Session Start: Wed Sep 16 22:01:33 2015 Session Ident: #dpacc 03[22:01] * Now talking in #dpacc [22:01] <@varunfsl> hi Lingli 01[22:01] Hi Varun [22:02] <@varunfsl> I am not able to join gotomeeting 01[22:02] Yes, I just notice the problem and advise to change to chatting here. [22:02] <@varunfsl> I get an error message saying that the meeting id is invalid 01[22:02] So did I. I will check with it later. [22:02] <@varunfsl> ok 01[22:02] Hope everybody sees my note in time. 03[22:03] * olli___ (d98c608c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.96.140) has joined #dpacc 01[22:03] Hi, who is this? 03[22:03] * Keith_ (c0373725@gateway/web/freenode/ip.192.55.55.37) has joined #dpacc 01[22:03] Hello Keith. [22:03] Hi Lingli 01[22:04] Let's wait a minute for everybody to come in. 03[22:04] * Rob__ (d98c608c@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.96.140) has joined #dpacc 03[22:04] * Magnus_ (86868b46@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.70) has joined #dpacc 03[22:05] * jfender (~jfender@69-165-175-11.dsl.teksavvy.com) has joined #dpacc [22:05] Good morning everybody [22:05] Morning Magnus! 03[22:05] * subha-fsl (6bdfd219@gateway/web/freenode/ip.107.223.210.25) has joined #dpacc 03[22:05] * picnet (~lab@dsl-hkibrasgw4-54f857-89.dhcp.inet.fi) has joined #dpacc [22:05] Hi Rob. How are you? [22:05] Mike Rooke(Nokia) Here. 01[22:06] Hello. Would everybody identify yourself and affiliation when you coming in. 01[22:06] Thank you Mike. [22:06] Good thanks Magnus hope you're well [22:06] Keith Wiles (Intel) [22:06] This is Rob Dimond from ARM 03[22:06] * jfender is now known as jfender-altera- [22:06] Ola Liljedahl from ARM [22:06] Subha (Freescale) [22:06] Magnus Karlsson from Intel 03[22:06] * Kin-Yip (62d2713f@gateway/web/freenode/ip.98.210.113.63) has joined #dpacc [22:07] Josh Fender (Altera) 03[22:07] * picnet is now known as MikeR__ 01[22:08] Ola, is Bob coming today? 01[22:08] shall we wait for him? [22:08] I suppose so [22:08] is there an associated voice call or are we chat only today? [22:08] I will check with Bob [22:08] Lets wait and see a few minutes [22:09] Today it is chat only :-( 01[22:09] I am sorry I am having problems with GTM, and don't have any backup for now. 03[22:10] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) has joined #dpacc 03[22:10] * mikeH (~mike@c-98-221-136-245.hsd1.nj.comcast.net) has joined #dpacc [22:10] And I liked GoToMeeting! Better than WebEx 03[22:11] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) has joined #dpacc 01[22:11] I think we should get started now. [22:11] On IRC, nobody can hear you scream [22:11] lol [22:11] ok...I am on 03[22:11] * Raj_ (7aa683ac@gateway/web/freenode/ip.122.166.131.172) has joined #dpacc [22:11] or is it haha now 01[22:11] Hi Bob? [22:11] yes...I am here 01[22:12] Great. Sorry for the inconvenience. 01[22:12] Let us get started. 01[22:12] Before the big discussion over gAPI requirements. I have a few slides to share and discuss about. 01[22:12] Would everybody go to the wiki page and open the slides that I put there 01[22:13] https://wiki.opnfv.org/_media/dpacc/1_b-release_planning_for_dpacc_documentation.ppt 03[22:13] * BillFischofer (181c46ef@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.28.70.239) has joined #dpacc 01[22:13] on page 2, you can see the schedule of B-release 01[22:14] which is proposed by Debra of release project, and approved by TSC 02[22:14] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 01[22:14] As discussed last week, we applied to join in B-release project, for dpacc documentation. 01[22:15] To keep up the pace, we need to do two things in the following weeks as highlighted on this page. 01[22:15] AR1: identify work items and dependencies in Jira 01[22:15] AR2: upstream requirements published 02[22:15] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 01[22:15] which are detailed in the following two pages 01[22:16] any questions on Page 2? [22:16] None for me 01[22:16] I will give you a minute to read the table before we move to next page. 03[22:16] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) has joined #dpacc 01[22:17] Ok, next page. 01[22:17] for this week, we identify work items and dependencies in Jira 02[22:18] * Raj_ (7aa683ac@gateway/web/freenode/ip.122.166.131.172) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 03[22:18] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) has joined #dpacc [22:18] hello? [22:18] ok...my echo is working again 02[22:18] * BillFischofer (181c46ef@gateway/web/freenode/ip.24.28.70.239) Quit (Quit: Page closed) 01[22:19] for the current proposed 4 work items, please feedback you comments on the current proopsed dependencies. 