►
From YouTube: Envoy Community Meeting 2020-01-14
Description
Envoy Community Meeting 2020-01-14
B
C
A
D
E
A
G
So
v3
alpha
many
of
the
major
PR
emerged
last
week,
so
anyone
who's
working
with
the
api's
interlink
there's
a
v3
alpha
alternative.
You
should
be
using
that
most
of
onboarding
to
me
is
updated
now
in
theory,
it
should
make
absolutely
zero
difference
to
the
configurations
between
just
like
bootstrap
or
this,
which
comes
from
the
wire.
If
you
notice
issues,
please
speak
up
and
say
something
because
we
are
planning
on
freezing
v3
after
v3
and
they're
coming
days
and
also
are
cutting
the
1.13
release,
ideally
before
in
the
week.
G
So
a
lot
of
this
relies
on
us
getting
new
puzzle,
useful
signal
from
folks
who
are
actually
you
know,
working
on
master
its
head
and
you
might
notice
that
things
the
issues
that
arise
as
you
know,
they
actually
do
rollouts
and
they're.
They
stay
there.
They
bump
to
pass
where
we've
cuts
the
v3
we've
noticing.
Like
the
recent
couple
recent
PRS,
there
has
been
some
memory
increase
in
like
per
endpoint
in
per
cost
over
there,
the
faster
ones,
not
significant
per
input.
G
G
G
I'm,
not
sure
that
there's
been
a
lot
of
stuff
which
has
happened
in
the
last
quarter
or
one
of
the
major
things
will
be.
The
v3
API
is
because
lots
of
other
things
which
are
going
to
make
that
way
in
there
I'll
be
looking
at
kind
of
never
once
later
this
week.
If
we
don't
hear
any,
you
know
if
there
any
fires,
burning,
yeah,
I'm,
not
sure
what
else
there
is
for
me
to
say
there.
H
G
A
B
A
I'll,
do
that
I'll.
Do
that
today.
Did
you
do
the
changes
to
the
one-time
thing,
or
did
you
know
so,
there's
been
yeah?
What
will
sink
I
should
be
able
to
get
one
of
mine,
if
not
both
of
them
in
today
and
the
other
one
in
tomorrow,
they're
like
again,
98
percent
of
the
work
is
done.
It's
like
merging,
Harvey's
and
doing
a
time
to
clean
up.
That's
big
tactic
like
spelling
of
convict
strings
and
tests.
G
So
yeah
so
I
think
optimistically
and
a
week
if
there
could
be
potential
slippage
engineer
inch
next
week,
but
definitely
no
later,
because
we
have
bunch
of
other
reasons
that
can't
slip
further
and
particularly
like
right
now.
We
would
like
folks
to
refrain
from
merging
any
high-risk,
EOS,
so
obviously
I
kind
of
main
that
state
indefinitely
yep.
B
H
I
just
wanted
to
briefly
mention
that
this
has
come
up
before,
but-
and
it
came
up
again
recently
with
the
increasing
number
of
extensions
that
people
are
trying
to
merge
into
the
main
repo
I
I
think
we
are
going
to
have
to
start
thinking
about
either
initially
doing
multiple
docker
images.
So
you
could
think
of
like
a
you
know
like
a
core
envoy
version
with
like
only
security
vetted
things
or
something
like
that,
and
then
there's
a
yeah
per
that
per
that
tweet.
H
G
Notices
that
submits
to
envoy
proper,
their
abstentions,
for
a
variety
of
reasons.
Now
one
of
these
is
because
hey
the
politician,
hombre
distribution,
it's
gonna,
be
everybody's
homeboy,
binary,
it's
gonna
and
so
on.
Teller
is
get
CI
coverage.
Other
is
like
so
that
it's
you
know,
like
probably
I,
don't
know
it's
considered
to
be
one
of
the
high
quality
envoy
first-class
extensions,
I
figure.
We
can
at
least
provide
the
CI
coverage
one
by
this
external
repo,
and
that's
essentially,
role
will
be
shooting
for
rights.
G
H
I
H
I
mean
you
know
it
it.
It
does
and
there's
the
open
issue
there,
which
again
I,
don't
really
think
it's
that
hard,
like
I,
think
someone
could
implement
it.
I,
don't
know
that
that
solves
the
question.
I
don't
know
that
it
solves
the
problem,
though,
because
even
with
loadable
modules,
you're
still
probably
gonna
expect
you
know
some
type
of
bundling
and
especially
with
c++.
You
know
they
all
have
to
be
compiled
at
the
same
time.
Yadda
yadda,
yadda,
so
I
agree
that
loadable
modules
potentially
makes
it
better.
H
You
know,
there's
been
some
ongoing
work
in
like
having
config
dumps,
say
what
extensions
are
compiled
in,
and
it's
just
like.
This
is
a
very
complicated
topic
where
we
have
a
tension
between
people
that
want
to
have
a
very
limited.
Trusting
trusted
computing
base
and
vendors
that
want
like
the
the
kitchen
sink
so
that
they
don't
need
to
worry
about
deployment
issues.
It's
it's
quite
complicated,
yeah.
