[openstack-dev] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?
LBaaS team, As we discussed in the Weekly LBaaS meeting this morning we should make sure we get the design sessions scheduled that we are interested in. We currently agreed on the following: * Neutron LBaaS. we want to schedule 2 sessions. I am assuming that we want to go over status and also the whole incubator thingy and how we will best move forward. * Octavia: We want to schedule 2 sessions. --- During one of the sessions I would like to discuss the pros and cons of putting Octavia into the Neutron LBaaS incubator project right away. If it is going to be the reference implementation for LBaaS v 2 then I believe Octavia belong in Neutron LBaaS v2 incubator. * Flavors which should be coordinated with markmcclain and enikanorov. --- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102723/ Is this too many sessions given the constraints? I am assuming that we can also meet at the pods like we did at the last summit. thoughts? Regards Susanne Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org Aug 27 (1 day ago) to OpenStack Hi everyone, I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply some of those ideas for Paris, within the constraints we have (already booked space and time). Here is something we could do: Day 1. Cross-project sessions / incubated projects / other projects I think that worked well last time. 3 parallel rooms where we can address top cross-project questions, discuss the results of the various experiments we conducted during juno. Don't hesitate to schedule 2 slots for discussions, so that we have time to come to the bottom of those issues. Incubated projects (and maybe other projects, if space allows) occupy the remaining space on day 1, and could occupy pods on the other days. Day 2 and Day 3. Scheduled sessions for various programs That's our traditional scheduled space. We'll have a 33% less slots available. So, rather than trying to cover all the scope, the idea would be to focus those sessions on specific issues which really require face-to-face discussion (which can't be solved on the ML or using spec discussion) *or* require a lot of user feedback. That way, appearing in the general schedule is very helpful. This will require us to be a lot stricter on what we accept there and what we don't -- we won't have space for courtesy sessions anymore, and traditional/unnecessary sessions (like my traditional release schedule one) should just move to the mailing-list. Day 4. Contributors meetups On the last day, we could try to split the space so that we can conduct parallel midcycle-meetup-like contributors gatherings, with no time boundaries and an open agenda. Large projects could get a full day, smaller projects would get half a day (but could continue the discussion in a local bar). Ideally that meetup would end with some alignment on release goals, but the idea is to make the best of that time together to solve the issues you have. Friday would finish with the design summit feedback session, for those who are still around. I think this proposal makes the best use of our setup: discuss clear cross-project issues, address key specific topics which need face-to-face time and broader attendance, then try to replicate the success of midcycle meetup-like open unscheduled time to discuss whatever is hot at this point. There are still details to work out (is it possible split the space, should we use the usual design summit CFP website to organize the scheduled time...), but I would first like to have your feedback on this format. Also if you have alternative proposals that would make a better use of our 4 days, let me know. Cheers, ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?
Let's use a different email thread to discuss if Octavia should be part of the Neutron incubator project right away or not. I would like to keep the two discussions separate. Susanne On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 10:49 AM, Susanne Balle sleipnir...@gmail.com wrote: LBaaS team, As we discussed in the Weekly LBaaS meeting this morning we should make sure we get the design sessions scheduled that we are interested in. We currently agreed on the following: * Neutron LBaaS. we want to schedule 2 sessions. I am assuming that we want to go over status and also the whole incubator thingy and how we will best move forward. * Octavia: We want to schedule 2 sessions. --- During one of the sessions I would like to discuss the pros and cons of putting Octavia into the Neutron LBaaS incubator project right away. If it is going to be the reference implementation for LBaaS v 2 then I believe Octavia belong in Neutron LBaaS v2 incubator. * Flavors which should be coordinated with markmcclain and enikanorov. --- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102723/ Is this too many sessions given the constraints? I am assuming that we can also meet at the pods like we did at the last summit. thoughts? Regards Susanne Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org Aug 27 (1 day ago) to OpenStack Hi everyone, I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply some of those ideas for Paris, within the constraints we have (already booked space and time). Here is something we could do: Day 1. Cross-project sessions / incubated projects / other projects I think that worked well last time. 3 parallel rooms where we can address top cross-project questions, discuss the results of the various experiments we conducted during juno. Don't hesitate to schedule 2 slots for discussions, so that we have time to come to the bottom of those issues. Incubated projects (and maybe other projects, if space allows) occupy the remaining space on day 1, and could occupy pods on the other days. Day 2 and Day 3. Scheduled sessions for various programs That's our traditional scheduled space. We'll have a 33% less slots available. So, rather than trying to cover all the scope, the idea would be to focus those sessions on specific issues which really require face-to-face discussion (which can't be solved on the ML or using spec discussion) *or* require a lot of user feedback. That way, appearing in the general schedule is very helpful. This will require us to be a lot stricter on what we accept there and what we don't -- we won't have space for courtesy sessions anymore, and traditional/unnecessary sessions (like my traditional release schedule one) should just move to the mailing-list. Day 4. Contributors meetups On the last day, we could try to split the space so that we can conduct parallel midcycle-meetup-like contributors gatherings, with no time boundaries and an open agenda. Large projects could get a full day, smaller projects would get half a day (but could continue the discussion in a local bar). Ideally that meetup would end with some alignment on release goals, but the idea is to make the best of that time together to solve the issues you have. Friday would finish with the design summit feedback session, for those who are still around. I think this proposal makes the best use of our setup: discuss clear cross-project issues, address key specific topics which need face-to-face time and broader attendance, then try to replicate the success of midcycle meetup-like open unscheduled time to discuss whatever is hot at this point. There are still details to work out (is it possible split the space, should we use the usual design summit CFP website to organize the scheduled time...), but I would first like to have your feedback on this format. Also if you have alternative proposals that would make a better use of our 4 days, let me know. Cheers, ___ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
Re: [openstack-dev] Design sessions for Neutron LBaaS. What do we want/need?