01[22:19] @Bob, I will copy the previous notes to you privately. [22:19] i am back it seems 02[22:20] * Lingli_Deng (~LIngli@117.114.129.14) Quit (Excess Flood) Session Close: Wed Sep 16 22:20:05 2015 Session Start: Wed Sep 16 22:20:05 2015 Session Ident: #dpacc 02[22:20] * Attempting to rejoin channel #dpacc 03[22:20] * Rejoined channel #dpacc [22:20] oh, i see the N/A 02[22:21] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) [22:21] high level requirements for various APIs as shown #1 slide 4. 01[22:21] sorry, I lost connection, back again. [22:21] It looks like #3 is the only one that applies to us, right? 03[22:21] * netoptimizer (~netoptimi@x1-6-a4-2b-8c-a1-06-12.cpe.webspeed.dk) has joined #dpacc [22:21] I am not familiar with the IPSec benchmarkig in QTip [22:21] slide 5 rather. 01[22:22] Bose, would you explain? [22:22] QTip is just a test framework, it could apply if we have something to test [22:22] right, but is there a specific IPSec test that is being recommended? [22:23] as for traffic profiles...last I saw it was just a shell and no tests actually exists 01[22:23] That is to be worked on via cooperation between us and them. [22:23] but I have not seen a message since Ray P commneted the above [22:23] I think they have a set of tests they use for IPSec, but you can always write a new one if I am not mistaken [22:23] The gap analysis would be against the requirements identified on the etherpad? [22:24] Rob..that is my assumption 01[22:24] it seems we are crossing the lines. 01[22:24] I am trying to soliciting feedback on Page 3. 01[22:24] Is it suggested that we remove dependencies from Functest and QTip? [22:25] #3 applies and #4 applies if we have something to test [22:25] I do not see it as a dependency at this time [22:25] @Lingli, what is functest? [22:25] Is there any document around that? [22:25] If we are providing something, it should be testable? 01[22:26] It is another OPNFV project, which would deliver a set of traffic profiles as output. [22:26] It is possible to identify test cases for IPsec and give that input for Qtip [22:26] Or how do we know our delivery is fulfilling the requirements? 01[22:26] I am thinking of using their output, e.g. mobile traffic profile, for testing later. [22:27] I am not familiar with the details of the projects but it makes sense for there to be testing infrastructure that can show the benefit of acceleration [22:27] The output from Qtip is the scripts and profiles, correct? 01[22:28] @Subha I don't think so, they are currently work-in-progress. [22:28] I would like to see one deliverable from DPACC being a VM guest/host interface for accessing accelerated crypto/IPSec [22:28] I do not think we have a dependency on QTip only that we use the framework for any testing [22:29] @Keith: makes sense 03[22:29] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) has joined #dpacc 01[22:29] OK. I did not see Bose around. I will check with him later and come back. 03[22:29] * Mario_ (df3ed80d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.223.62.216.13) has joined #dpacc 01[22:30] Hi Bose, Keith is wondering if QTip outputs scripts and profiles? 01[22:30] woudl you help clarifying [22:30] I am glad to see virtio there I think this is an area where we can really make progress [22:30] Yes...if we can produce test cases for sample implementations, seems Qtip could useful facilitate testing. 03[22:31] * julien_ZTE (~zhang@121.237.227.193) has joined #dpacc [22:31] Yes, virtio testing is a must and one of our main goals IMO [22:31] AGreed, Rob. We should propose to work on a sample virtio like crypto and test? [22:31] #info Julien [22:31] Currently QTIP is will be based on Ansible scripts [22:32] Agree that virtio-crypto is really interesting [22:32] Bose...does that mean custom tests can be built to use that scripting language to create tests of target software?