013, at 10:36 AM, Stephen Wong <s3wong at midokura.com>
 wrote:

> Hi Kyle,
> 
>    So no meeting this Thursday?
> 
I am inclined to skip this week's meeting due to the fact I haven't heard many
replies yet. I think a good starting point for people would be to review the
BP [1] and Design Document [2] and provide feedback where appropriate.
We should start to formalize what the APIs will look like at next week's meeting,
and the Design Document has a first pass at this.

Thanks,
Kyle

[1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/group-based-policy-abstraction
[2] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZbOFxAoibZbJmDWx1oOrOsDcov6Cuom5aaBIrupCD9E/edit?usp=sharing

> Thanks,
> - Stephen
> 
> On Wed, Nov 13, 2013 at 7:11 AM, Kyle Mestery (kmestery)
> <kmestery at cisco.com> wrote:
>> On Nov 13, 2013, at 8:58 AM, "Stein, Manuel (Manuel)" <manuel.stein at alcatel-lucent.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Kyle,
>>> 
>>> I'm afraid your meeting vanished from the Meetings page [2] when user amotiki reworked neutron meetings ^.^
>>> Is the meeting for Thu 1600 UTC still on?
>>> 
>> Ack, thanks for the heads up here! I have re-added the meeting. I only heard
>> back from one other person other than yourself, so at this point I'm inclined
>> to wait until next week to hold our first meeting unless I hear back from others.
>> 
>>> A few heads-up questions (couldn't attend the HK design summit Friday meeting):
>>> 
>>> 1) In the summit session Etherpad [3], ML2 implementation mentions insertion of arbitrary metadata to hint to underlying implementation. Is that (a) the plug-ing reporting its policy-bound realization? (b) the user further specifying what should be used? (c) both? Or (d) none of that but just some arbitrary message of the day?
>>> 
>> I believe that would be (a).
>> 
>>> 2) Would policies _always_ map to the old Neutron entities?
>>> E.g. when I have policies in place, can I query related network/port, subnet/address, router elements on the API or are there no equivalents created? Would the logical topology created under the policies be exposed otherwise? for e.g. monitoring/wysiwyg/troubleshoot purposes.
>>> 
>> No, this is up to the plugin/MechanismDriver implementation.
>> 
>>> 3) Do the chain identifier in your policy rule actions match to "Service Chain UUID" in Service Insertion, Chaining and API [4]
>>> 
>> That's one way to look at this, yes.
>> 
>>> 4) Are you going to describe L2 services the way group policies work? I mean, why would I need a LoadBalancer or Firewall instance before I can insert it between two groups when all that load balancing/firewalling requires is nothing but a policy for group communication itself? - regardless the service instance used to carry out the service.
>>> 
>> These are things I'd like to discuss at the IRC meeting each week. The goal
>> would be to try and come up with some actionable items we can drive towards
>> in both Icehouse-1 and Icehouse-2. Given how close the closing of Icehouse-1
>> is, we need to focus on this very fast if we want to have a measurable impact in
>> Icehouse-1.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> Kyle
>> 
>> 
>>> Best, Manuel
>>> 
>>> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings#Neutron_Group_Policy_Sub-Team_Meeting
>>> [3] https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/Group_Based_Policy_Abstraction_for_Neutron
>>> [4] https://docs.google.com/document/d/1fmCWpCxAN4g5txmCJVmBDt02GYew2kvyRsh0Wl3YF2U/edit#
>>> 
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Kyle Mestery (kmestery) [mailto:kmestery at cisco.com]
>>>> Sent: Montag, 11. November 2013 19:41
>>>> To: OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Subject: [openstack-dev] [neutron] Group-based Policy
>>>> Sub-team Meetings
>>>> 
>>>> Hi folks! Hope everyone had a safe trip back from Hong Kong.
>>>> Friday afternoon in the Neutron sessions we discussed the
>>>> "Group-based Policy Abstraction" BP [1]. It was decided we
>>>> would try to have a weekly IRC meeting to drive out further
>>>> requirements with the hope of coming up with a list of
>>>> actionable tasks to begin working on by December.
>>>> I've tentatively set the meeting [2] for Thursdays at 1600
>>>> UTC on the #openstack-meeting-alt IRC channel. If there are
>>>> serious conflicts with this day and time, please speak up
>>>> soon. Otherwise, we'll host our first meeting on Thursday this week.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks!
>>>> Kyle
>>>> 
>>>> [1]
>>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/group-based-pol
>>> icy-abstraction
>>>> [2]
>>>> https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings#Neutron_Group_Policy_
>>>> Sub-Team_Meeting
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>> 
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> OpenStack-dev mailing list
>> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev