MoM of today's OCP SONiC call 04/21/2020

Skip to first unread message

MS Reddy

Apr 22, 2020, 3:58:44 AM4/22/20
to sonicproject,, Michael Schill, Xin Liu (CLOUD)
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  04/21/2020.

Topics discussed.
Management Framework -2 - Anand/Partha/Sachin  [BRCM]
  • Does this design covers authentication workflows?  - It will be cover under RBAC design PR
  • How does it integrate with HamD & tacacs/radius - Lookout for RBAC PR
  • Provide some example how to use CVL for custom validations? 
  • Do you have REST performance numbers to share to community? 
  • Will the design provide what improvements done w.r.t rest validations & performance? 
  • Will the rest server supports pagination? 
  • Does management framework allows sonic cli & ISCLI intertwined? -config made through sonic cli shows up in ISCLI viceversa?
  • What are the major changes with framework 2 
    • Multi DB changes 
    • decouple telemetry 
    • upgrade openAPI spec 3.0 to support yang stmt, union, yang constriants etc.
    • klish -> moved away from client / generic client libCurl 
    • Telemetry - goModule support 
    • notification and version support
Discussion will be continued next week too. The PR is out for feedback -

Virtual Summit
  • OCP virtual summit Registration remainder + high level schedule
  • May 12 - Live panel + sonic talks (10- 11:30)
  • May 13 - Hardware related
  • May 14 - sonic software 
  • May 15 - Symposium
More details checkout the schedule


On Tue, Apr 14, 2020 at 9:44 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  04/14/2020.

Topics discussed.
D-BUS - Mike[DELL]
  • Why Dbus used for ztp and why not control panel aclD? 
  • How to secure the users shouldn't mis use the critical host access to commands like reboot? Can you provide some guidelines around it? 
  • How does host communicate to ex: reboot/warm reboot execution status to clients (containers issued commands to host)? How does D-Bus helps here?   
  • Will the design provide some infrastructure level audit mechanism who does what w.r.t host commands like reboot/warm reboot etc.
  • Why D-Bus used specific listed services/activities alone, why can't it use for all the services? Can you add some guidelines to the document?  
Virtual Summit 

On Fri, Apr 10, 2020 at 9:27 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  04/06/2020.

Topics discussed.
AAA Enhancements - Martin [DELL]
  • How to deal with Redis failures w.r.t account management? 
  • What is the target sonic customer deployments trying to address here? 
  • How do we protect the account creations from docker/applications like sonic-mgmt-framework or any other applications? Do you have any suggestions?
  • Can this design support Radius based account management? Ans: It seems there is a PR from BRCM
  • Today SONiC has Tacacs, what are the improvements expect from this HLD? 
  • How does the design handles multiple component failures? Ex: HAMD, REDIS, TACACS etc
  • Can hamD decoupled from sonic-mgmt-framework? 
202006 Roadmap 

On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:07 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  03/31/2020.

Topics discussed.
Proposal for System Health for LED settings - Liat (MLNX)

  • Can this design consider multiple system LED's? AI Liat
  • How do you test and quality LED management? Ans: Unit testing 
  • Is it possible to integrate with Monit for docker/process critical monitoring? Ans : Yes
  • What is the suggestions for BMC systems ? Ans: this design is not for BMS based systems
  • Can this alert/syslog messages duplicate to SNMP traps? Ans: It seems SONiC don't have traps today
  • Can this design support system ready status? AI Liat (ASIC/vendor specific APIs)
  • Is this design provide any port level LED blink functionality? AI Liat (ASIC/Vendor specific)
  • This design should take care the fact that syslog format shouldn't be break BMC messaging/ extra work for BMC based systems  ? 
Non Technical
  • OCP virtual summit - May
  • Pre-recorded talk  - deadline by this friday.
  • Virtual booths - video recording of Demo [OCP will play demos several multiple months.

On Tue, Mar 24, 2020 at 9:26 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  03/24/2020.

Topics discussed.
Port Mirroring Rupesh Kumar  (BRCM)

1. Do you have a data model to support this feature? Please list out in HLD AI Rupesh
2. Can this feature support OpenConfig data model? No
3. How does the design handles both ACL & port based mirror enabled? Can we expect two copies ? AI Rupesh
4. Can this design support config validations? AI Rupesh
5. How does the design handles link events w.r.t to activate inactivate sessions? 
6. If platform doesn't support SPAN/ERSPAN features what is the behavior? Does this design consider SAI capability check? AI Rupesh/BRCM
7. What are the tests written and How are these test cases organised / which repos will be used? AI - Rupesh
8. What are the SAI attributes used in the feature.
9. Can we police SPAN/ERSPAN sessions? AI Rupesh


On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 9:14 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  03/17/2020.

