[09:31:03] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10SRE: Finalise design extension of WMCS networks to new cloudsw in Eqiad rows E/F - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T304989 (10dcaro) Hey @cmooney, is there any input needed from WMCS on this? (just want to make sure you are not blocked)
[10:30:28] <jbond>	 wlecome slyngshede 
[10:32:59] <slyngshede>	 Thank you :-)
[10:57:14] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10SRE, 10observability: Grafana posting to http://wpt-graphite.wmftest.org:8080/ - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T307445 (10jbond)
[12:42:03] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10SRE, 10fundraising-tech-ops: Upgrade pfw to Junos 20+ - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T295691 (10Jgreen) >>! In T295691#7894680, @Papaul wrote: > @Jgreen hello do you think this can be done on May the 16th?   @Papaul, yes that sounds good. We can plan for downt...
[12:46:58] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10SRE, 10observability: Grafana posting to http://wpt-graphite.wmftest.org:8080/ - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T307445 (10jbond) this is likely related to https://wikitech.wikimedia.org/wiki/Performance/Graphite/Synthetic_Instance
[14:20:31] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10SRE, 10observability: Grafana posting to http://wpt-graphite.wmftest.org:8080/ - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T307445 (10fgiunchedi) Yes valid indeed, see also {T231870} and {T304583}
[15:18:27] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Data-Engineering, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10Product-Analytics, and 3 others: Maybe restrict domains accessible by webproxy - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T300977 (10jbond) >>! In T300977#7836272, @Volans wrote: > If I may add my use case too, I would like to be able to restrict the a...
[15:53:09] <wikibugs>	 10netops, 10Infrastructure-Foundations, 10Prod-Kubernetes, 10SRE: Agree strategy for Kubernetes BGP peering to top-of-rack switches - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T306649 (10akosiaris) >>! In T306649#7883435, @elukey wrote: > We have discussed this issue in the #serviceops channel yesterday, and the i...