Open Stack

It sounds good to me.

Thanks Sandhya for organizing it.

‹Robert

On 5/9/14, 2:51 PM, "Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)" <sadasu at cisco.com> wrote:

>Thanks for all your replies.
>
>Thanks for the great inputs on how to frame the discussion in the etherpad
>so it becomes easier for people to get on board. We will add author indent
>to track the source of the changes. Will work on cleaning that up.
>
>Regarding the session itself, as you probably know, there was an attempt
>in Icehouse to get the sr-iov work going. We found that the time allotted
>for the session was not sufficient to get to all the use cases and discuss
>alternate views. 
>
>This time around we want to be better prepared and so would like to keep
>only a couple of open times for the actual session. Hence, the request for
>the early meeting.
>
>How does Monday 1pm sound?
>
>Thanks,
>Sandhya
>
>On 5/9/14 11:44 AM, "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com> wrote:
>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Robert Li (baoli)" <baoli at cisco.com>
>>> Subject: Re: Informal meeting before SR-IOV summit presentation
>>> 
>>> This is the one that Irena created:
>>> https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/pci_passthrough_cross_project
>>
>>Thanks, I missed this as it wasn't linked from the design summit Wiki
>>page.
>>
>>-Steve
>>
>>> On 5/8/14, 4:33 PM, "Steve Gordon" <sgordon at redhat.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> >----- Original Message -----
>>> >> > It would be nice to have an informal discussion / unconference
>>>session
>>> >> > before the actual summit session on SR-IOV. During the previous
>>>IRC
>>> >> > meeting, we were really close to identifying the different use
>>>cases.
>>> >> > There was a dangling discussion on introducing another level of
>>> >> > indirection between the vnic_types exposed via the nova boot API
>>>and
>>> >>how
>>> >> > it would be represented internally. It would be ideal to have
>>>these 2
>>> >> > discussions converged before the summit session.
>>> >> 
>>> >> What would be the purpose of doing that before the session? IMHO, a
>>> >> large part of being able to solve this problem is getting everyone
>>>up to
>>> >> speed on what this means, what the caveats are, and what we're
>>>trying to
>>> >> solve. If we do some of that outside the scope of the larger
>>>audience, I
>>> >> expect we'll get less interaction (or end up covering it again) in
>>>the
>>> >> session.
>>> >> 
>>> >> That said, if there's something I'm missing that needs to be
>>>resolved
>>> >> ahead of time, then that's fine, but I expect the best plan is to
>>>just
>>> >> keep the discussion to the session. Afterwards, additional things
>>>can be
>>> >> discussed in a one-off manner, but getting everyone on the same page
>>>is
>>> >> largely the point of having a session in the first place IMHO.
>>> >
>>> >Right, in spite of my previous response...looking at the etherpad
>>>there
>>> >is nothing there to frame the discussion at the moment:
>>> >
>>> >https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/juno-nova-sriov-support
>>> >
>>> >I think populating this should be a priority rather than organizing
>>> >another session/meeting?
>>> >
>>> >Steve
>>> 
>>> 
>>
>>-- 
>>Steve Gordon, RHCE
>>Product Manager, Red Hat Enterprise Linux OpenStack Platform
>>Red Hat Canada (Toronto, Ontario)
>