Topics discussed.
Sonic Qos Schedular & Shaping - Michael (BRCM)
  • Can shaping config support on sub interfaces/ port channels ? No 
  • Do we have a plan to support vlan/port channel as many DC supports this use case? 
  • Why do need SAI_SCHEDULER_GROUP_ATTR_SCHEDULAR_PROFILE_ID when SAI_QUEUE_SCHEDULAR_PROFILE_ID available ? Ans: schedular_group will help for finer granularity. 
  • Do you have plan to publish spytest cases with feature? yes
  • How to configure these new shaping configuration? is this coexists with config_db? Ans : new shaping attributes supported through sonic-mgmt-framework open-config model 
  • What are the shaping constraints w.r.t DPB (dynamic port breakout) ? 
  • Can shaping applied to CPU queues? suggestion - CoPP is the right place to configure the CPU queues? 
  • Can it be possible to configure shaping in percentage so that DPB can dynamically change the shaping per port? 
  • Can this shaping applied on operation port (profile applied and under traffic) ? No CLI to configure that today

On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 9:22 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:

  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  03/10/2020.

Topics discussed.
Monitoring and auto-Mitigating unhealthy containers n SONiC - Joe
  • How Monit service is different from Supervisord? Monit does track and alert every 5 min, so user will not miss any, where as supervisord alerts only once. 
  • Can Monit service monitor resource usage? >> possible
  • How does Monit service detects dockers come online dynamically? >> right now it's driven by confiig file
  • Can we make Thresholds human readable? Can it be possible to calculate threshold in % values ? >> Joe will look into itt
  • How can we determine these throsholds ? ex: How much threshold shall we fix for a BGP container? >> Joe will look into it
  • Can Monit service help user specify docker system quotas? >> no
  • Can database is consistent after auto restart ? >> Not right now. Monit service provide provision to disable features from auto-restart ex: database 

On Wed, Feb 26, 2020 at 8:09 PM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  02/25/2020.

Topics discussed.
Gear Box Design - BRCM 

  • How does this design support for dynamic loading/discovering of external phy 
  • Why do pick multiple versions of phy-syncd? why can't glorify the existing syncd? 
  • Can vendors cherry-pick one synd instance out of all the instances/ is this possible switch off other syncd instances ? 
  • It is advised GearBox design should discuss with breakout/sub port work groups?
  • Can this design supports dynamically updating eeprom / firmware ? 
  • How does this design treats system side vs line card link events ?

On Tue, Feb 11, 2020 at 9:27 AM MS Reddy <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  02/11/2020.

Topics discussed.
SONiC Line card Hot Swap - Inspur
  • How does it detect line card is broken ? Line card status must have [present/not present/ abnormal]
  • How does this line card event detected by sonic ? is it event or poll based? 
  • I/O module / Linecard type detection is HW based detection 
  • List out the I/O or line cards supported in the design? 
  • How do you initilize the ASIC to line card type 
  • It should be discussed w.r.t sku/ dynamic breakout and gear box features.
Inspur team work with Xin to have sub group meeting to discuss more on the interested parties. 

Pre-OCP registration remainder


On Tue, Feb 4, 2020 at 9:09 AM  <> wrote:
MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  02/04/2020.

Topics discussed.
Debian 10 buster kernel upgrade 202006 release
  • 201911 release bugs triage - watch out for bug comments and provide your update.
  • OCP pre-summit workshop 

On Tue, Jan 14, 2020 at 8:43 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  01/14/2020.

Topics discussed.
  • OCP pre-summit workshop - watch out for invitation from EventBrite
  • Hackathon - watch out for invitation 
  • New workgroups - watch out for workgroup page
  • Round table for workgroup meetups
  • Next release - 202006

On Tue, Dec 17, 2019 at 8:57 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  12/17/2019.

Topics discussed:

              PCI_E Diagnostics:

  • How does it help? the feature captures all the pci_e components in pcie.yaml config file and verify the components on demand.
  • How is different from lspci? the feature aggregates the lspci command info and capture components list in pcie.yaml file for component check 
  • When does the pcie.yaml generated? Platform shall generate the file when there is any change.
  • Is the feature generic for all the platforms ? yes, there is specific file for each platform and the platform owners should update it.
  • Can the feature distinguish critical/non critical PCI_e components? can this be included in the design ?

