[opnfv-tech-discuss] [qtip] Agenda for Weekly Meeting 2017-03-27

https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/qtip-meetings-2017-03-27 *# QTIP project weekly meeting on 2017-03-27* - time: UTC0730 - irc://#opnfv-qtip@freenode - index: https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/qtip-meetings *## Action followup* - SerenaFeng to help investigate the logging issue JIRA: Q

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] Dovetail weekly meeting minutes

Thanks Dave. I know a lot of people are busy on getting Danube release out. Appreciate your still finding time to move Dovetail forward. Here is the agenda list for this Friday's call. It is still at the same time 6:00 AM PDT and for 1.5 hours long this week. - Test case requirement wiki review

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] REMINDER: OPNFV Summit CFP Closes March 27

Hi Bryan, Thanks for flagging your concerns. The "extra" CFP page now directs to the latest CFP info/submission link. There's a lot of history around the move to a new CFP tool for OPNFV, but essentially, this new tool: - Gives the track chairs/program committee more flexibility for viewin

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] OVS DPDK problems (question from #opnfv-apex)

Hi Viktor, Sorry, I just realized I never responded to you. I got VXLAN + OVS 2.6.1 working in Apex for nosdn and ODL scenarios. It is as you suspected that you do not need any patch port to br-phy. Both scenarios work just fine with floating IP NAT, and tenant networks. Thanks, Tim Rozet R

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Congress on TryStack?

Brian, I've copied our guys that work on TryStack: Will and Kambiz. They will be able to give you an update on when it will be updated to a newer version of OpenStack. As far as installing Congress, I would imaging they wouldn't have a problem deploying it. Although RDO doesn't have congress supp

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Code Scan Tools Discussion

Hi all, I'm looking for the takeaways from the discussion https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Licensing+and+External+repo%27s+discussion, specifically on the open questions. Should we have a specific followup item for this on the weekly technical call? I'm also interested in other use cases for

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Weekly Technical Discussion #84

BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:REQUEST PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Pacific Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T02 TZOFFSETFROM:-0700 TZOFFSETTO:-0800 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:16010101T02000

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Summary of Weekly Technical Community Discussion Thursday March 23

rch 30th, we will focus on MANO WG's Build and Test. Thanks Bin [1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/tc+minutes+20170323 [2] http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2017/opnfv-meeting.2017-03-23-13.00.html ___ o

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] Dovetail weekly meeting minutes

Hi, I also updated the test requirements to integrate suggestions, and moved things around to make it clear what we have agreed and what are suggestions. I also added our feedback to suggestions from last week. Thanks, Dave. On 03/20/2017 07:10 PM, Wenjing Chu wrote: > > > I took an action it

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status

Thanks, Brady. Sorry I missed your previous mail. MS9 and 10 are offsets of the release, so if the release date is changed, then MS9 and 10 will change, accordingly. David On Thu, Mar 23, 2017 at 2:11 AM, Brady Allen Johnson < brady.allen.john...@ericsson.com> wrote: > > David, > > I asked in

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] REMINDER: OPNFV Summit CFP Closes March 27

Brandon, Some feedback on the CFP tool: - We should use the LF CFP tool (not sure why we are using a different one this time). It’s much more efficient to use a consistent tool with the history of proposals we have made to earlier summits. - The tool requires you to enter all

[opnfv-tech-discuss] SDF (Scenario Descriptor File) Documentation

Uli I thought of another question. What about documentation? Currently the install projects also house the documentation for the scenario files. Will that also become the responsibility of the scenario owners? Will it be distributed independently from the installation project;s documentation? Tha

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Test Working Group Weekly Meeting

BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:REQUEST PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Pacific Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T02 TZOFFSETFROM:-0700 TZOFFSETTO:-0800 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:16010101T02000

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Cancelled: Test Working Group Weekly Meeting

BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID://Yahoo//Calendar//EN VERSION:2.0 METHOD:CANCEL BEGIN:VEVENT SUMMARY:[opnfv-tech-discuss] Test Working Group Weekly Meeting DESCRIPTION:? IRC channel: #opnfv-testperf @ Freenode\n\nPhone numbers: https://global.go

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Cancelled: Test Working Group Weekly Meeting

BEGIN:VCALENDAR PRODID://Yahoo//Calendar//EN VERSION:2.0 METHOD:CANCEL BEGIN:VEVENT SUMMARY:[opnfv-tech-discuss] Test Working Group Weekly Meeting DESCRIPTION:? IRC channel: #opnfv-testperf @ Freenode\n\nPhone numbers: https://global.go

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Canceled: Test Working Group Weekly Meeting

BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:CANCEL PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Pacific Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T02 TZOFFSETFROM:-0700 TZOFFSETTO:-0800 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:16010101T02

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Canceled: Test Working Group Weekly Meeting

BEGIN:VCALENDAR METHOD:CANCEL PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010 VERSION:2.0 BEGIN:VTIMEZONE TZID:Pacific Standard Time BEGIN:STANDARD DTSTART:16010101T02 TZOFFSETFROM:-0700 TZOFFSETTO:-0800 RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11 END:STANDARD BEGIN:DAYLIGHT DTSTART:16010101T02

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] 答复: VNF to demonstrate VNF high availability across VIM

Hi Valentin, The networking topology is very clear from the picture. If we want to make vIMS clearwater as close as to the production deployment in OpenStack multisite environment, what's the better networking proposal, for example, how many interfaces for one VM, i.e, how many network planes,

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [multisite] weekly meeting of Mar.23

Hello, Gerald, Thank you for the mail. Will discuss this in next weekly meeting whether we can help. Before rewriting the multisite part, can the old one still be put in place? The update can be done gradually. Someone already complains the missing of this guide. Best Regards Chaoyi Huang (jo

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] K8 scenario testing on Joid

Hi, Agreed. “Releasing” something that has not been –properly– tested is not a good practice. By “properly” I mean following the same procedures we use to verify all the other scenarios. We need to emphasize that manual testing or “I run my own tests and it works” is not sufficient. Testing re

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [multisite]weekly meeting minutes of Mar.23

Hello, team, Weekly meeting minutes is as follows: * Agenda * CMCC multi-site requirements * Functest issue. * E-Release discussion * OPNFV Beijing summit preparation * Open discussion * Minutes * * CMCC multi-site requirements(joehuang

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][danube] Danube release status

David, I asked in an email previous to this the following questions: Considering the Danube 1.0 release will be delayed by at least 1 week, what is the status of Milestones 9 and 10? Milestone 9 is due today, March 22 and requires us to have all the JIRAs closed and/or assigned to subsequent

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [VSPERF] Query regarding VSPERF trafficgen module

Hello Kritshekhar, it seems to me, that you're using an outdated version of vsperf. This issue has been fixed on 10th of November 2016. Could you please update your repository (git pull) and switch to the recent version of master or stable/danube branch and test it again? In case that your iss