> [22:32] Think there was a draft proposal from Freescale around this [22:32] a while back [22:32] I believ so, Magnus [22:33] yes, there is on virtio-ipsec [22:33] yes. I think that is really the only meaningful deliverable we have as of now [22:33] Yes custom scripts can be used, but QTIP focuses only on performance measurements [22:33] Why not use that as a starting point [22:33] The goal should be for this to be upstreamed into Linux and Qemu [22:33] Linux/KVM [22:34] The proposal was on the IPSec level, but maybe we should start on the lower crypto level [22:34] So upstreaming is one acceptance test 01[22:34] Let us mark a AR here, gap analysis for virtio-ipsec. I need a volunteer to start and take care of the work. [22:34] Magnus could be right [22:34] ? Should have been a question :-) [22:35] Would like some help though [22:35] I am no tthe expert on the levels but perhaps lower cyrpto is a starting point [22:35] But my proposal is to start with virtio-crypto and then build IPSec on top of that [22:35] Some of the virtio-ipsec messages can be re-used for virtio-crypto as well [22:35] I can see value in complete protocol offload (stateful) and stateless. I think that is Magnus' point? [22:36] Agree with Subha [22:36] Subha? FF? [22:36] yes, agree. we can re-use the messages from virtio-ipsec [22:36] we can add additional messages that may be needed for virtio-crypto [22:36] I seem to recall tht both FF and Freescale had proposed prototype concepts [22:36] freescale proposal addresses lookaside accelerator [22:37] Where can I get FF's proposal? [22:37] pure crypto acceleration has to be lookaside [22:37] agree with @rob complete offload would be an interesting to work 01[22:37] Yes, FF also indicated agreement with Freescale's proposal after the July hackfest. [22:38] I believe the proposals are archived, LingLi? [22:38] previous preso [22:38] But let us start to build this from the ground up 01[22:38] Great guys. looking forward to your contribution. Magnus and Subha. [22:38] Complete offload is interesting, but is that not step two? [22:38] "complete offload", do you mean IPsec protocol processing or inline IPsec [22:38] Virtio today is very basic. See it hard to get virtio-ipsec in there before something more basic like virtio-crypto [22:39] @Magnus: Yes I think we all agree 01[22:39] agreed. [22:39] Former [22:39] Agreed [22:39] so step 1: plain virtio-crypto [22:39] recommend we keep virtio-ipsec as baseline; re-use relevant messages and update virtio-ipsec as needed [22:40] agreed 01[22:40] Let us keep the detailed discussion of today's meeting. [22:40] Agree with Subha 01[22:40] move on to next page, guys. [22:41] @subha, not sure what that means as baseline v doing the virtio-crypto as step 1 [22:41] Page #$? [22:41] 4? [22:41] yes 01[22:41] Yes, as you can see, 01[22:42] no other comments on the proposed editor/care-taker for the docs? [22:42] I agree with the separation. high level reqs do not list out steps and do not dictate an implementations 01[22:42] Howard Huang for Openstack? 01[22:42] Keith for DPDK? 01[22:42] Bob for ODP? [22:42] gap analysis for proposed solution x and Y can enumrate gaps and etc [22:42] Yes...I will work with my team to assess ODP gaps 01[22:43] and Magnus for Virtio [22:43] we assume, againsts requirements? 01[22:43] Thanks Bob 01[22:43] Yes, that brings us to the last page. 01[22:43] Page 5. 01[22:44] there are questions about the dependencies to QTip and Functest. I will take an AR for further clarification. [22:44] work items? for which? deadline tomorrow seems tight 02[22:44] * Bose (3ba3cafe@gateway/web/freenode/ip.59.163.202.254) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 01[22:45] to move forward with gap analysis, we need to push the high level requirements ASAP 01[22:45] the proposed time points, any comments? [22:46] I am not clear on work items deadline [22:46] what work items? [22:46] The times look fine, just not sure how to meet them today [22:46] AR1 [22:46] @Magnus, could we help you with virtio-crypto? 01[22:46] @Bob back to page 2, according to the schedule of B-release [22:47] Yes please. 01[22:47] we need to fulfill three tasks the following two weeks 01[22:47] AR1 by this week, preferably. [22:47] I do not have any time this week to devote to this. [22:47] Good. Let's talk offline. 