  • Next meeting - Jan 7th.


On Tue, Dec 10, 2019 at 9:18 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  12/10/2019.

Topics discussed:
Release 201910 tracking status:
  • ZTP  -  Ready to merge  #599 is failed to pass tests. (failed tests are vs related.) 
  • MGMT Framework -  Should support mgmt docker can be turned off / not build at all. Ready to merge.
  • PDDF - on review pending 
  • STP/PVSP - Pending on Jenkins jobs.
  • L3 performance - Merged
  • L2 performance - ready to merge 
  • BFD - one more review needed and sync up with FRR upstream / feature on or off capabilities(next releases) - BRCM will share test results for review
  • NAT - SAI dependency, BRCM will work with SAI community to close on this next few months (next release) - BRCM will share test results for review (No automation tests)
- OCP planning
To be focussed Topics - Community should focus on topics such as test improvements 
Venue - LNKD

On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 9:11 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  12/03/2019.

Topics discussed:
Release 201910 tracking status:
  • ZTP  -  [Approvals Pending] - Guohan approved it
  • BFD - one more review needed and sync up with FRR upstream / feature on or off capabilities(next releases) - BRCM will share test results for review
  • NAT - SAI dependency, BRCM will work with SAI community to close on this next few months (next release)
  • STP/PVST - Build Job in Zenkins should be included 
  • MGMT Framework - Short group to review the changes / Alibaba provided comments on gNMI bring together with mgmt container.
Discussions will be continued next week.


On Tue, Nov 26, 2019 at 9:11 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  11/26/2019.

Topics discussed:

Release 201910 tracking status:
  • ZTP  - Mostly ready BRCM & Dell will take a look PR and close it 
  • BFD - one more review needed and sync up with FRR upstream / feature on or off capabilities(next releases)
  • NAT - SAI dependency, BRCM will work with SAI community to close on this next few months
  • L2 enhancements - extra file should be removed from SAI REDIS PR.
  • MultiDB - Need to raise PR with all new changes 
  • MGMT Framework - Short group to review the changes  
  • Deadline for OCP participation extended- Dec 5th.

On Tue, Nov 19, 2019 at 9:15 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  11/19/2019.

Topics discussed

Thermal Control Design - MLNX

             Review (Q & A):
  • Can the design support to integrate with thirdparty ? ex: BCM enabled CPU /thermal controls? yes
  • Can this new daemon enabled/disabled? yes
  • Is it possible to select few objects (fan/cpu/thermal) ? yes (all/none) 
  • How about supporting ASIC Internal Sensors - Dell will raise a PR on it
  • Can this design supports to have flexibility use their own thermal/fan algorithm? yes 
  • A single daemon handles all the change events (fan/cpu/thermal)? there us high chance that some events should wait in the loop with the current design? Why can't we propose different change events for different cpu/fan/optics? 
  • Will the design supports more policies? yes
  • Verbose on API definition on threshold levels about Average/Max/ Snapshot 
  • The current design discussed about 60 sec polling interval ? Is there a way to include timestamp in polling mechanism? 
  • Is there any API exposed for fanTray contain more than one fan? 
OCP deadline - Nov 29th 


On Sun, Nov 17, 2019 at 6:23 PM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
  • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  11/12/2019.

Topics discussed

DPKG Caching Framework - BRCM

             Review (Q & A):
  • How does the framework track/calculate the GIT hash for new files and dependencies pulling from the Internet?
  • Where does the debug cache stored? 
  • Can this framework increase build time (first time, how much does it take to populate the cache)? 
  • How much memory the debug cache takes ? ~600MB
  • The framework discussed about two SHA hases? Does it have any significance? can this solved using single hash? 
  • How does the framework capture the file modified or not ? 
  • How does the framework deals with sonic patch files get applied to dpkg cache framework?
  • Does the sha calculated for the depends files or depend files content ?
  • How does commit and content SHA utilized in the framework? Why can't content-sha alone should solve the local modified files ? 
  • Do need to reevaluate/ recommend memory requirements with the DPKG feature?

        On Tue, Nov 5, 2019 at 9:53 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  11/05/2019.

