Date   

Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

Ryan Goulding <ryandgoulding@...>
 

PTL title comes with responsibilities in ODL beyond committer.  I think it is important to preserve a sole point of contact for the PTL position;  since that person votes for their representative project regarding releases/delays etc.  This is just my $0.02 though.

Regards,

Ryan Goulding

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 10:20 PM, Gao Kai <gaok12@...> wrote:
Putting Jensen as the one and only PTL is fine with me.  After all titles are just titles.

Regards,
Kai

On 29/10/15 02:53, George Zhao wrote:

I am just curious, will one as PTL, the other as project contact work for you.

 

Having multiple PTLs for one project has no precedent, I just want to point this out, not necessarily against it.

 

From: tsc-bounces@... [mailto:tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of tony
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 10:54 AM
To: Colin Dixon
Cc: tsc@...; alto-dev@...
Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

 

Yes, of course. Actually, it is him that comes up with the suggestion. Since he is not a committer, I start the voting for him.

 

Thanks,

Tony

 

On Oct 28, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Colin Dixon <colin@...> wrote:

 

That all looks good. Out of curiosity, is Shu aware of this?

--Colin

 

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, wangxin <xinwang2014@...> wrote:

Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.

 

 

Thanks,

Tony


_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc

 

 



_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc



Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

Jensen Zhang
 

George and TSC,

After discussing, we reach the following agreement:

- Kai is the PTL.
- Add Jensen as a new Project Contact.

Once getting your confirm, we will update our Main wiki and Beryllium Release Plan wiki. Please let me know, if there is anything else that needs to be done.

Regards,
Jensen

2015-10-29 10:20 GMT+08:00 Gao Kai <gaok12@...>:

Putting Jensen as the one and only PTL is fine with me.  After all titles are just titles.

Regards,
Kai

On 29/10/15 02:53, George Zhao wrote:

I am just curious, will one as PTL, the other as project contact work for you.

 

Having multiple PTLs for one project has no precedent, I just want to point this out, not necessarily against it.

 

From: tsc-bounces@... [mailto:tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of tony
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 10:54 AM
To: Colin Dixon
Cc: tsc@...; alto-dev@...
Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

 

Yes, of course. Actually, it is him that comes up with the suggestion. Since he is not a committer, I start the voting for him.

 

Thanks,

Tony

 

On Oct 28, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Colin Dixon <colin@...> wrote:

 

That all looks good. Out of curiosity, is Shu aware of this?

--Colin

 

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, wangxin <xinwang2014@...> wrote:

Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.

 

 

Thanks,

Tony


_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc

 

 



_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev



Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

Gao Kai <gaok12@...>
 

Putting Jensen as the one and only PTL is fine with me.  After all titles are just titles.

Regards,
Kai

On 29/10/15 02:53, George Zhao wrote:

I am just curious, will one as PTL, the other as project contact work for you.

 

Having multiple PTLs for one project has no precedent, I just want to point this out, not necessarily against it.

 

From: tsc-bounces@... [mailto:tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of tony
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 10:54 AM
To: Colin Dixon
Cc: tsc@...; alto-dev@...
Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

 

Yes, of course. Actually, it is him that comes up with the suggestion. Since he is not a committer, I start the voting for him.

 

Thanks,

Tony

 

On Oct 28, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Colin Dixon <colin@...> wrote:

 

That all looks good. Out of curiosity, is Shu aware of this?

--Colin

 

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, wangxin <xinwang2014@...> wrote:

Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.

 

 

Thanks,

Tony


_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc

 

 



_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

George Zhao <George.Y.Zhao@...>
 

I am just curious, will one as PTL, the other as project contact work for you.

 

Having multiple PTLs for one project has no precedent, I just want to point this out, not necessarily against it.

 

From: tsc-bounces@... [mailto:tsc-bounces@...] On Behalf Of tony
Sent: Wednesday, October 28, 2015 10:54 AM
To: Colin Dixon
Cc: tsc@...; alto-dev@...
Subject: Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

 

Yes, of course. Actually, it is him that comes up with the suggestion. Since he is not a committer, I start the voting for him.

