►
From YouTube: CNCF SIG App Delivery Meeting- 2019-08-14
Description
Join us for Kubernetes Forums Seoul, Sydney, Bengaluru and Delhi - learn more at kubecon.io
Don't miss KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020 events in Amsterdam March 30 - April 2, Shanghai July 28-30 and Boston November 17-20! Learn more at kubecon.io. The conference features presentations from developers and end users of Kubernetes, Prometheus, Envoy, and all of the other CNCF-hosted projects
B
E
A
A
Alright,
y'all
ready
or
five
minutes
inch
I
thanks.
Everyone
for
coming
today
is
Wednesday
August
14.
This
is
the
Sig
absalom
recall
we're
just
going
to
be
discussing
any
final
items
on
the
stakeout
delivery,
Charter
and
then,
after
this
call,
Alexis
will
kick
off
a
boat
on
the
mailing
list,
just
between
this
group
of
people
to
make
sure
that
nobody
has
any
objections.
Everybody,
it's
good
to
go
with
the
shorter
and
then
on
the
20th
after
the
TFC
call
will
call
for
a
vote
on
the
TOC
for
both
the
Charter
and
the
chairs.
A
G
So
alright,
too
busy
to
get
the
each
other
to
a
place
where
everybody
on
this
call
can
vote
on
it
and
the
mailing
list
for
vote
on
it
to
today,
because
we
would
like
to
then
take
it
to
the
TOC
ASAP
and
I'd
like
to.
First
of
all,
thank
everybody.
Who's
been
involved
in
the
creation
of
this
document.
Let's
make
sure
that
if
you
want
it,
you
can
be
acknowledged
in
the
as
a
creator
of
this
document
when
we
can
take
to
take
you
to
the
TOC.
Don't
let
us
forget
to
do
that.
G
A
couple
of
highlights
so
Quinton
is
back
from
his
trip
and
he
was
an
editor
and
had
a
couple
of
suggestions
which
we'd
want
to
discuss
today.
So
the
that
we
want
to
bump
a
couple
of
things
into
working
groups.
There
was
the
question
about
the
service.
Wg
Quinton
is
proposing
that
we
also
have
a
CIC
pwg,
the
passwd
and
one
of
our
initial
deliverables,
b/c
ICD,
and
that
would
mean
that,
in
addition
to
landscape
deliverable,
we
would
have
a
CIC
be
deliverable.
What
do
people
think
about
that?
I.
A
Think
it's
great
to
have
CI
CD
and
it's
on
working
group,
but
I
do
think
that,
like
we
should
not,
we
should
let
the
cig
form
and
then
have
people
who
are
organically
interested
in
that
space
form
their
own
working
group
after
I.
Don't
want
to
say
it's
a
goal
to
form
the
working
group,
because
I'd
really
like
to
have
a
way
to
see
that
there's
interest
there
and
somebody
wants
to
lead
it
and
you
know
figure
out
what
the
objectives
of
that
working
group
is
like.
That
in
itself,
is
it's
like
own?
H
G
Not
necessarily
I
think
you
can
decide
later.
We
don't
have
to
be
overly
prescriptive
today.
I
just
think.
It's
important
that
we
have
some
key
deliverables
in
the
initial
TOC
presently
I
think
there
is
a
strong
consensus
about
the
landscape
on
that
at
dev
tools,
because
that
space
is
so
so
confusing.
G
A
D
I
think
the
top
the
topics
I
I,
think
the
topic
is
less
important
than
the
number
of
people
and
if,
if
figure
out
delivery
attracts
ten
people,
fragmenting
into
four
working
groups
feels
like
we
got
a
bit
carried
away.
I
think
saying
that
the
they
liked
the
overall
say
getting
from
the
Charter
perspective.
These
are
things
we
want
to
cover
like
I,
a
concrete
deliverable
around
CITV
company,
the
other
arm
paths
company.
There
are
several:
it's
like
guidance
whatever
it
might
be.
D
Feels
like
Italians
go
up
totally
a
good
idea,
and
if
that,
if
we
end
up
with
like
30
people,
turning
you
up
in
ten
of
them
want
to
do
that.
That
feels
like
a
great
way
of
like
the
state
going
hey,
have
a
working
group
got
on
with
it.
I
wouldn't
put
that
in
this
document,
I
think
they're
things
was
as
the
cig.
We
should
do.
