<div dir="ltr">Hi Trevor,<div><br></div><div>thanks for sharing this minutes!</div><div>I would like to cooperate a bit to this project's developments, possibly without ending up being just deadweight.</div><div><br></div>
<div>To this aim I have some comments inline.</div><div><br></div><div>Salvatore<br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On 18 August 2014 22:25, Trevor Vardeman <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:trevor.vardeman@rackspace.com" target="_blank">trevor.vardeman@rackspace.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div>
<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></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div> Have you listed your concerns somewhere? AFAICT the incubator definition is in progress and feedback is very valuable at this stage.</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:#000000;font-size:10pt">
<div> b) The political happenings in Neutron leave our LBaaS patches under review unlikely to land in Juno</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I am a bit disappointed if you feel like you have been victims of political discussions.</div>
<div>The truth in my opinion is much simpler, and is that most of the neutron core team has prioritised features for achieving parity with nova-network or increasing neutron scalability and reliability.</div><div>In my opinion the incubator proposal will improve this situation by making the lbaas team a lot less dependent on the neutron core team.</div>
<div>Considering the level of attention the load balancing team has received I would not be surprised if neutron cores are topping your most-hated list!</div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:#000000;font-size:10pt">
<div> c) The Incubator proposal doesn't affect Octavia development direction, with inclination to distance ourselves from Neutron proper</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>It depends on what do you mean by "proper" here. If you're into a neutron incubator, your ultimate path ideally should be integration with neutron.</div>
<div>Instead if you're planning on total independence, then it might the case of considering the typical paths new projects follow. I'm not an expert here, but I think that usually starts from stackforge.</div><div>
</div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:#000000;font-size:10pt">
<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></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Which probably sounds a reasonable thing to do (and a lot less effort for you as well) </div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:#000000;font-size:10pt">
<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></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I'll try and find some time to review it. </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:#000000;font-size:10pt">
<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></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>This is one of the reasons for which I don't attend load balancing meetings.</div>
<div>I find IRC much simpler and effective - and is also fairer to people for whom English is not their first language.</div><div>Also, perusing IRC logs is much easier than watch/listen to webex recordings.</div><div>Moreover, you'd get minutes for free - and you can control the density you want them to have during the meeting!</div>
<div><br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div style="direction:ltr;font-family:Tahoma;color:#000000;font-size:10pt"><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>
<span><font color="#888888">
<div><br>
</div>
<div>-Trevor</div>
</font></span></div>
</div>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
OpenStack-dev mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org" target="_blank">OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org</a><br>
<a href="http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev" target="_blank">http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev</a><br>
<br></blockquote></div><br></div></div></div>