 

Thanks,

Tony

 

On Oct 28, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Colin Dixon <colin@...> wrote:

 

That all looks good. Out of curiosity, is Shu aware of this?

--Colin

 

On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, wangxin <xinwang2014@...> wrote:

Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.

 

 

Thanks,

Tony


_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc

 

 


Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

xinwang
 

Yes, of course. Actually, it is him that comes up with the suggestion. Since he is not a committer, I start the voting for him.

Thanks,
Tony

On Oct 28, 2015, at 8:32 AM, Colin Dixon <colin@...> wrote:

That all looks good. Out of curiosity, is Shu aware of this?

--Colin


On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, wangxin <xinwang2014@...> wrote:
Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.


Thanks,
Tony

_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc




Re: [OpenDaylight TSC] Switch project leader

Colin Dixon <colin@...>
 

That all looks good. Out of curiosity, is Shu aware of this?

--Colin


On Wed, Oct 28, 2015 at 12:37 AM, wangxin <xinwang2014@...> wrote:
Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.


Thanks,
Tony

_______________________________________________
TSC mailing list
TSC@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/tsc



Switch project leader

xinwang
 

Dear TSC,

We have carried out a public vote for switching project leader in ALTO project [1][2][3]. We, all committers, agree that we switch Jensen Zhang as co-lead instead of Shu.


Thanks,
Tony


Re: Switch project leader

Y. Richard Yang
 

+1

I believe that we have the votes to make the changes.

Thanks a lot!
Richard

On Mon, Oct 26, 2015 at 2:40 PM, Wendy Roome <wendy@...> wrote:
Also +1.

     - Wendy Roome



> On Oct 21, 2015, at 11:09, 13xinwang@... wrote:
>
> Dear all committers,
>
> Since Shu got a high work load recently and he is not able to focus on ALTO project. I'd like to propose that we switch Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.
>
> [1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.opendaylight.org_gerrit_-23_q_project-3Aalto-2Bowner-3Ajensenzhang&d=AwIFAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=rJMvYkFEJRivEzR3Xf7tBPnMweG9S-FkYAYch2CTX7Q&s=a_DdxC8d-4Iejm5GijQb6YIDPj2um05zHlSvYFDYhRg&e= .
>
> Thanks again,
> Tony



--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================


Re: Switch project leader

Wendy Roome
 

Also +1.

- Wendy Roome

On Oct 21, 2015, at 11:09, 13xinwang@... wrote:

Dear all committers,

Since Shu got a high work load recently and he is not able to focus on ALTO project. I'd like to propose that we switch Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.

[1] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/q/project:alto+owner:jensenzhang.

Thanks again,
Tony


Re: Switch project leader

Xiao SHI <xiao.shi@...>
 

+1

Best,
Xiao

On Wed, Oct 21, 2015 at 10:25 PM, Y. Richard Yang <yry@...> wrote:


On Wednesday, October 21, 2015, <13xinwang@...> wrote:
Dear all committers,

Since Shu got a high work load recently and he is not able to focus on ALTO project. I'd like to propose that we switch Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.

+1

Richard
 

[1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.opendaylight.org_gerrit_-23_q_project-3Aalto-2Bowner-3Ajensenzhang&d=AwICaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=Z1pTf3w-ZknQyIjzaeGww5HI2IhfC-f8S4RRSpE704U&s=GX2RiUzOPeI_ok7kZPZ30EbmsYYtngFextGtcFa8wgs&e= .

Thanks again,
Tony


--
Richard


NetJSON and ALTO

Y. Richard Yang
 

It may make sense for some of us to take a look at NetJSON. Wendy gave a thorough response, and some of us may want to take a close look as well.

Richard

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Wendy Roome <w.roome@...>
Date: Mon, Sep 21, 2015 at 10:50 AM
Subject: Re: NetJSON and ALTO
To: alto@...
Cc: hrogge@..., aaron@..., "Y. Richard Yang" <yry@...>, manet@..., nemesis@...


Thanks for letting the ALTO group know about NetJSON. NetJSON is related
to the proposed ALTO extensions to describe network topology. However, I
think ALTO's needs are sufficiently different, and sufficiently simpler,
that there is no advantage using NetJSON in ALTO.