They
sound
like
it
real
interesting
things
to
do.
A
E
E
You
know
very
strong
focus
on
that
initially,
and
you
know
it's
all
very
well
to
say
if
30
people
sign
up
and
do
whatever
that
that's
all
very
well,
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
the
sig
itself
has
to
have
you
know,
priorities
and
focuses,
and
and
sometimes
that
requires
the
leadership
to
actively
go
and
seek
out
the
right
people
to
produce
the
the
artifacts
in
in
sort
of
some
priority
order.
But
there
was
a
thinking,
yeah
I,.
D
D
How
we
eat
self
organize
around
those
topics
can
be
based
on
the
people
who
turn
up
her
in
the
room.
I'd
worry
if
we
came
and
said
we're
honest
out
this
sig
and
we
won't
set
up
these
four
working
groups.
That's
there's
a
risk
of
that
being
fragmented
versus
we're
under
set
the
sig.
It's
gonna
focus
on
these
topics
and
Bernal
yeah.
It
was.
E
D
E
Other
consideration
was
that
we
do
actually
have
existing
working
groups
serve
eliciting
one
of
them
and
the
question
is
you
know
what
is
the
relationship
between
service
working
group
and,
and
this
sake
and
and
the
explicit
answer
which
was
discussed
on
the
previous
quasi
looks
you
might
have
missed
an
Alexis.
You
might
have
missed
it,
but
it
was
explicitly
decided
to
fault
that
working
group
in
to
this
sick
and
and
so
we
needed
to
kind
of
state
that
somewhere
yeah
and
hence
the
the
section
on
making
groups.
Yes,.
D
G
Yeah,
okay,
so
Garrett
do
you
have
a
quick
look
at
the
documents?
Do
you
feel
like
that?
That
concept
which
I
think
everyone's
running
around
is
adequately
expressed,
and
if
not,
could
you
could
you
make
a
couple
of
quick
changes
so
that
we
care
more
realize
this,
and
then
we
can
kind
of
declare
victory,
I,
think.
D
A
I,
the
original
intent
of
that
section
was
discussing
or
clarifying
the
relationship
between
existing
groups,
not
necessarily
talking
about
you
know
all
of
the
work,
not
necessarily
thinking
about
what
the
working
group
structure
would
be.
So
there
was
a
mention
of
you
know
how
we
relate
to
the
existing
Cabrini's,
the
gaps
and
how
we
relate
to
the
existing
serverless
working
group.
So
really
don't
think
that
we
need
to
mention
the
CIC
be
working
group
necessarily
or
a
past
working
group.
C
Yeah
I
agree
with
Michelle.
This
part
actually
now
looks
like
we
are
trying
to
create
new
working
groups
under
League,
or
we
went
on
to
put
the
existing
working
group
under
the
scope
of
this
I.
Think
it's
more
like
we
are
talking
about
a
relationship
between
the
existing
six
and
then
I
think
you
guys
might
notice.
There
is
even
no
CIC
D,
yes
yeah,
so
maybe
we
don't
imagine
that
expectedly,
like
that
or
rebecca
nation
at
four
upcoming
CIC
working
groups
and
another
thing
is
CIN
stadium
is
actually
not
in
the
same
thing.
C
B
Well,
what's
interesting
is
the
entire
paragraph
sounds
a
little
wreath,
little
funky
in
the
sense
that
the
entire
section
is
about
What's
in
scope,
and
then
we
have
a
paragraph
in
there.
It
says
the
following
items
are
in
scope,
so
we
already
mentioned,
has
one
other
spot
in
that
section?
It's
like
five
lines
above
when
you
say
host
an
environment
in
our
building,
and
we
mention
that
in
there.
B
E
C
Constant
here,
because
I'm
reading
the
charter
of
the
surveys,
the
working
group
actually
including
both
functionalist
and
the
bank
and
service
for
the
pen
canister-
is
it's
actually
a
larger
scope,
even
than
this
cigar
delivery
working
group
even
easier
than
this.
They
got
delivery.
For
example,
the
the
database
may
claim
to
be
serviced
by
filling
the
form
of
the
bank
in
histories,
but
I
don't
think
it's
very
related
to
the
application
or
what
we
are
talking
in
this
state.
That.
G
G
G
A
D
A
A
A
Could
you
send
that?
Could
you
mention
that,
on
an
email
on
the
mailing
list,
maybe
amy
has
some
answers
or.