        Topics discussed

        • DPKG Caching Framework - BRCM 
        • Review (Q & A):
          • How do track/calculate the GIT hash for new files and dependencies from the internet?
          • Where does the deebug cache stored? 
          • Can this framework takes more time?  
          • How much memory the debug cache takes ? ~600MB

        On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 9:39 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  10/29/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • RADIUS - BRCM
        Review (Q & A):
        • Where does the Cached MPL (management-privilege-level)stored ?  It stored at protected file /var/run/radius
        • Can the framework support user change from tacacs+ to radius? 
        • What is the radius agent planning to use ? pam-radius 
        • How about user login's on device reboots? does it expect login failed/success? No, as soon as MPL cache preserved, users can logged in.
        • Can the MPL cache associate with TTL? No, right now we refresh the session on every user logging in.
        • There are 3 radius options [many-to-one = Y/N/A] discussed, what is appropriate for SONiC usage?  

        DPKG Caching Framework - BRCM
        • How do track/calculate the GIT hash for new files and dependencies from the internet?
        • Where does the deebug cache stored? 
        • Can this framework takes more time?  
        • How much memory the debug cache takes ? ~600MB
        PR is available, discussion will continue next week.


        On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:00 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  10/22/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • VRRP (Virtual Router Redundancy Protocol)- BRCM
        Review (Q & A):
        • What is preventing not to support vrrp3?
        • How is it different from FRR VRRP support? do you get a chance to evaluate FRR VRRP stack? 
        • It would be good to list the out the possible use cases/deployments for the sonic user to enable to this feature? Can this feature work with data center MLAG kind of deployments ?
        • How does the uplink tracking works? for instance let's say there are more than 8 uplink interfaces how do we does it effects on mastership?
        • How to handle split-brain scenarios? 
        • What are the supported VRID ranges ? 
        Sub group on test framework proposal - starting tomorrow 8-9 AM PST 

        On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 6:50 PM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  10/15/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • Tech Support export Service 
        Review (Q & A):
        • Can custom scripts will be added to tech support service ? This is minimal service, can be added. 
        • Can the Journal data should be part of tech support ? will be included
        • What kind of granular level support provided by tech support service? Minimal service for now, can be added filters, custom plugins to ex: to export to cloud etc. 
        • It seems tech support keep adding repeated data? How to avoid this storage back pressure on remote server? will look it
        • do you have per process core support ? Can the user cherry pick on few process instead all ? With current schema of things with containers seems not possible right now. BRCM will look into it.
        •   Core File Manager 
        Review (Q & A):
        • Can File Manager do automatic analysis on core dumps ? yes 
        • Will it be possible to export only analysis reports to tech support ? yes 
        • Is the Core file uploaded with back traces ? yes
        • Does the systemD increase footprint - little bit 

        On Tue, Oct 8, 2019 at 10:27 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  10/08/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • Checkout for OCP summit
        • Test sub group will be back next week [mid of OCT]
        • SONiC Document work group - news-letter bi-weekly [end of October]
        • 201908 Code PR reviews - target next 2 weeks.
        • 201908 Code complete - by Oct 31st
        • 201908 QA start - Nov 1st 

        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  9/24/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • MGMT Framework - BRCM & DELL

        Review (Q & A):
        • List out examples where does the developers/users need transLib hints?
        • W.r.t CVL library, do you have any performance numbers ex: add-del-add config objects work flow ex: vlan ? Do you see any performance hit? what are the improveements?

        On Tue, Sep 24, 2019 at 9:22 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  9/24/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • Dynamic Port BreakOut  - LKND 
        • This talk is extension of previous discussion.
        Review (Q & A):
        • Can the design incorporate port groups ? offline discussion with Dell, LKND.
        • Can the design support to add port persona ex: FC/FCoE or Ethernet? 
        • What is the default admin status of fanned out ports ? admin staus is DOWN by default.
        • How does the design guarantee the sequencing of delete/add configurations? 


        On Tue, Sep 17, 2019 at 9:49 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  9/17/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • Firmware Utils  - MLNX
        Review (Q & A):
        • Why don't leverage ONIE updater, what is the design rational behind the fwUtils? 
        • What is the significance of chassis? Does Sonic supports multiple chassis?
        • Can the design supports module level installations? 
        • Is the design support remote image path? yes
        • What are the supported methods to download images? remote url http/https
        • What about the image validations ? ex: compatibility between CPLD/BIOS etc..
        • Can user skip/install specific image version using the fwUtils? - you should use it manually [skip the fwUpgrade]
        • Can fwUtils supports scheduling of reloads after component updates? 