The proposed ALTO topology extensions give clients a very simple, abstract
view of the network so that clients can determine how much the paths
between endpoints overlap. E.g., suppose a client wants to do parallel
backups to two different cloud servers. If the paths to servers A & B have
many common elements, while the paths to servers A & C do not, the client
would prefer to use A & C.

ALTO could use the NetJSON NetworkGraph sub-schema to describe topology,
but that is considerably more complicated than what we have proposed. For
example, a NetworkGraph has nodes, links that connect nodes, and
descriptions of routing protocols. The front-runner for describing
topology in ALTO is to provide a list of abstract network elements
involved in the path between two endpoint clusters. The elements can be
nodes, links, or combinations of those. A NetJSON NetworkGraph is
considerably more complicated, and much closer to the physical network.

Also, ALTO clients are typically enduser applications with minimal
knowledge of network internals. They want ALTO to hide the details and
give them just what the need, and no more. So few ALTO clients would need
the rest of NetJSON, and forcing them to learn it would just make it
harder to use ALTO. Similarly, I doubt that NetJSON libraries would
simplify ALTO clients; it would just mean a client has to learn how to
turn off features the client will never use.

        - Wendy Roome

>Date: Mon, 14 Sep 2015 10:05:31 +0000
>From: Rick Taylor <rick@...>
>To: Henning Rogge <hrogge@...>, "L. Aaron Kaplan"
>       <aaron@...>
>Cc: manet IETF <manet@...>, Nemesis Capoano <nemesis@...>,
>       "alto@..." <alto@...>
>Subject: Re: [alto] [manet] Request for feedback
>
>Hi All,
>
>I'm a big fan of this kind of thing in principle, and I like the use of
>JSON, but I worry there is some cross-over with the work that is
>happening in the ALTO group (I have cc'd them), and some of the work in
>with RESTCONF from the NETCONF people (I'm less up to speed with what
>they are doing).
>
>Does anyone from the ALTO group have any opinions?
>
>Rick
>
>On 13/09/15 14:06, Henning Rogge wrote:
>>Hi everyone...
>>
>>I was involved in the discussions about NetJSON, have done a NetJSON
>>implementation for Olsrd2 and played a bit with it.
>>
>>I think this could be very useful for the MANET group... yes, we can
>>do everything we can do with NetJSON with SNMP and the corresponding
>>mibs...
>>
>>but of course it would take weeks to get something complicated right
>>and it would be protocol specific.
>>
>>It took me a two days and a few hundred lines of Javascript (and a
>>javascript graph API) to just build a live monitoring webpage for
>>olsrd2 that updates through XMLRPC. It was fun to do.
>>
>>
>>I think we should look into NetJSON, make sure with some suggestion it
>>fits both reactive and proactive protocols and standardize it.
>>
>>Henning Rogge
>>
>>On Thu, Sep 10, 2015 at 3:55 PM, L. Aaron Kaplan <aaron@...>
>>wrote:
>>>Hi MANET WG,
>>>
>>>
>>>We would like to draw your attention to an upcoming new document called
>>>"netJSON" and ask for your feedback.
>>>
>>>TL;DR:  go to https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__netjson.org&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=wEy0rT9mpMQ_IruaoYGTpIB8kw_AV0o2zR2fCZlKGjw&s=ESmMYTQ8nJeilLuKJIZ9mCwEROKN5mP9ZMCJp_-3KKA&e=
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>Background: Henning and me are both in an EU FP7 project (called
>>>CONFINE). This gives us some financial means to focus on some projects.
>>>One of these projects is what I usually call a "common node DB". The
>>>idea being that every (community) wireless (mesh) network loves to
>>>invent its own registry (LIR) database. There nodes and different
>>>devices and their ownership are documented . Also on how to reach the
>>>other owner. In essence, it's a necessity for us to have such a thing
>>>for maintaining IP address assignments.
>>>Often these node DBs don't end with IP address assignment
>>>functionalities: they often include interesting network link planning
>>>features, line of sight calculations, firmware config generation tools
>>>and of course a lot of monitoring tools.
>>>
>>>
>>>Right now the situation is that every (community) network loves to
>>>invent its own node DB. So there is no standard. Hence we came together
>>>and started to define a **simple** JSON based format for describing our
>>>networks. This shall not replace SNMP nor netconf. It's a simple (as
>>>opposed to *S*nmp) format definition. Very flexible, and people
>>>essentially can opt in to what parts of it they want to support.
>>>
>>>Please note that this has a different focus than netconf. Also, it is
>>>not SNMP. We looked at those.
>>>
>>>The focus of that format is to describe mesh networks. Wireless
>>>(containing wired links for sure) mesh networks.
>>>
>>>
>>>We also made a first RFC-ish draft: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__netjson.org_rfc.html&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=wEy0rT9mpMQ_IruaoYGTpIB8kw_AV0o2zR2fCZlKGjw&s=B0PwEB-l47qftiSQYAqASXiFGxSzdoEq_5jWAAAQ7Ro&e=
>>>
>>>
>>>The source code can be seen here: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_interop-2Ddev_netjson&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=wEy0rT9mpMQ_IruaoYGTpIB8kw_AV0o2zR2fCZlKGjw&s=84Uzj0bAUlE2ruXD0YGckt06iRJZ141u245eSnKyu9c&e=
>>>(feel free to send pull requests via github)
>>>
>>>Ultimately, the goal will be to have interoperable mesh network
>>>descriptions and thus being able to separate the coding work amongst
>>>different (community) networks (or other players in this field).
>>>
>>>
>>>Let us know, what you think. Thanks!
>>>Aaron.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>_______________________________________________
>>>manet mailing list
>>>manet@...
>>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_manet&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=wEy0rT9mpMQ_IruaoYGTpIB8kw_AV0o2zR2fCZlKGjw&s=6jNncRndzz3mkpHIg3vLQCA15Or0BfC7mmKGAKwL4G4&e=
>>>
>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>manet mailing list
>>manet@...
>>https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.ietf.org_mailman_listinfo_manet&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=wEy0rT9mpMQ_IruaoYGTpIB8kw_AV0o2zR2fCZlKGjw&s=6jNncRndzz3mkpHIg3vLQCA15Or0BfC7mmKGAKwL4G4&e=
>>
>