B
H
H
I
think
post
113,
we're
probably
gonna,
start
a
policy
where
we
start
maintaining
multiple
stable
branches,
so
that
will
include
probably
backporting
security
fixes
to
at
least
the
last
two
releases
to
give
people
at
least
a
three
month
window
to
upgrade,
and
it
will
probably
also
mean
in
conjunction
at
least
with
the
SDO
team
of
backporting
bug
fixes.
Also.
However,
this
will
require
community
stable
maintainer.
H
H
Think
it
right
so
I
think
if
they
I
think
if
people
want
more
than
X
they're
they're
gonna
have
to
pony
up
the
resources,
but
that's
something
that
we
will
have
to
hash
out
here.
Like
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
it's
reasonable
to
ask.
You
know
the
primary
envoy
security
team.
The
upstream
maintainer
is
to
say
back
port
security
fixes
to
four
four
releases.
It's
just
too
time-consuming,
so
I
think
that.
But
these
are
the
kinds
of
things
that
we
will
have
to
hash
out
for
sure.
H
H
Think,
what's
more
I
think
what's
more
important
is
having
a
discussion
about
what
the
upstream
maintainer
x'
will
and
won't
do
versus
what
the
community
will
and
won't
do
so,
for
example,
it's
great
if
the
community
does
X
but
I
think
it's
more
important
to
say
that
the
upstream
maintainer
x'
will
not
do
X,
meaning
like
the
upstream
maintainer
x',
will
only
back
port
security
fixes
to
the
last
few
releases
or
something
like
that.
But.
A
J
G
J
E
I
Just
one
thing
that
we
most
of
this
discussion
happened
on
the
OS
X
dev
channel.
It
just
turns
out
that
C++
17
standard
a
file
system
just
still
remains
completely
unusable
or
unpredictable
between
POSIX
and
Mac
and
Windows
and
so
forth.
So
it
looked.
We
finally
realized
it's
easier
to
just
deal
with
all
of
this
in
terms
of
POSIX
or
in
terms
as
well,
POSIX
or
Windows
specifics,
so
we're
basically
looking.
We've
almost
got
a
patch
together
that
gets
rid
of
standard
file
system
altogether
from
working
tree
and
I'm.
I
Also
looking
at
the
fact
that
there's
a
tremendous
amount
of
overlap
in
the
API
between
the
way
we're
doing
I/o
handle
for
sockets
and
the
way
that
we're
doing
the
file
system
API
it
looks
it
looks
like
there's
got
to
be
a
superclass
of
that
error.
So
we
should
be
able
to
abstract
this
enough
that
all
these
things
look
similar
and
arm
usable
by
everybody
without
a
great
deal
of
hassle.
I
H
On
the
on
the
standard
file
system,
side,
I
think
that
makes
sense
to
me
just
because
I
think
that
will
likely
allow
us
to
upgrade
to
C++
17,
since
we
already
know
that
on
unblameable,
like
standard
file
system
is
not
going
to
work
for
the
foreseeable
future.
So
my
advice
is:
we
already
have
the
file
system,
abstraction
I,
think
as
long
as
we
just
plum
that
through
everywhere
and
then,
even
if
it's
not
implemented
yet
on
by
mobile
or
in
Windows
or
whatever
we
can,
we
can.
H
L
L
L
So
there's
some
order,
n-squared
or
there's
some
order
and
operations
around
headers,
which
the
system
doesn't
know
about
yet
and
there's
also
a
little
bit
of
a
conflation
of
being
fast
versus
coalescing,
behavior.
Well,
yeah
you
better
to
clean
up
a
little
bit,
and
actually
it
doesn't.
The
the
doc
does
not
specify
what
to
do.
It
just
gives
a
bunch
of
options
and
paste
some
performance
graphs
from
what
I
have
experimented
with
like
a
month
ago,
just
kind
of
get
that
out
and
I
wanted
to
kind
of
get
somebody
full-time
to
work
on.
Yes,.
G
Looking
at
another
issue-
and
that
is
like
every
time
we
share
this
code
to
security
or
it
is-
then
we
tell
we
put
them
at
home
boy-
I
know
that
second,
is
it
okay
because
he
has
solutions
here,
but
you
know
historically,
every
tone
has
cure
its
feet:
perks,
zooming
on
this
car.
It's
not
that
the
code
is
incorrect.
It's
that
it's
it
burns
time
with
the
auditors,
because
they're
looking
it's
very
low-level
mem
copy,
Malik
it
a
buffer,
resizing
kind
of
stuff
which
defi
and
I
realized
absolved
was
like.
G
H
Only
thing
that
I
would
say
is
I
I.
Think,
there's
there's
two
separate
things
here
and
what
I
would
suggest
is
that
the
proposal
that
I
put
out
to
replace
all
of
the
low-level
stuff
with
AB
seal
I
think
I'm
hoping
that
will
be
non-controversial
because
I
think
algorithmically.
That
should
roughly
replace
the
current
implementation
with
something
that
is
much
easier
to
understand.
So,
like
there
shouldn't
be
a
lot
of
discussion
around
perf
like
we
can
do
basic
benchmarks,
but
it
should
be
roughly
the
same.