        2019 Oct Release 
        Checkout below for release tracking 


        On Tue, Sep 10, 2019 at 9:10 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  9/10/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • Drop Counters HLD  - MSFT
        Review (Q & A):
        • Does the design preserve the counters on warm reboots? No
        • Can the design reports the user if the drop counter is not supported with platforms? yes
        • List out the caveats with warm reboot cases. Ex: if the device went wrong after warm reboots, does the drop counters distinguish the failure reasons?
        • Do we have default settings for the debug counters with the device? No
        • Can the design provide any templates for the debug counters to configure it? 
        • Can the lifecycle (ex: clear)of these counters will not effect the existing counters? No
        • Can the design support logical/aggregate debug counters? 
        • Does these counters are ASIC independent? what platforms do you guys cover it?
        • Can this integrate with mgmt framework?


        On Tue, Sep 3, 2019 at 9:22 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
        • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  9/3/2019.

        Topics discussed
        • BGP Error handling  - BRCM  
        Review (Q & A):
        • Is there any perf impact on disable this feature: No
        • Data shows the RIB-in convergence performance degradation is 44%, it should be linear, but why is 44%? can it be improved? 
        • What is the scope of the QuickTests? Is it covered only happy paths alone? do you have numbers with non-happy path scenarios? 
        • does the QuickTest covers both Ipv4 or Ipv6 ? QuickTest supports mix scenario of ipv4 & ipv6 ? not yet done for pure Ipv6 routes, will be explored.
        • do you have any special handling for default route ? No
        • Does it supports any debug commands check the failed route ? yes
        • What is the reconciliation on daemon crashes (Ex: BGP)- how to reconcile the routes? Please list out the scenarios in HLD.
        • Can this feature turn-off on demand ? is yes, can this affect the system stability? 
        • PR -

        Error Handling - BRCM

        Review (Q & A):
        • Overall framework is thinking about two approaches - 1) Introduce Opaque ID to track the add-delete-add kind of error handling scenarios 2) Introduce an Sync SAI API in addition to current Async SAI API.
        • HLD is out for the community review.


          On Wed, Aug 28, 2019 at 7:19 AM MSREDDY P <> wrote:
          • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  8/27/2019.

          Topics discussed
          • Dynamic Port BreakOut HLD - LNKD 
          Review (Q & A):
          • Can't SONiC query SAI API to fetch the break out capabilities?
          • Generic question : Why breakout support only per interface? why can' t it per device ? Platform's don't allow certain ports due to silicon issues or the feature is not ready to use the breakout port on this relesase
          • Can the breakout feature supports range of ports together? 
          • Can ASIC vendors support breakout on range/group of ports?
          • What does platform vendors do to support this feature?  It seems vendors should provide platforms.ini file.
          • Can this feature support the list of breakout supported to the user? 
          • Can breakout feature enforce lanes and aliases to the sonic application?
          • Why can't we define platform files per HWSKU?  
          • Can this HLD covers Platform LED feature?
          • How about the configuration validations during port-breakout ? Can this integrate with MGMT framework CVL lib? yes.


          • MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  8/20/2019.

          Topics discussed
          • MC-LAG HLD - Nephos 
          Review (Q & A):
          • Can MC-LAG support on sub-port interfaces?
          • Update scope of L2/L3 MC-LAG in HLD. 
          • Can MCLAG supports multicast? 
          • Do you have scale numbers w.r.t FDB/ARP/Route sync between MC-LAG failures? 
          • How can we isolate the packet flooding between MCLAG vs NON-MCLAG in same broadcast domain? 
          • Update HLD with test cases for MC-LAG failover (link/node level) scenarios?


          MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  8/13/2019.

          Topics discussed
          • Sonic management framework - BRCM & DELL
          Review (Q & A)
          • Can the click cli co-exists with mgmt-framework ? Yes.
          • Does mgmt framework support existing click cli commands ? yes, click based cli commnads will be migrated to klish based cli.
          • Can the click based cli deprecated ? No
          • Can the mgmt-framework supports the external AAA servers for authentication? pl add details to the HLD.
          • Add AAA auth failure work flow the REST SET work flow?
          • Does the mgmt framework handles the end to end error handling or feedback loop ? No, out of the scope.
          • Why are pulling telemetry container into mgmt container? We don't run multiple gNMI servers in SONIC, and requesting community to rename the sonic-telemetry server and make part of mgmt-framework.
          • Does output of click based CLI will be changed? 
          • Does the mgmt-framework supports the notion of start up config ? 
          • Does the mgmt framework supports the CLI show to reflect the configDB?
          • Can the mgmt-framework supports show running config ?
          • Feature timelines - the scope is proposing the mgmt framework and there will be seperate feature HLDs coming. 

          MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  8/6/2019.

          Topics discussed
          • Sub port interface design - Winda
          Review (Q & A)
          • How sub-port interface different from vlan interface in sonic? Ans: Vlan interface is a bridge port in sonic.
          • Rename dot1Q table ? - Since there is vlan interface table, dot1Q interface table is little confusing, community suggested go with sub-port/interface table.
          • How about separate sub-interface/port manager for sub-port interfaces?
          • Does sub-port feature use sonic-cli/direct native calls ? It uses linux iproute2 calls 
          • Do you expect iproute2 upgrades to support sub-port feature? No 
          • What is the use case of mtu with sub interface? 
          • Can sub-port interface support on port-breakout interfaces? 
          • Do you see any issues with naming convention w.r.t port breakouts & sub-ports?
          • Is there any limit on sub port interfaces? yes, refer scalability section [750 per switch]
          • Few question on sub-port functionality? If the packet entered untagged how does it route to sub-port interface?
          • what is the miss-policy support with sub-port interfaces ? could be dropped - debatable 
          • define behavior untagged and miss policy arrived to physical port? How Sonic process these packets?
          • Can physical & sub port interfaces shared same neighbor table or different ? 
          • Add section to the HLD for cross functional / port properties when port is layer 3/ layer 2 port? 

          • 201908 release - will be delayed 10/2019
          • please send out PR's to sonic mailing lists 
          • OCP Amsterdam [Europe]- End of Sept.

          MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  07/23/2019.

          Topics discussed
          • Debug framework design spec - BRCM
          Review (Q & A)
          • What is the impact on current show tech dump ? 
          • Can the framework support get the tech dump specified time slice/range ? 
          • Does framework support any schema for debug event triggers ? 
          • Where does this framework run, can user turn off? 
          • Will the framework exports debug data in Json format? 

          MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  07/16/2019.

          Topics discussed
          • Egress Mirror support and ACL action capability check 
          Review (Q & A)
          • Does this feature backward compatible? Yes [sonic - to -sonic ]
          • Is there any requirement for egress mirroring to have all packet modifications done in the mirrored copy? No such support.
          • What is the behavior if max egress sessions programmed? - Not a requirement 
          • If both ingress/egress enabled on same packet, do we see two mirror copies? Yes, might need a fix around it.
          • Does SONiC has any limit on supporting egress mirror sessions? - depends on ASIC limit
          • Does this design supports truncate the mirrored copy ? Does it a SONiC/SAI spec? Need to check 

          • SONiC Image Build Time Improvements (MLNX)
          Review (Q & A)

          • Is the design use parallel builds? yes, make use of all the cpu threads (12) 
          • How much build time improvements we can see if we discount kernel? - ~1 h (we build linux built in separate thread)
          • How is different Docker build kit from docker natived?- DBK is completely written for docker images and supports isolated users instead multiple users.

            • 201908 release tracking
            • Repurposing the sub-group meetings to design meetings.

            MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  07/09/2019.

            Topics discussed

            • PDE (Platform Development Environment) /PDDF (Platform Driver Development Framework)- BRCM
            Review (Q&A)
            • Is PDE specific to BRCM chipset? Not necessarily, who ever supoport SAI can use it.
            • What are the interfaces PDE provides for ASIC and platform? PDDF data driven framework (JSON APIs)& existing driver API's
            • Can framework allow vendor extensions ? PDDF supports vendor extensions
            • How to package PDE ?  PDE can be built along with full sonic image & dockers or individual docker
            • Will custom plugins (ex:BMC) could integrate with PDE? yes
            • Can we load PDE into multiple targets? possible 

            • PR reviews ownership - checkout the 201908 release tracking page

            MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  06/25/2019.

            Topics discussed

            • VRF design discussion  - Nephos (Jeffrey) 
            Review (Q&A)
            • How does VRF configures in Linux kernel? As of now, though there is a CLI wrapper, SONiC ultimately uses the linux NetLink calls. [Community has some suggestions - Liat may help here with our examples]
            • Questions on config_db migration script on VRF config migration? offline discussions would continue/PR feedback.
            • Design decision behind creating an empty interface INTERFACE|Ethernet0:{} in config_db ? Multiple things, 1) SAI 2) Code complexity behind the resource migration. etc. There is a section in the PR,  feedback can be provided.
            • There is a request on VRF ID adding besides interface name in the next hop? The decision seems we are going with minimal configuration to support the SONiC system design.
            • Can we safely assume VRF design supports later versions of Linux Kernel 4.9? Yes. 
            What next? 
            • PR discussion could be extended to next meeting based on the PR feedback. [Jeffery/Prince]

            MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  06/18/2019.