--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================


Re: Switch project leader

Y. Richard Yang
 



On Wednesday, October 21, 2015, <13xinwang@...> wrote:
Dear all committers,

Since Shu got a high work load recently and he is not able to focus on ALTO project. I'd like to propose that we switch Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.

+1

Richard
 

[1] https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.opendaylight.org_gerrit_-23_q_project-3Aalto-2Bowner-3Ajensenzhang&d=AwICaQ&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=Z1pTf3w-ZknQyIjzaeGww5HI2IhfC-f8S4RRSpE704U&s=GX2RiUzOPeI_ok7kZPZ30EbmsYYtngFextGtcFa8wgs&e= .

Thanks again,
Tony


--
Richard


Switch project leader

xin wang
 

Dear all committers,

Since Shu got a high work load recently and he is not able to focus on ALTO project. I'd like to propose that we switch Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.

[1] https://git.opendaylight.org/gerrit/#/q/project:alto+owner:jensenzhang.

Thanks again,
Tony


Re: Propose Jensen to be co-lead of ALTO

Gao Kai
 

Thanks Tony, it will be very helpful!

On 21/10/15 22:48, tony wrote:

Hi Kai and Shu,

I think I can start the vote to make Jensen a co-leader. And to get a clean record of email voting procedure, I will send a new voting email to all committers and cc to alto-dev.

Thanks,
Xin

On Oct 21, 2015, at 10:15 PM, Gao Kai <godrickk@...> wrote:

Shu,

It’s nice to hear from you and I support the idea of making Jensen a co-leader. However, there are some procedures I’d like to point out:

First according to this, this and this, only the commiters can vote for committer nominations and project leader election.

According to Collin, a member of ODL TSC, there are only 4 committers and since there was no voting (as far as I know) you and I are not legal project leaders at the moment.