I'm not sure exactly how many design sessions will be available but it seems like 2 for Neutron LBaaS and 2 for Octavia will be hard to accomplish. Neutron LBaaS had 2 in Atlanta didn't it? One broad one ofr Neutron LBaaS and one more specific to TLS and L7. I'm totally on board for having 2 for each though. I just think since Octavia is still just an idea at this point, it'd be hard getting space and time for a design session for it, much less 2. Doesn't stop us from doing the pods or ad hoc sessions though. As for topics: Neutron LBaaS 1) I've been wanting to try and solve the problem (at least I think it is a problem) of drivers being responsible for managing the status of entities. In my opinion, Neutron LBaaS should be as consistent as possible not matter what drivers are being used. This is caused by supporting both Asynchronous and Synchronous drivers. I've got some ideas on how to solve this. 2) Different status types on entities. Operating status and Provisioning status. Octavia I hope we have gotten far enough along this to have some really detailed design discussions. Hopefully we are within reach of a 0.5 milestone. Other than that, too early to tell what exact kind of design talks we will need. Thanks, Brandon On Thu, 2014-08-28 at 10:49 -0400, Susanne Balle wrote: LBaaS team, As we discussed in the Weekly LBaaS meeting this morning we should make sure we get the design sessions scheduled that we are interested in. We currently agreed on the following: * Neutron LBaaS. we want to schedule 2 sessions. I am assuming that we want to go over status and also the whole incubator thingy and how we will best move forward. * Octavia: We want to schedule 2 sessions. --- During one of the sessions I would like to discuss the pros and cons of putting Octavia into the Neutron LBaaS incubator project right away. If it is going to be the reference implementation for LBaaS v 2 then I believe Octavia belong in Neutron LBaaS v2 incubator. * Flavors which should be coordinated with markmcclain and enikanorov. --- https://review.openstack.org/#/c/102723/ Is this too many sessions given the constraints? I am assuming that we can also meet at the pods like we did at the last summit. thoughts? Regards Susanne Thierry Carrez thie...@openstack.org Aug 27 (1 day ago) to OpenStack Hi everyone, I've been thinking about what changes we can bring to the Design Summit format to make it more productive. I've heard the feedback from the mid-cycle meetups and would like to apply some of those ideas for Paris, within the constraints we have (already booked space and time). Here is something we could do: Day 1. Cross-project sessions / incubated projects / other projects I think that worked well last time. 3 parallel rooms where we can address top cross-project questions, discuss the results of the various experiments we conducted during juno. Don't hesitate to schedule 2 slots for discussions, so that we have time to come to the bottom of those issues. Incubated projects (and maybe other projects, if space allows) occupy the remaining space on day 1, and could occupy pods on the other days. Day 2 and Day 3. Scheduled sessions for various programs That's our traditional scheduled space. We'll have a 33% less slots available. So, rather than trying to cover all the scope, the idea would be to focus those sessions on specific issues which really require face-to-face discussion (which can't be solved on the ML or using spec discussion) *or* require a lot of user feedback. That way, appearing in the general schedule is very helpful. This will require us to be a lot stricter on what we accept there and what we don't -- we won't have space for courtesy sessions anymore, and traditional/unnecessary sessions (like my traditional release schedule one) should just move to the mailing-list. Day 4. Contributors meetups On the last day, we could try to split the space so that we can conduct parallel midcycle-meetup-like contributors gatherings, with no time boundaries and an open agenda. Large projects could get a full day, smaller projects would get half a day (but could continue the discussion in a local bar). Ideally that meetup would end with some alignment on release goals, but the idea is to make the best of that time together to solve the issues you have. Friday would finish with the design summit feedback session, for those who are still around. I think this proposal makes the best use of our setup: discuss clear cross-project issues, address key specific topics which need face-to-face time and broader attendance, then try to replicate the success of midcycle meetup-like open unscheduled time to discuss whatever is hot at this point. There are still details to work out (is it possible split the space, should we use the usual design summit CFP website to organize