            Topics discussed

            • Error Handling  - BRCM (Santhosh)
            Review (Q&A)
            We had a great discussion, there are lot of inputs from community and here is some. Feel free to add missing comments here.
            • How does framework supports multiple CRUD failures?  
            [Ben]: See below 
            • Do you provide a knob to switch off Error handling feature? Is knob necessary? 
            [Ben]: No knob is necessary. The error handling proposal is a framework that is available for a) implementation of error reporting in SWSS on a feature-by-feature basis and b) application processing of such errors. Both a) and b) are implementation choices that can be made on an feature-by-feature basis. And if an application does not want to process a supported error, then it can just ignore it. 
            • Does the applications get out of order notifications from feedback loop? How to handle in the case of it? Ex: User does create/delete/create and do you expect the error feedback come in order? 
            [Ben]: The specific comment was that the key/values used to refer to APP_DB (or other) in an ERROR_DB report may not be specific enough to distinguish between different error events. The example given (by Nikos) was a route add-withdraw-add case - since the APP_DB table entry may be the same between the 2 adds, then, if there's an error report, how does the application (FRR in this case) know which of the adds failed? We will come back on this point. 
            • What is the design decision behind a new Error DB? Why can't we merge error attributes into APP DB? 
            [Ben]: We thought about both options, and decided that the ERROR_DB gave a bit more flexibility and avoided changing existing application tables. It was not a clear decision, but we see no reason to move away from it. 
            • What is the mechanism to synchronize route CRUD between APP DB vs new Error DB? 
            [Ben]: See above 
            • Is new Error DB is a mirror of APP DB? 
            [Ben]: Not really - but each error table entry points to a corresponding entry in another table (usually APP_DB) 
            • The current design mentioned an approach to stop propagate the failed/error routes to the neighbors? This may not right as per RFC, the routes should propagate though the it failed due to some policy. (Nikos)
            [Ben]: This topic went beyond scope of the framework (#1 above) and into the BGP doc (#2). We will setup a separate offline discussion for this.
            Overall feedback - The feedback loop is necessary to address SAI fatal errors. However the community requested the design should dis associate/de couple the feedback loop  as much as possible so that applications have freedom to react/handle it own way.
            [Ben]: That's exactly how it's setup today. 
            one option suggested - Framework should more generic and should accommodate opaque error context for the applications. 
            [Ben]: This is a different topic - see above ("The specific comment was that the key/values ....")

            Xin will extend an offline discussion on this topic, stay tuned.

            • SONiC Release 201908 tracking page - Xin can you post the link
            • Action Item for community - Signup for PR reviews

            MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  06/04/2019.

            Topics discussed
            • STP/PVST - Sandeep (BRCM)
            Q & A 
            • Can this STP feature compile time disabled? BRCM will explore this (compile time/run time options to disable/enable STP/PVST feature)
            • Warm reboot not supported for PVST? Community requested more details need to be added to design 
            • Multiple questions what is the design decision on why  STP states are not programming to Kernel?   Few questions: 1) With the current STP design - the STP states are not populating in kernel, ASIC and Kernel will be out of sync, what is the downside ?  2) Let's say Port/Vlan is not blocking in the kernel, but is blocked in ASIC, then what is the behavior with arp/ping/ospf in this scenarios ?  BRCM should document the scenarios.
            • Community requested to document the ASIC and Kernel out of sync scenarios - AI BRCM
            • There should be no drop if HW says forwarding? yes
            • Is there mechanism to program the states in to Kernel ? BRCM to explore on it
            • If the trap is configured on port which is blocked does the packet comes to CPU? yes, based on the trap configurations.
            • When port is blocked in HW, what are the packets should send? - HW shouldn't block L2 packets/LACP exchanges but drop L3 packets.
            • Can COPP program to trap to cpu ? Yes

            • HLD on NAT  - Kiran Kella (BRCM)

            Q & A 
            • Does it support payload/embedded headers (ALGs- application level gateways) support ? Not right now.
            • Continue discussion next sub group meeting. 
            • Next sub group meetings HLD on NAT, SFLow 

            MoM of today's OCP SONiC SUB GROUP call  05/28/2019.