It would be great if someone can continue to push forward the process of committer nominations and also this co-lead election. One major issue is that we must get at least 3 votes from the four committers, especially from Shi and Wendy.

Regards,
Kai

On 21/10/15 21:26, Shu Dong wrote:



Dear all,

I got a high work load recently and am not able to focus on ALTO project. Hence, I'd like to propose Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.


Best Regards,
Shu


_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev



Re: Propose Jensen to be co-lead of ALTO

xinwang
 

Hi Kai and Shu,

I think I can start the vote to make Jensen a co-leader. And to get a clean record of email voting procedure, I will send a new voting email to all committers and cc to alto-dev.

Thanks,
Xin

On Oct 21, 2015, at 10:15 PM, Gao Kai <godrickk@...> wrote:

Shu,

It’s nice to hear from you and I support the idea of making Jensen a co-leader. However, there are some procedures I’d like to point out:

First according to this, this and this, only the commiters can vote for committer nominations and project leader election.

According to Collin, a member of ODL TSC, there are only 4 committers and since there was no voting (as far as I know) you and I are not legal project leaders at the moment.

It would be great if someone can continue to push forward the process of committer nominations and also this co-lead election. One major issue is that we must get at least 3 votes from the four committers, especially from Shi and Wendy.

Regards,
Kai

On 21/10/15 21:26, Shu Dong wrote:



Dear all,

I got a high work load recently and am not able to focus on ALTO project. Hence, I'd like to propose Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.


Best Regards,
Shu


_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


Re: Propose Jensen to be co-lead of ALTO

Gao Kai
 

Shu,

It’s nice to hear from you and I support the idea of making Jensen a co-leader. However, there are some procedures I’d like to point out:

First according to this, this and this, only the commiters can vote for committer nominations and project leader election.

According to Collin, a member of ODL TSC, there are only 4 committers and since there was no voting (as far as I know) you and I are not legal project leaders at the moment.

It would be great if someone can continue to push forward the process of committer nominations and also this co-lead election. One major issue is that we must get at least 3 votes from the four committers, especially from Shi and Wendy.

Regards,
Kai

On 21/10/15 21:26, Shu Dong wrote:

Dear all,

I got a high work load recently and am not able to focus on ALTO project. Hence, I'd like to propose Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.


Best Regards,
Shu


Propose Jensen to be co-lead of ALTO

dongshu
 

Dear all,

I got a high work load recently and am not able to focus on ALTO project. Hence, I'd like to propose Jensen Zhang to be a co-lead of ALTO project. Jensen has been being involved in the project actively since ALTO Lithium release [1] and he will for sure contribute more in the future. Please vote +1, 0, -1 for the proposal. Thanks.


Best Regards,
Shu


Re: alto pids

Y. Richard Yang
 

Some revisions... Please see below.

On Tuesday, October 20, 2015, Y. Richard Yang <yry@...> wrote:
I made some changes to make the nearest-anchor more general. Please see below.

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Y. Richard Yang <yry@...> wrote:
Good discussions. I have reported it as a bug in https://github.com/snlab/alto. In addition to reporting as a bug, which helps us to get priority, let's start some specific discussions.

What we need is a mechanism so that an admin can define the partition of hosts into PIDs. Let me give a try to start a strawman.

We can consider the hosts in the network as leaves in a graph. Each host also has a set of attributes (e.g., geolocation) beyond the graph properties. Hence, I assume that we need a mechanism to use these properties to group the hosts. A first idea coming to mind is cluster analysis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_analysis). 

Let me start with an anchor based approach. Assume that we allow the admin to define a set of anchors, where each anchor is a switch. 
{
   "netmap-grouping-alg": "nearest-anchor",

   "alg-metric": "hopcount",     // it could be "nearest geo-location", if we know

   "anchors": [ "sw1", sw3", "sw4"],

"anchors": [ "pid1": ["sw1", "sw2"] , "pid2" : ["sw3"], "pid3": ["sw4", "sw5"] ],


Hence each PID is seeded with a set, instead of a single switch. We can then approximate other design, for example using regular expressions.


