<html dir="ltr">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1">
<style type="text/css" id="owaParaStyle"></style><style type="text/css"></style><style type="text/css"></style>
</head>
<body fpstyle="1" ocsi="0">
<div style="direction: ltr;font-family: Tahoma;color: #000000;font-size: 10pt;">
<div>Agenda items are numbered, and topics, as discussed, are described beneath in list format.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>1) Discuss future of Octavia in light of Neutron-incubator project proposal.</div>
<div> a) There are many problems with Neutron-Incubator as currently described</div>
<div> b) The political happenings in Neutron leave our LBaaS patches under review unlikely to land in Juno</div>
<div> c) The Incubator proposal doesn't affect Octavia development direction, with inclination to distance ourselves from Neutron proper</div>
<div> d) With the Neutron Incubator proposal in current scope, efforts of people pushing forward Neutron LBaaS patches should be re-focused into Octavia.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>2) Discuss operator networking requirements (carry-over from last week)</div>
<div> a) Both HP and Rackspace seem to agree that as long as Octavia uses Neutron-like floating IPs, their networks should be able to work with proposed Octavia topologies</div>
<div> b) (Blue Box) also wanted to meet with Rackspace's networking team during the operator summit a few weeks from now to thoroughly discuss network concerns</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>3) Discuss v0.5 component design proposal [<a href="https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113458/" target="_blank">https://review.openstack.org/#/c/113458/</a>]</div>
<div> a) Notification for back-end node health (aka being offline) isn't required for 0.5, but is a must have later</div>
<div> b) Notification of LB health (HA Proxy, etc) is definitely a requirement in 0.5</div>
<div> c) Still looking for more feedback on the proposal itself</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>4) Discuss timeline on moving these meetings to IRC.</div>
<div> a) Most members in favor of keeping the webex meetings for the time being</div>
<div> b) One major point was other openstack/stackforge use video meetings as their "primary" source as well</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div> Sorry for the lack of density. I forgot to have the meeting recorded, but I hope I included some major points. Feel free to respond in line with any more information anyone can recall concerning the meeting information. Thanks!</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Trevor</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>