            Topics discussed:
            • Status on MLAG Design discussions - Nephos Team

            Q & A 
            • Does this solution addressed L3 MLAG alone? Both L3 and L2. It seems L2 MLAG HLD need some updates.
            • Does MCLAG supports MulitCast? Nephos team will update the HLD with all the use-cases and missing pieces.
            • When is the next meeting to discuss on MCLAG ? June 11th
            • Community requested Nephos team for Updated MCLAG HLD before Jun 11th. 

            Action Items/Announcements
            • Will it be possible to discuss other than MCLAG in SUB Group calls ? Yes. Xin we will work and adjust to the cadence
            • Community requested to include/Update User Scenarios in HLDs for review
            • Ben Gale (BRCM) will propose on MCLAG next few weeks. 
            • Request community to review below MCLAG PR before next sub group meeting (06/11/2019)
            • Here is the PR and design presentation
              1.  MCLAG video -
              2.  MCLAG PR -

            MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  05/21/2019.

            Topics discussed
            • L2 - FDB/MAC enhancements - Anil (Broadcom)

            Q & A 
            • FDB aging per device ? yes 
            • Does FDB aging support per sec ? yes 
            • Can MAC aging support per port and VLAN ? Anil will add support to the proposal 
            • Design on restrict the warning logs on VLAN range feature support? Broadcom will consider this in the proposal [Aggregated log etc.]
            • Does this feature need  SAI support from vendors ? (no new SAI attributes), Broadcom will list SAI APIs using it currently for this feature.
            • How does Vlan range updates implemented? vlan range being consolidated at config_db and apply down to the hardware in single shot, no deletes and adds.
            • Do we have FDB type in the fdb entry ? yes [static vs dynamic] and will be displayed in show commands
            • How does FDB optimizations on topo/STP event flush ? out side of ASIC, in the case of broadcom flushes are quick.  
            • How does system wide fdb flush ? It should handled by SAI, by go over all the ports and Vlans, vendor specific. 
            • Community ask on MAC aging & MAC move scale numbers? Broadcom will add into the proposal 

            • BFD - Sumit Agarwal (Broadcom)
            Q & A 

            • Discussed on BFD implementations phase 1  & Phase 2. 
            • In BFD Phase-1 : BFD is part of BGP docker
            • In BFD Phase 2 : BFD will implement in Hardware. 
            • Can SONiC Users turn off if they don't want? yes through compile time, but community suggested don't run default, provide CLI to enable it.
            • How BFD works with warm reboots ? 1) planned warm reboot, users can update the BFD timers upfront 2) unplanned warm reboot BFD session will timeout before BGP timeouts. 
            • Can configure/control BFD timeouts on remote Bgp peers? Question from Nikos. Need discussion more.

            • More design reviews lineup for Aug 2019.
            • Provide feedbacks on PRs 
            • Watch out for bi weekly meeting on design proposals and reviews.
            MoM of today's OCP SONiC call  05/07/2019.

            Topics discussed
            • SONiC 201908 release Planning - 05/07/2019

            Q & A 
            • Need code review support for multi-db performance improvements - MSFT & AVIZ Networks
            • What is the scope of Error handling mechanism work by BRCM  - It covers SAI error surfacing and handling
            • What is the scope of Configuration validations - Open for design, current scope is use syslog mechanism to propagate the config errors.
            • What is the VRF feature planned in SONiC? it is VRF lite support not the MPLS. 
            • Do we have plan for multi-tenancy VPN with VRF feature? No, that would be handles separately.
            • When is the VRF lite design review - Expected 5/21
            • What is the ETA for dynamic breakout - Xin will work with LNKD
            • For dynamic breakout, is it possible to get ASIC vendor ETA ? Xin will talk to ASIC vendors [an ETA early July would help to test it]
            • Do we have a list of platform APIs ? refer PMON APIs
            • How to earn OCP credits for companies - Checkout the OCP website for how to get credits to such as software contributions etc.
            • Is sub-port feature is same as sub-interface ? yes 
            • What kind of features run on sub-port? No HLD yet, Jipan will come back with HLD on this
            • Can we have small description on sub-port ? Xin will work with Alibaba
            • When is the SAI proposal on sFlow? Dell working on the SAI proposal for sFlow and will send for design review.
            Reply all
            Reply to author
            0 new messages