►
From YouTube: Envoy Community Meeting - 2019-07-16
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
A
B
D
A
E
A
E
E
A
That
I
promised
that
I
would
and
I
didn't
so
and
I'm
I'm
going
to
a
conference
tomorrow
that
I'm
traveling
this
week.
So
realistically
it
would
be
next
week
before
I
could
play
with
that.
I
think
some
of
the
Pinterest
folks
had
also
agreed
to
do
that
so
I
I
don't
know
if
we
want
to
follow
up
with
them
and
ask
if
they
had
done
that.
So.
D
D
A
I
mean
thanks.
That's
a
that's
a
great
vote
of
confidence.
I
I
would
still
love
a
couple
more
people
to
do.
Do
some
quick
testing,
though
I
I
think
what
we
could
do
right
is
like
we're:
we're
not
going
to
delete
the
old
implementation
like
we're.
Still
gonna
have
the
run
time
flag,
so
I
guess
Josh.
Do
you
want
to
just
flip
the
default
like
I?
Think?
That's
probably
fine.
A
B
E
G
H
E
A
It's
a
it's
something
that
I
can
possibly
do
in
the
next
couple
of
days,
but
just
being
realistic
with
my
travel
schedule.
Probably
not
I
can
definitely
do
it
by
next
Monday,
but
it
seems
fine
to
go
ahead
and
just
flip
flip
the
defaults,
and
if
we
find
any
you
know
issue,
we
can
always
flip
it
back.
A
A
A
That's
fine
I
mean
if
GCC
is
that
slow
I
guess
that's
life,
but
I
guess
my
only
concern
there,
and
this
is
not
something
that
we
should
action
on.
It's
just
that
I
know
that
I've
seen
PRS
from
like
people
at
Intel
and
other
folks.
They
keep
fixing
things
that
are
breaking
on,
like
GCC,
nine
and
I.
Don't
I,
don't
know
how
to
reconcile
this
right
because,
like
we
have,
we
have
limited
resources,
so
there's
only
so
many
builds
that
we
can
do
it's
like
we're.
We're
obviously
never
going
to
cover
every
compiler.
A
A
What
I'm,
what
I'm
wondering
if
we
should
do
and
I
know
that
you
and
I
had
talked
about
this
at
some
point,
is,
and
maybe
we
can
just
open
an
issue
to
track,
is
to
use
GCC
just
to
compile
the
server
and
don't
run
tests,
because
the
tester
will
take
forever
and
that
would
at
least
you
know,
that
would
at
least
show
up
like
obvious
issues
in
production
code
and
that
shouldn't
take
that
long.
So
that
might
be
something
that
we
can
consider.
G
A
G
A
Sorry,
it
looks
like
you
were
typing.
Also,
okay,
did
you
did
you
want
to
talk
publicly
yet
about
the
run
time,
Guard
stuff,
Alyssa
that
the
you
had
sent
slack
messages
about,
or
is
it
too
early
and.
F
We
can,
I
think,
I
think,
we're
just
in
a
state
where
we,
we
think
we're
gonna
move
towards
encouraging
run
guarding
visible,
like
changes
to
the
data
plane,
yeah
they're
like
adding
headers
removing
headers
whenever
people
default
to
cardigan
yeah.
I
think
we're
at
the
point
where
we're
gonna
put
that
in
governance
yep,
because
we
found
a
couple
of
small
issues
and
we
just
want
to
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
before
we
ask
people
to
do
by
default.
Yep.
A
I
think
that's
fine,
I
I
think
my
only
comment
there
is
we're
gonna
need
to
better
define
like
during
code
review.
You
know
what
is
the
data
plane
like
what
qualifies
as
a
thing
that
we
would
want
to
run
time
guard
because
I'm?
Assuming
that
you
know,
we
don't
need
to
run
time,
guard
bug
fixes,
but
it's
unclear
right
so,
like
I,
think
I
think
that
we
just
need
to
have
some
guidance
in
terms
of
what
meets
the
bar
so
that
when
people
are
doing
code,
reviews
like
we
can
make
sure
that
we're.
A
A
And
I
think
that
we've
talked
about
this
off
and
on
over
the
last
year
or
two
and
I
I
have
no
conceptual
objection.
I
just
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
go
too
far
over
the
top,
and
then
it
becomes
like
a
giant
pain
in
the
ass
for
not
not
that
much
benefit
so
I'm,
hoping
that
we
can
hit
a
happy,
medium
and
I
think
just
having
having
some
structure
and
place
of
how
to
think
about
whether
we
want
to
put
the
garden
or
not
like
would
probably
be
useful.
Yeah.
I
F
A
A
I
also
think
that
it's
completely
reasonable
to
like
once
we
get
the
ability
in
the
bot
to
require
code
reviews
like
for
particular
sections
of
the
code,
I
think
it's
reasonable.
You
know
to
have
a
set
of
reviewers
that
must
review
either
the
TLS
code
or
the
or
like
the
codec
code,
or
something
like
that.
But
even
there
I
mean
like
we're.
Just
gonna
have
to
figure
out
like
what
code
requires,
what
and
just
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
block
on
any
single
person.
F
A
A
I
mean
it's,
it's
less
even
about
encourages
and
requires
I'm
more
just
concerned
about
like
what
like
what
are
we
guarding
and
who
has
to
approve
and
I
think
as
specific
as
we
can
be
there
and
get
that
open
for
discussion.
Probably
the
the
better
we'll
be
okay,
cool
and
I,
and
the
fixes
that
you're
working
on
just
so
I
understand
is
the
stuff
that
we
had
talked
about,
so
that
we
can
use
the
static
runtime
guarding
either
in
like
the
test
code
or
the
production
code.
Yeah.
F
So
my
example
CL,
which
works
great
and
solves
a
problem
for
envoy,
is
essentially
saying:
okay,
if
for
the
integration
tests,
if
you're
not
a
runtime,
if
you're,
not
a
worker
thread,
you
can
still
check
run
time
yeah.
But
then
it
occurred
to
me
for
people
who
have
hybrid
binaries
that
will
still
want
it
to
work
so
yeah.
The
PR
that
I
put
to
give
you
that
the
this
morning
that
empty
headers
yeah.
I
A
Yeah,
let's,
let's
maybe
brainstorm
offline
like
just
thinking
off
the
top
of
my
head,
I'm
wondering
if,
since
this
is
such
an
important
case,
if
we
could
have
some
kind
of
function
or
like
an
on
worker
thread
can
register
for
runtime
and
then
it
would
be
hooked
up
to
the
same
plumbing
and
then
it
would
just
work
effectively.
That
seems
like
something
that
we
could
build.
I
think.
F
A
F
A
Great
all
right,
I
guess
the
only
other
announcement
is.
We
got
the
CFPs
back
for
the
conference.
They
look
amazing
if
anyone
out
there
wants
to
be
on
the
program
committee-
and
we
have
you
haven't
already
raised
your
raised,
your
desire,
please
let
us
know
we'll
be
starting
to
look
through
the
proposals
soon.
Oh.
A
E
A
You
know
that's
more
Chris's
domain
like
I,
think
there's
different
amounts.
I
think
that
we
could
be
flexible,
probably
depending
on
depending
on
what
people
want
a
sponsor
and
probably
what
they
want
to
get
out
of
it.
So
I
think,
just
if
you're
out
there
and
you're
interested
in
potentially
sponsoring
just
circle
back
with
us
privately
and
we
can,
we
can
figure
out
what's
possible.