Seeding with fixed switches may not be flexible. For example, what if you want a new switch to be an anchor. An alternative us to provide tags to switches. For example, the nearest-anchor call only defines the network map name and the names of pids. We have an API to allow assign tags to switch: 
sw1 -> netmap1:pid2, netmap3:pid10

In a sense we provide a map management API, which allows create maps, defines the grouping algorithm (e.g., nearest-anchor), and tag switches, ...

Note that link based partition can be interesting as well.

Richard
 
 Richard

   "cost-map-cal-alg": "avg"   // cost from pid1 (sw1 cluster) to pid2 (sw2 cluster) is the average of host pairs
}
Then we can see that it defines three PIDs, where each PID is defined by an anchor in anchors. When an host is added, we can automatically compute which anchor is the nearest and hence assign it to it. We can prove that each PID is a connected component, if we assume the full graph is connected, when we consider graph hopcount. 

How to define a more general mechanism?

Richard

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Gao Kai <gaok12@...> wrote:
Hi there,

Unfortunately current implementation doesn't support this.  My guess is that the developers of alto-hosttracker wrote this module mainly to support the Endpoint Cost Service instead of the Network Map/Cost Map so they didn't implement PID partition.  I'll forward your e-mail to confirm that.

However, in an internal meeting this July we did discuss about PID partition using hosttracker so I think there might be some progress on that.

Besides, you can report it as a bug by visiting https://bugs.opendaylight.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=alto.  Since there are some major changes in the latest release and we have limited manpower, I can't really guarantee that this issue can be fixed soon enough. :(

We really appreciate your participation and we look forward to getting more feedbacks from you.  Thanks very much!

Regards,
Kai

On 20/10/15 22:46, adenisiewicz@... wrote:
Is it possibility to define pids for the network created in mininet that is read by hosttracker-network-map? 
When I try, all hosts are grouped into one pid. 
_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opendaylight.org_mailman_listinfo_alto-2Ddev&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=ZBFW8jc61u6TZZ_hrnVbyvrEV7Mj9NHxC86L0AJXeKM&s=zC3GJx0GJ28Q8X7jWZuYaFondueHh2mVdEN4QznLuxs&e=




--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================



--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================


--
Richard


Re: alto pids

Y. Richard Yang
 

I made some changes to make the nearest-anchor more general. Please see below.

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 1:10 PM, Y. Richard Yang <yry@...> wrote:
Good discussions. I have reported it as a bug in https://github.com/snlab/alto. In addition to reporting as a bug, which helps us to get priority, let's start some specific discussions.

What we need is a mechanism so that an admin can define the partition of hosts into PIDs. Let me give a try to start a strawman.

We can consider the hosts in the network as leaves in a graph. Each host also has a set of attributes (e.g., geolocation) beyond the graph properties. Hence, I assume that we need a mechanism to use these properties to group the hosts. A first idea coming to mind is cluster analysis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_analysis). 

Let me start with an anchor based approach. Assume that we allow the admin to define a set of anchors, where each anchor is a switch. 
{
   "netmap-grouping-alg": "nearest-anchor",

   "alg-metric": "hopcount",     // it could be "nearest geo-location", if we know

   "anchors": [ "sw1", sw3", "sw4"],

"anchors": [ "pid1": ["sw1", "sw2"] , "pid2" : ["sw3"], "pid3": ["sw4", "sw5"] ],


Hence each PID is seeded with a set, instead of a single switch. We can then approximate other design, for example using regular expressions.

 Richard

   "cost-map-cal-alg": "avg"   // cost from pid1 (sw1 cluster) to pid2 (sw2 cluster) is the average of host pairs
}
Then we can see that it defines three PIDs, where each PID is defined by an anchor in anchors. When an host is added, we can automatically compute which anchor is the nearest and hence assign it to it. We can prove that each PID is a connected component, if we assume the full graph is connected, when we consider graph hopcount. 

How to define a more general mechanism?

Richard

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Gao Kai <gaok12@...> wrote:
Hi there,

Unfortunately current implementation doesn't support this.  My guess is that the developers of alto-hosttracker wrote this module mainly to support the Endpoint Cost Service instead of the Network Map/Cost Map so they didn't implement PID partition.  I'll forward your e-mail to confirm that.

