Ok, after one week, looks like the most popular time slot is B,
that is 14:00 UTC / Wednesdays.

I’m proposing first meeting for Wednesday / Apr 22th 14:00 UTC / 
#openstack-meeting-2.

Tomorrow (Apr 15th / 14:00 UTC) It’s a been early since the announcement, so 
I will join #openstack-meeting-2 while working on the agenda for next week, 
feel free to join
if you want/have time.




> On 9/4/2015, at 22:43, Howard, Victor <victor_how...@cable.comcast.com> wrote:
> 
> I prefer Timeslot B, thanks for coordinating.  I would be interested in 
> helping out in any way with the design session let me know!
> 
> From: "Sandhya Dasu (sadasu)" <sad...@cisco.com <mailto:sad...@cisco.com>>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 12:19 PM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [QoS] QoS weekly meeting
> 
> Hi Miguel,
>     Both time slots work for me. Thanks for rekindling this effort.
> 
> Thanks,
> Sandhya
> 
> From: Miguel Ángel Ajo <majop...@redhat.com <mailto:majop...@redhat.com>>
> Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> Date: Tuesday, April 7, 2015 1:45 AM
> To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" 
> <openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org <mailto:openstack-dev@lists.openstack.org>>
> Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] [neutron] [QoS] QoS weekly meeting
> 
> On Tuesday, 7 de April de 2015 at 3:14, Kyle Mestery wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 6:04 PM, Salvatore Orlando <sorla...@nicira.com 
>> <mailto:sorla...@nicira.com>> wrote:
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On 7 April 2015 at 00:33, Armando M. <arma...@gmail.com 
>>> <mailto:arma...@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> On 6 April 2015 at 08:56, Miguel Ángel Ajo <majop...@redhat.com 
>>>> <mailto:majop...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>>>>> I’d like to co-organized a QoS weekly meeting with Sean M. Collins,
>>>>> 
>>>>>     In the last few years, the interest for QoS support has increased, 
>>>>> Sean has been leading
>>>>> this effort [1] and we believe we should get into a consensus about how 
>>>>> to model an extension
>>>>> to let vendor plugins implement QoS capabilities on network ports and 
>>>>> tenant networks, and
>>>>> how to extend agents, and the reference implementation & others [2]
>>> 
>>> As you surely know, so far every attempt to achieve a consensus has failed 
>>> in a pretty miserable way.
>>> This mostly because "QoS" can be interpreted in a lot of different ways, 
>>> both from the conceptual and practical perspective.
> Yes, I’m fully aware of it, it was also a new feature, so it was out of scope 
> for Kilo. 
>>> It is important in my opinion to clearly define the goals first. For 
>>> instance a simple extensions for bandwidth limiting could be a reasonable 
>>> target for the Liberty release.
> I quite agree here, but IMHO, as you said it’s a quite open field (limiting, 
> guaranteeing, 
> marking, traffic shaping..), we should do our best in trying to define a 
> model allowing us 
> to build that up in the future without huge changes, on the API side I guess 
> micro versioning
> is going to help in the API evolution.
> 
> Also, at some point, we should/could need to involve the nova folks, for 
> example, to define
> port flavors that can be associated to nova
> instance flavors, providing them 
> 1) different types of network port speeds/guarantees/priorities, 
> 2) being able to schedule instance/ports in coordination to be able to met 
> specified guarantees.
> 
> yes, complexity can sky rocket fast, 
>>> Moving things such as ECN into "future works" is the right thing to do in 
>>> my opinion. Attempting to define a flexible framework that can deal with 
>>> advanced QoS policies specification is a laudable effort, but I am a bit 
>>> skeptical about its feasibility.
>>> 
>> ++, I think focusing on perhaps bandwidth limiting may make a lot of sense 
> Yes, I believe we should look into the future , but at the same pick our very 
> first feature (or a
> very simple set of them) for L, stick to it, and try to make a design that 
> can be extended.
>>  
>>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>     As per discussion we’ve had during the last few months [3], I believe 
>>>>> we should start simple, but
>>>>> prepare a model allowing future extendibility, to allow for example 
>>>>> specific traffic rules (per port,
>>>>> per IP, etc..), congestion notification support [4], …
>>> 
>>> "Simple" in my mind is even more extreme then what you're proposing here... 
>>> I'd start with bare APIs for specifying bandwidth limiting, and then phase 
>>> them out once this "framework" is in place.
>>> Also note that this kind of design bears some overlap with the flavor 
>>> framework which is probably going to be another goal for Liberty.
>>> 
>> Indeed, and the flavor framework is something I'm hoping we can land by 
>> Liberty-1 (yes, I just said Liberty-1).
> Yes it’s something I looked at, I must admit I wasn’t able to see it work 
> together (It doesn’t 