01[22:47] AR2 by next week (high level requirements), for the best. [22:47] Next week? I am on California... [22:47] Meeting with you guys on Friday plus travel. [22:48] I leave California on Sunday :-( 02[22:48] * Mario_ (df3ed80d@gateway/web/freenode/ip.223.62.216.13) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) [22:48] Many of us are in a week long conference next week and an all day meeting on Friday. [22:49] Linaro Connect next week? [22:49] tough deadlines and I am still not clear on what needs tobe created [22:49] for AR 1 ,,Jira cards? [22:49] I think we can clean up requirements by next week but htne need committer reveiw 01[22:49] I will create them based on our consensus. [22:50] @Magnus. Yes. Let's continue over email. [22:50] OK...let's just try to communicate and review on mailing list as much as possible [22:50] OK [22:50] That to LingLi 01[22:51] OK 01[22:51] Any other comments to the slides? [22:51] I do not think so. [22:51] Am good with the slides, but it going to be hard to meet the deadlines 01[22:52] If not, I will leave it to Keith and Bob for gAPI requirements. [22:52] @Keith..agreed [22:52] Ok, so Bill, Rob, Keith and I need to try to clean up requirements by Monday [22:53] But we will want to remove implementations from requriements [22:53] <@varunfsl> I am not clear on the comparison between the virtio-crypto and virtio-ipsec. Virtio-ipsec is stateful, whereas a virtio-crypto device could be stateless [22:53] then committers can review and ratify 03[22:54] * Magnus__ (86868b46@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.70) has joined #dpacc [22:54] So virtio-crypto could be simpler 03[22:54] * Keith__ (86868b4a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.74) has joined #dpacc 02[22:54] * Magnus_ (86868b46@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.70) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) [22:54] @olli got kicked out so missed your conversation [22:54] I will repeat my statement re requirements [22:55] Although we might opt to make it very similar to virtio-ipsec anyway [22:55] Keith, Bill, Rob D and I need to try and close requirements by Monday ish [22:55] OK, back. @bob please update the gapis and we can discuss those changes later [22:55] But we want to be clear that we want all implmentation spoecifications/dictates removed from requirements. [22:55] This is requirements 101 [22:55] I responded to Varun's comment on virtio-crypto could be stateless. Which is good because we could make the interface simpler [22:56] sounds good Keith [22:56] <@varunfsl> but don't agree with the point about pushing virtio crypto upstream as a base of virtio-ipsec 02[22:56] * Keith_ (c0373725@gateway/web/freenode/ip.192.55.55.37) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) 03[22:56] * Mario_ (7be452ec@gateway/web/freenode/ip.123.228.82.236) has joined #dpacc [22:56] <@varunfsl> upstream [22:56] OK...we lsot Keith it seems...We will be discussing this Friday Lingli [22:56] I need to run [22:56] <@varunfsl> they can exist in parallel [22:56] Anything we do with Linux or other open source has to go upstream 01[22:57] thanks Bob. 02[22:57] * bob_ (d98c674b@gateway/web/freenode/ip.217.140.103.75) Quit (Quit: Page closed) [22:57] as a base doesn't have to mean as a technical abse where virtio-ipsec builds upon virtio-crypto. [22:58] virtio-crypto could just be a base for our efforts of extending virtio, building credibility and simplify future extensions. [22:58] @varun, yes they can exist in parallel. @Magnus: agree we need to make it available upstream [22:58] But start with something simple 01[22:58] Keith? [22:58] <@varunfsl> we have started with POC for virtio-ipsec [22:59] @varunfsl good [22:59] But a POC does not have to be based on upstreamable code. 01[23:00] @subha any progress with usecase doc? [23:00] @varunfsl always useful to learn from a POC. You should work with Ola and Magnus 02[23:01] * Keith__ (86868b4a@gateway/web/freenode/ip.134.134.139.74) Quit (Ping timeout: 246 seconds) [23:01] <@varunfsl> ok [23:02] @Lingli: I should have a version out today or tomorrow [23:02] This time I got kicked out of my physical room :-) [23:02] I will upload to the DPACC wiki [23:02] Back again 01[23:04] thanks, Subha 01[23:05] Time is up for today. 01[23:05] Thanks everyone for joining. 03[23:06] * jfender-altera- (~jfender@69-165-175-11.dsl.teksavvy.com) has left #dpacc 02[23:06] * MikeR__ (~lab@dsl-hkibrasgw4-54f857-89.dhcp.inet.fi) Quit (Quit: ircII EPIC4-2.10.5 -- Are we there yet?) 01[23:06] Bye.