H
A
G
Could
we
just
rethink
everything
you
said
start
with
a
simple
map:
yeah?
Maybe
that
isn't
before
enough,
but
like?
Let's
actually
do
some
simple
benchmarking
and
actually
you
know
start
off
like
any
person
implicitly
here
could
allow
us
to
remove
a
lot
of
the
other
things
that
have
historically
been
complicating
here.
You
know
I
missing
the
original
motivation
here,
but
over
time
no
checks
change.
You
know,
former
zaps
off
hashmap
might
be
different
than
that
of
you
know
all
this
kind
of
stuff.
G
H
That's
all
fine
I
mean,
and
that
sounds
like
a
great
use
of
time
to
actually
look
at
this
from
a
holistic
perspective.
It's
something
that
I've
wanted
to
do
for
a
long
time.
My
point
more
is
that
I
think
we
can
land
a
functionally
equivalent
code,
clean
up
relics
we
quickly
and-
and
that
will
be
probably
non-controversial
and
make
auditors
like
much
happier
so
I
would
suggest
that
we
just
do
that,
because
I
don't
think
it's
that
hard
and
then
that
will
give
us
a
little
more
breathing
room
to
hopefully.
A
L
H
Yeah
so
and
I
mean,
but
on
on
that
point
with
all
the
fuzzing
we
have
now
and
a
bunch
of
other
stuff
like
does
it
really
matter?
Probably
not
so
I
I'll
defer
to
all
of
you
to
decide
what
you
know
what
we
should
do
there,
but
yeah.
It
would
be
great
like
this
is
one
of
the
areas
where
you
know
that
code
is
really
from
three
and
a
half
or
four
years
ago,
and
it
hasn't
really
had
any
I
would
say
rigorous
performance
analysis.
Since
then,
I.
A
M
Yeah,
this
is
a
Gary
I.
Just
had
a
quick
question
about
the
dynamic
forward.
Proxy
I
saw
that
it
was
checked
in
there
Matt
back
in
the
summer
time
and
according
to
the
documentation,
it's
done
as
an
alpha
state.
I
haven't
seen
a
document
document
update
since
then,
I've
been
playing
around
a
little
bit
with
it
seems
to
be
stable,
didn't
have
any
issues
with
it.
You
have
an
update
as
far
as
is
it
expected
to
be
stable
or
there
are
other
things
to.
H
J
H
There's
I
think
again.
This
probably
needs
a
little
more
rigor
in
terms
of
how
we
mark
different
things.
I
think
the
security
perspective
is
obviously
what
the
intention
is,
meaning
we
would
fix
any
issues
that
come
up
there.
I
think
the
Alpha
status
was
more
just
typically
when
we
put
out
a
new
filter
that
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
production
coverage.
H
You
know
I
think
we're
just
trying
to
say
that
it
doesn't
have
a
lot
of
production
coverage
yeah,
but
I
I
do
know,
implicitly
that
there
are
people
using
it
in
prod,
so
I
think
it's
probably
okay
to
switch
it
now.
But
again,
that's
yet
another
process
thing
that
we
probably
need
to
look
at
so
I
will
I
will
make
a
note
there.
M
H
Don't
I
don't
know,
I
I
think
the
code
has
all
of
the
right
circuit
breakers
in
place
to
avoid
a
unlimited
expansion
and
things
like
that.
So
I
think
that
you
could
do
your
own
measurements.
You
know
to
to
see.
We
definitely
wrote
the
code
like
with
it
in
mind,
to
you
know,
use
a
limited
amount
of
memory,
but
I
think
you'd
have
to
do
your
own
measurements.
Okay,.
M
H
There's
someone
that
said
that
they
were
gonna,
do
it,
but
I
haven't
seen
any
progress
on
that.
So
I
would
assume
that
it's
not
being
worked
on
right
now.
It's
something
that
I
would
love
to
see
lands
I,
think
we
have
a
pretty
good
idea
of
roughly
what
needs
to
be
done.
It
would
just
require
a
development
resource.
E
H
H
A
N
J
D
H
Probably
not
if
beasts
not
without
someone
doing
a
ton
of
work
on
their
own,
it's
just
like
getting
it
getting
it.
Working
at
all
is
absolutely
Herculean
effort,
so.
A
H
I
A
Say
from
from
experience,
I
ITL
the
quick
launch
over
at
Google,
it
took
us
like
two
and
a
half
years
of
tuning
to
sort
out
all
the
weird
corner
cases
in
you
know.
Various
pathological
act
patterns
and
stuff
like
I,
wouldn't
want
to
go
through
that
again,
which
is
why
we're
doing
the
quiche
integration
for
envoy
is
that's
what
they
wanted.
H
I
mean
we,
we
did
build
the
quick
listener
thing
as
an
extension,
so
it
should
be
technically
possible
to
plug
in
a
different
quick
listener,
but
you
know
I
think
that's
the
kind
of
thing
that
you
would
probably
be
mostly
on
your
own
and
I
I'm,
honestly,
not
sure
what
technical
reason,
what
what
technical
problem
you
would
be.
You
would
be
solving.