Hi,
Our CI system is disabled due to a running bug and wrong log link. I have
manually verified the system with sandbox and two Neutron testing patches.
However, with CI disabled, I am not able to see its review comment on any
patch.
Is there a way that I can see what the comment will look like w
Thanks Joshua. I will give it a try.
Gary
On Wed, Sep 3, 2014 at 1:21 AM, Joshua Hesketh wrote:
> On 9/3/14 12:11 PM, Gary Duan wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> Our CI system is disabled due to a running bug and wrong log link. I
> have manually verified the system with sandbox and t
Hi, Isaku and Edgar,
As part of the effort to implement L3 router service type framework, I have
reworked L3 plugin to introduce a 2-step process, precommit and postcommit,
similar to ML2. If you plan to work on L3 code, we can collaborate.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/l3-router
See inline,
On Thu, Nov 21, 2013 at 2:19 AM, Isaku Yamahata wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 10:16:46PM -0800,
> Gary Duan wrote:
>
> > Hi, Isaku and Edgar,
>
> Hi.
>
>
> > As part of the effort to implement L3 router service type framework, I
> have
>
work with agent scheduler.
Thanks,
Gary
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 11:56 AM, Gary Duan wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I've registered a BP for L3 router service integration with service
> framework.
>
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/l3-router-service-type
>
> In gene
I will be joining IRC too.
Thanks,
Gary
On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 10:33 AM, Edgar Magana wrote:
> Also joining!
> Looking forward to hearing your ideas folks!
>
> Edgar
>
> On 12/10/13 10:16 AM, "Nachi Ueno" wrote:
>
> >+1 ! I'll join.
> >I'm also working on investigating how to use openstack g
Regarding using 'provider' in L3 router, for the BP 'L3 service integration
with service framework', I've submitted some code for review, which is
using 'provider' in a same notion as other advanced services. I am not sure
if it can be reused to describe 'centralized' and 'distributed' behavior.
h
Hi,
I'm not sure if this question has been asked, but I wonder what is the
purpose to have the following function in ovs, linuxbridge and ml2 plugins.
disable_security_group_extension_if_noop_driver()
With this logic, if I set neutron to use NOOP firewall, creating a Nova
instance will fail, bec
Hi,
The patch I submitted for L3 service framework integration fails on jenkins
test, py26 and py27. The console only gives following error message,
2014-02-12 00:45:01.710 | FAIL: process-returncode
2014-02-12 00:45:01.711 | tags: worker-1
and at the end,
2014-02-12 00:45:01.916 | ERROR: Invoc
Hi, Clark,
Thanks for your reply.
I thought the same thing at first, but the page by default only shows the
failed cases. The other 1284 cases were OK.
Gary
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 6:07 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 5:52 PM, Gary Duan wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
Clark,
You are right. The test must have been bailed out. The question is what I
should look for. Even a successful case has a lot of Traceback, ERROR log
in subunit_log.txt.
Thanks,
Gary
On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:19 PM, Clark Boylan wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2014 at 7:05 PM, Gary Duan wr
Oleg,
Thanks for the suggestion. I will give it a try.
Gary
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 12:12 AM, Oleg Bondarev wrote:
> Hi Gary,
>
> please see my comments on the review.
>
> Thanks,
> Oleg
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 5:52 AM, Gary Duan wrote:
>
>> Hi
I'm interested in the discussion. UTC-8.
Gary
On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 10:22 AM, Mandeep Dhami wrote:
>
> I would be interested as well (UTC-8).
>
> Regards,
> Mandeep
>
>
>
> On Wed, Feb 12, 2014 at 8:18 AM, Eugene Nikanorov > wrote:
>
>> I'd be interested too.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Eugene.
>>
>>
>
Hi, Eugene,
What are the parameters that will be part of flavor definition? As I am
thinking of it now, the parameter could be performance and capacity
related, for example, throughput, max. session number and so on; or
capability related, for example, HA, L7 switching.
Compared to # of CPU and m
Hi, Paul,
If the backend driver maintains its own database, I think the pre_commit
and post_commit approach has an advantage. The typical code flow is able to
keep the driver and plugin database consistent.
Regarding question 1, where validation methods should be added, I am
leaning towards A, bu
Hi, Marios,
STF stands for 'service type framework'. It's the current way to dispatch
calls to different drivers based on 'provider' attribute of the LBaaS
service instance. Firewall and VPN implementations were not upstreamed as
we want to move to Flavor Framework.
I think the flavor framework d
Xurong,
Firewall is colocated with router. You need to create a router, then the
firewall state will be updated.
Gary
On Thu, Jun 5, 2014 at 2:48 AM, Xurong Yang wrote:
> Hi, Stackers
> My use case:
>
> under project_id A:
> 1.create firewall rule default(share=false).
> 2.create firewall pol
I guess you need bind the port you just create. Also, the port need to be
plugged into the VM, right? I don't see that in the code. Maybe you are
doing it outside of OpenStack.
Thanks,
Gary
On Fri, Mar 28, 2014 at 3:15 PM, Paul Michali (pcm) wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have a VM that I start up outsi
Hi, Sumit,
I'd like to be there. How long the sprint will be?
Thanks,
Gary
On Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 12:33 PM, Sumit Naiksatam
wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> The Group Policy team is planning to meet on July 24th to focus on
> making progress with the pending items for Juno, and also to
> facilitate the
I am sorry that I missed this morning's meeting.
Reading through the log, one thing that was briefly touch upon is to
support Service Type Framework for L3 router service. As all other services
(vpn, fw, lb, metering) will be integrated to the service framework in
I-release, L3 router service, as
Hi,
I've registered a BP for L3 router service integration with service
framework.
https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/l3-router-service-type
In general, the implementation will align with how LBaaS is integrated with
the framework. One consideration we heard from several team members
eutron/+spec/lbaas-lvs-driver
> https://blueprints.launchpad.net/neutron/+spec/lbaas-lvs-extra-features
>
> Maybe the first one is same as yours.
> We are happy if we just concentrate making a provider driver.
>
> Thanks.
> Itsuro Oda
>
> On Thu, 24 Oct 2013 11:56:53 -0700
ith this blueprint?
>
> Regards,
> Salvatore
>
>
> On 25 October 2013 01:03, Gary Duan wrote:
>
>> Hi, Oda-san,
>>
>> Thanks for your response.
>>
>> L3 agent function should remain the same, as one driver implementation of
>> L3
Hi, Geoff,
This is because I haven't added spec to the BP yet.
Gary
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 4:51 PM, Geoff Arnold wrote:
> I’m getting a *“**Not allowed here”* error when I click through to the
> BP. (Yes, I’m subscribed.)
>
> On Oct 24, 2013, at 11:56 AM, Gary Duan wrote:
I just wrote a short spec on the wiki page and link it to the blueprint. I
should have done this when we registered the BP.
Please let me know if you have any question.
Thanks,
Gary
On Thu, Oct 24, 2013 at 5:35 PM, Gary Duan wrote:
> Hi, Geoff,
>
> This is because I haven't add
25 matches
Mail list logo