> mean it doesn’t play well, but most probably I was silly enough not to see it 
> :) ),
> 
> I didn’t want to distract attention from the Kilo cycle focus making 
> questions, so it should
> be a good thing to talk about during the first meetings.  
> 
> Who are the flavor fathers/mothers? ;)
>  
>>  
>>> Morever, consider using "common" tools such as the specs repo to share and 
>>> discuss design documents.
>>>  
>> Also a good idea.
> Yes, that was the plan now, we didn’t use it before to avoid creating 
> unnecessary noise during this cycle.
> 
>>  
>>>>> 
>>>>>     It’s the first time I’m trying to organize an openstack/neutron 
>>>>> meeting, so, I don’t know what’s the
>>>>> best way to do it, or find the best timeslot. I guess interested people 
>>>>> may have a saying, so I’ve 
>>>>> looped anybody I know is interested in the CC of this mail. 
>>>> 
>>>> I think that's a good idea. Incidentally I was speaking with Sean 
>>>> regarding Summit session [1], and we were hoping we could get some folks 
>>>> together either prior or during the summit, to try and get some momentum 
>>>> going behind this initiative, once again.
> Very interesting [1]!, nice to see we start to have a bunch of people with an 
> interest in QoS.  
>>> 
>>> I think is a good idea as well.  I was thinking that perhaps it might be a 
>>> good idea to grab a design summit session as well (surely not a fishbowl 
>>> one as they're totally unfit for this purpose).
>>> However, it might be good to achieve some sort of consensus before the 
>>> summit, as as we know fairly well now the summit is probably the worst 
>>> place where consensus can be achieved!
>>> 
>> And finally, agreed here as well.
>>  
> Yes, a bit of preliminary discussion, and a “deadline” and final discussion 
> on summit. Sounds good.
>>>> 
>>>> We'd need to fill in page [2], and find an empty slot on [3]
> 
> [2] done, and Meetings/QoS created 
> 
> About [3]
> Do any of those sound reasonable: 
> a) Thursdays / 19:00 CEST
> b)  Wednesdays / 16:00 CEST 
> 
>> One thing I had proposed to Miguel was to use the meeting as an initial 
>> starting point, and then once momentum is achieved to naturally end it and 
>> move any further meeting needs to the regular Neutron meeting.
> 
> Correct, that seems a natural thing to do once the meetings can be done under 
> a certain
> amount of time we could move them to a weekly meeting timeslot for 
> details/progress tracking.
>>  
>>>> Thanks for starting this thread!
> Thank you all :) 
>>>> 
>>>> [1] 
>>>> https://openstacksummitmay2015vancouver.sched.org/event/27eeef71d5f57997ac09b4c7783c72fe#.VSMIzJT-NhM
>>>>  
>>>> <https://openstacksummitmay2015vancouver.sched.org/event/27eeef71d5f57997ac09b4c7783c72fe#.VSMIzJT-NhM>
>>>>   
>>>> [2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronSubTeams 
>>>> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/NeutronSubTeams>
>>>> [3] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings 
>>>> <https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Meetings>
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Miguel Ángel Ajo
>>>>> 
>>>>> [1] https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-qos-api 
>>>>> <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/quantum-qos-api>
>>>>> [2] 
>>>>> https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2XATqL7DxHFRHNjU3k1UFNYRjQ/view?usp=sharing
>>>>>  
>>>>> <https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2XATqL7DxHFRHNjU3k1UFNYRjQ/view?usp=sharing>
>>>>> [3] 
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xUx0Oq-txz_qVA2eYE1kIAJlwxGCSqXHgQEEGylwlZE/edit#heading=h.2pdgqfl3a231
>>>>>  
>>>>> <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1xUx0Oq-txz_qVA2eYE1kIAJlwxGCSqXHgQEEGylwlZE/edit#heading=h.2pdgqfl3a231>
>>>>> [4] 
>>>>> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/explicit-congestion-notification
>>>>>  
>>>>> <https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/explicit-congestion-notification>
>>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>>> Unsubscribe: 
>>>>> openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe 
>>>>> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe>
>>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev 
>>>>> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe 
>>>> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe>
>>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev 
>>>> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> __________________________________________________________________________
>>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe 
>>> <http://openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org/?subject:unsubscribe>
>>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev 
>>> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
>>> 
>> 
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe 
>> <mailto:openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev 
>> <http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Miguel Angel Ajo



__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev

Reply via email to