However, in an internal meeting this July we did discuss about PID partition using hosttracker so I think there might be some progress on that.

Besides, you can report it as a bug by visiting https://bugs.opendaylight.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=alto.  Since there are some major changes in the latest release and we have limited manpower, I can't really guarantee that this issue can be fixed soon enough. :(

We really appreciate your participation and we look forward to getting more feedbacks from you.  Thanks very much!

Regards,
Kai

On 20/10/15 22:46, adenisiewicz@... wrote:
Is it possibility to define pids for the network created in mininet that is read by hosttracker-network-map? 
When I try, all hosts are grouped into one pid. 
_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opendaylight.org_mailman_listinfo_alto-2Ddev&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=ZBFW8jc61u6TZZ_hrnVbyvrEV7Mj9NHxC86L0AJXeKM&s=zC3GJx0GJ28Q8X7jWZuYaFondueHh2mVdEN4QznLuxs&e=




--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================



--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================


Re: alto pids

Y. Richard Yang
 

Good discussions. I have reported it as a bug in https://github.com/snlab/alto. In addition to reporting as a bug, which helps us to get priority, let's start some specific discussions.

What we need is a mechanism so that an admin can define the partition of hosts into PIDs. Let me give a try to start a strawman.

We can consider the hosts in the network as leaves in a graph. Each host also has a set of attributes (e.g., geolocation) beyond the graph properties. Hence, I assume that we need a mechanism to use these properties to group the hosts. A first idea coming to mind is cluster analysis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cluster_analysis). 

Let me start with an anchor based approach. Assume that we allow the admin to define a set of anchors, where each anchor is a switch. 
{
   "netmap-grouping-alg": "nearest-anchor",

   "alg-metric": "hopcount",     // it could be "nearest geo-location", if we know

   "anchors": [ "sw1", sw3", "sw4"],

   "cost-map-cal-alg": "avg"   // cost from pid1 (sw1 cluster) to pid2 (sw2 cluster) is the average of host pairs
}
Then we can see that it defines three PIDs, where each PID is defined by an anchor in anchors. When an host is added, we can automatically compute which anchor is the nearest and hence assign it to it. We can prove that each PID is a connected component, if we assume the full graph is connected, when we consider graph hopcount. 

How to define a more general mechanism?

Richard

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 12:51 PM, Gao Kai <gaok12@...> wrote:
Hi there,

Unfortunately current implementation doesn't support this.  My guess is that the developers of alto-hosttracker wrote this module mainly to support the Endpoint Cost Service instead of the Network Map/Cost Map so they didn't implement PID partition.  I'll forward your e-mail to confirm that.

However, in an internal meeting this July we did discuss about PID partition using hosttracker so I think there might be some progress on that.

Besides, you can report it as a bug by visiting https://bugs.opendaylight.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=alto.  Since there are some major changes in the latest release and we have limited manpower, I can't really guarantee that this issue can be fixed soon enough. :(

We really appreciate your participation and we look forward to getting more feedbacks from you.  Thanks very much!

Regards,
Kai

On 20/10/15 22:46, adenisiewicz@... wrote:
Is it possibility to define pids for the network created in mininet that is read by hosttracker-network-map? 
When I try, all hosts are grouped into one pid. 
_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://lists.opendaylight.org/mailman/listinfo/alto-dev


_______________________________________________
alto-dev mailing list
alto-dev@...
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opendaylight.org_mailman_listinfo_alto-2Ddev&d=AwICAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=4G36iiEVb2m_v-0RnP2gx9KZJjYQgfvrOCE3789JGIA&m=ZBFW8jc61u6TZZ_hrnVbyvrEV7Mj9NHxC86L0AJXeKM&s=zC3GJx0GJ28Q8X7jWZuYaFondueHh2mVdEN4QznLuxs&e=




--
-- 
 =====================================
| Y. Richard Yang <yry@...>   |
| Professor of Computer Science       |
 =====================================

261 - 280 of 542