================================== #opendaylight-group-policy Meeting ================================== Meeting started by regXboi at 17:07:51 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetings.opendaylight.org/opendaylight-group-policy/2014/opendaylight-group-policy.2014-04-18-17.07.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * what has changed between 0.95 and 0.96? (regXboi, 17:08:45) * minor changes (regXboi, 17:08:51) * LINK: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B0Pf6vxIzl4lX3J6cDBQZ3ZJZms/edit (regXboi, 17:09:51) * the above is the 0.96 model (regXboi, 17:10:01) * labels have now been subdivided into roles, capabilities, conditions, and qualities (regXboi, 17:12:33) * clauses have also been added (regXboi, 17:12:47) * groups select contracts via selectors (or name releationships). A selector is formula on the contract's qualities (regXboi, 17:14:08) * question from Jan: what does target? (regXboi, 17:15:21) * mike says that the target is how the contract presents itself (regXboi, 17:15:48) * is this same as label we had? (dconde, 17:17:03) * see above .... labels have been subdivided statement... (regXboi, 17:17:22) * understdood (dconde, 17:18:58) * regXboi asks for the use case for a contract presenting multiple targets (regXboi, 17:21:40) * dvokinista and alagalah say the use case is allowing different users to have different selectors for the same contract (regXboi, 17:22:03) * regXboi says he'll think about it and scream if it doesn't make sense (regXboi, 17:22:19) * alagalah taking over scribing (alagalah, 17:22:55) * jmedved continues to ask why I would need separate targets (regXboi, 17:23:15) * dvorkinista says think of presenting targets for development versus test? (regXboi, 17:23:56) * jmedved was concerned the selector with multiple targets modifying the contract. dvorkinista pointed out this doesn't change anything in the contract, its a way of selecting the contract (alagalah, 17:25:58) * regXboi made an analogy of UNIX file systems. The contract is the file, the selector and targets are logical links, a way to traverse to the file (alagalah, 17:26:43) * dvorkinista pointed out its a lot of like labels in gmail (alagalah, 17:27:01) * Earlier on, dvorkinista pointed out that labels have subsets, Roles, Capabilities, Conditions and Qualities (missed that earlier) (alagalah, 17:28:38) * s3wong asks if this makes the prior label scheme less flexible (regXboi, 17:28:56) * dvorkinista said that 0.95 -> 0.96 is some renaming of things to make them clearer (ie the sub-groups above of labels) (alagalah, 17:29:09) * dvorkinista says they are equivalent (regXboi, 17:29:10) * readams asked a question that I couldn't pick up (alagalah, 17:29:57) * Why would you want to selectively match against targets that are being *provided* as opposed to consumed (readams, 17:33:21) * mickey_spiegel says we have to remember what provides and consumes means (regXboi, 17:34:09) * so that we can add new contracts without disturbing existing contracts (regXboi, 17:34:32) * readams wonders why we want this particular semantic feature (multiple contracts, multiple targets) (alagalah, 17:35:52) * Example: Existing contract for http and https, now add another protocol that requires going through another appliance (mickey_spiegel, 17:36:09) * dvorkinista says it allows for provision of services and combination of services qithout wondering how contracts are structured (alagalah, 17:36:26) * Now add another contract with additional qualifier, without disrupting others (mickey_spiegel, 17:36:28) * Service does not even need to know you are going through another appliance (mickey_spiegel, 17:36:32) * jmedved wants use case/concrete examples (alagalah, 17:37:57) * dvorkinista using DB cluster as an example. Shows a target for anything that wants to consume the database (alagalah, 17:38:23) * alagalah is going to find a way to record video of whiteboard sessions. Cos scribing this is nigh on impossible (alagalah, 17:38:47) * Discussion is around backup providers (alagalah, 17:41:09) * Back-up providers is a usecase to demonstrate the need for the selector concept (ChrisPriceAB, 17:42:36) * dvorkinista says basic contract is to provide a contract based on a query. (alagalah, 17:43:38) * dvorkinista says basic concept is to provide a contract based on a query. (alagalah, 17:43:52) * missed readams response (alagalah, 17:44:14) * regXboi asks how two contracts with same set of labels get resolved ? (alagalah, 17:45:43) * dvorkinista points out that target is only used for selection. It's a way of selecting multiple contracts (alagalah, 17:46:19) * regXboi since targets are only used for selection, then there needs to be a discussion on contract conflict resolution (alagalah, 17:46:56) * dvorkinista agreed (alagalah, 17:47:28) * ChrisPriceAB wanted to know if you should have a more specific query mechanism (alagalah, 17:48:03) * ChrisPriceAB in a way to avoid handling conflict resolution (alagalah, 17:48:18) * dvorkinista agrees conflict resolution is important. (alagalah, 17:48:32) * jmedved buids on regXboi's question about resolution at the contract level or something else (regXboi, 17:50:19) * dvorkinista says its at the rules level and not the contract level (regXboi, 17:50:35) * mickey_spiegel says at the end of the day, we are sending packets and rules will be selected based on the information in the packet (regXboi, 17:51:28) * note: that can include prior state (regXboi, 17:51:39) * er... that last is my editorial note (regXboi, 17:51:50) * in data plane, you determine contract based on source and destination addresses (mickey_spiegel, 17:51:56) * Anywhere where you do enforcement in the data plane, have to come up with the same answer for conflict resolution, for the same pair of source and destination addresses (mickey_spiegel, 17:52:15) Meeting ended at 17:57:19 UTC. Action Items ------------ Action Items, by person ----------------------- * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * alagalah (46) * regXboi (40) * s3wong (6) * mickey_spiegel (6) * ChrisPriceAB (4) * odl_meetbot (3) * dconde (2) * readams (2) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot