►
From YouTube: Public Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) Meeting - Moderated by Chris Aniszczyk, CNCF
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
Public Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) Meeting - Moderated by Chris Aniszczyk, Cloud Native Computing Foundation
The Technical Oversight Committee (TOC) provides technical leadership to the cloud-native community. The CNCF will host a public TOC meeting, inviting the community to discuss the project roadmap for 2019, the upcoming TOC Election Schedule for 2019, along with holding an open Q&A for the community with TOC members.
https://sched.co/Ngtv
A
You
know
governing
structures
in
place.
You
know
we
have
a
boring.
You
know
governing
board
that
kind
of
handles
all
the
budget
stuff.
No,
it's
not
so
exciting
and
then
the
exciting
part
is
the
TOC
or
technical
board
who
actually
handles
all
the
technical
vision
direction,
which
projects
get
in
which
projects
get
removed
and
so
on,
and
so
there's
nine
people.
You
know
on
this
TOC
and
we
have
three
of
them
here,
potentially
four.
A
If
Alexis
decides
to
show
up,
but
you
know
we
were
basically
going
to
kind
of
try
to
keep
this
informal
as
possible.
We'll
do
some
introductions
from
each
of
the
TOC
members
a
little
bit
about
their
background
kind
of
what
they're
working
on
and
what
their
hopes
are
for
this
year
and
then
I
just
like
to
kind
of
maybe
ask
them
a
question
or
two
and
they
just
open
up
to
the
crowd
here.
So
we
got
a
small
intimate
crowd.
So
how
about
we
start
with
Joe
from.
B
My
side
so
hello,
everybody,
my
name,
is
Joe
Beda
I'm,
a
principal
engineer
at
vmware
started
a
company
called
hefty,
oh,
but
before
I
was
google
and
helped
get
kubernetes
up
and
running
and
what
I
want.
So
so
you
know
you're
new
joining
the
TOC.
Like
you
know
my
take
on
it
is
like
I.
Don't
want
to
do
this
and
just
sort
of
like
you
know,
show
up
for
the
meetings
and
not
do
anything
and
so
like
the
coming
into
it.
B
The
thing
that
I
want
to
see
is
that,
like
the
TOC
helps
to
decide
which
projects
come
in
but
I
think
we,
you
know
we
could
do
an
expanded
role
to
actually
make
sure
that
we're
serving
those
projects
right
and
that
we're
creating
a
great
value
proposition
for
projects
so
that
it's
a
really
great
two-way
street
between
the
CNC
F
and
the
projects
to
really
build
some
sustainability
around
that.
So
that's
the
stuff
I'm
excited
about.
C
I'm
Liz
rice,
I
work
right
work
for
aqua
security,
so
I
guess
I
have
a
pretty
strong
interest
in
the
sort
of
security
side
of
things.
I
am
currently
TOC
chair,
which
is
kind
of
daunting
and
exciting
and
kind
of
along
the
same
lines
of
what
Joe
was
saying.
I
think
that
the
the
CNC
F
and
the
TOC
have
reached
a
stage
of
you
know.
C
D
C
All
really
clear
how
they
get
the
services
that
can
be
offered
and
that,
as
we
grow
and
scale
and
complete
complete,
if
anything
is
ever
complete.
The
the
cloud
native
stack
that
we
we
carry
on
doing
that
with
as
much
clarity
as
we
can
for
the
projects
and
for
the
end
users,
as
well
as
for
the
developers.
C
E
E
You
know
this
is
I'm
the
actually
the
end
user
member
on
the
technical
Oversight
Committee
from
the
representative
from
the
end-user
community
and
that's
the
thing
that
I'm
also
very
excited
about
as
as
true
end
users
of
kubernetes
and
talking
with
a
lot
of
the
other
end.
Users
is
really
bringing
that
that
customer
focus
into
the
TOC
and
into
the
projects
trying
to
you
know,
make
sure
that
we're
not
doing
science
projects
that
were
not
doing
a
bunch
of
cool
stuff
that
nobody
actually
needs
to
use.
And
so
that's
that's.
E
F
Hello,
yep
they're,
working,
hi,
I'm,
sorry,
I'm
late
I
had
it
in
the
calendar
for
2
p.m.
I.
Don't
know
why
I'm
Alexis
I
was
the
previous
chair
before
Liz
took
over.
Thank
goodness
I'm.
The
CEO
of
weave
works,
one
of
the
kubernetes
companies
along
with
another
39
others
out
there
on
the
floor.
We,
you
know
what
am
I
most
excited
about
this
year.
I
guess
I
think
this
is
the
year
where
we
developed
from
being
a
startup
type
organization
to
one
that
can
really
scale
across
the
industry.
F
You
know:
we've
got
the
basics
in
place:
to
have
a
industry,
a
new
industry
platform
for
cloud
native
applications
consisting
of
kubernetes
and
many
other
pieces,
that's
not
to
say,
there's
a
single
stack
or
anything
like
that.
Just
the
tool
chain
that
collectively
can
solve
the
customer
problem
of
how
do
I
go
cloud
native.
So
we
need
to
build
it
out
to
a
more
comprehensive
story
and
then
I
think
we've
set
our
scope
in
perpetuity
after
that.
F
A
F
Two
reasons
equally
important:
one
was
that
we
wanted
to
improve
the
level
of
diversity
and
contribution
in
the
whole
community
of
the
CN
CF,
and
we
felt
a
bit
embarrassed
that
there
were
these
sort
of
9
seats.
They
were
precious
which
came
with
the
robes
and
everything
else,
and
everyone
else
felt
kind
of
out
and
someone
excluded
and
that's
kind
of
stupid,
a
bad
way
to
grow
an
organization
if
we're
trying
to
solve
industry
problems.
So
now
you
can
get
involved
and
actually
be
hands-on.
F
F
That
joke
so
the
second
reason
is
that-
and
this
is
related-
is
the
real
bottle
necking
in
the
TOC.
You
know
we
had
a
number
of
things
to
do
and
we
were
meeting
once
a
fortnight
for
an
hour
and
I
think
everybody
was
getting
quite
depressed
with
that
and
we
were
not
making
enough
progress.
So
we
had
to
call
a
halt
and
figure
out.
How
can
we
to
step
back
and
actually
scale
this
across
the
key
activity
areas
we've
gone
to
grow?
A
C
Think
it's
just
a
very
small
addition
to
what
Alexis
said.
I
think
it's
also
about
leveraging
the
expertise.
That's
out
there,
because
you
know
we're
only
nine
people
and
we
can't
know
everything
and
there's
a
great
amount
of
depth
of
knowledge
out
there.
That
I
hope
the
six
will
enable
the
TOC.
To
kind
of
you
know
it's
a
kind
of
way
of
formalizing.
Getting
that
help
and
expertise.
A
Before
before
I
hand,
it
kind
of
to
the
audience
for
any
questions,
you
know
one
of
the
things
you
know
I
would
really
like
to
kind
of
you
know
challenge
the
TOC
this
year
is
I.
Think
it's
always
important
for
organizations
to
do
a
bit
of
spring
cleaning
right.
You
know
you
can't
just
always
accept
you
know,
project
fun
project,
not
everything
works
out.
So
you
know
I'd
love
to
kind
of
you
know,
hear
your
thoughts
we've.
You
know
recently
approved
a
archiving.
A
F
One
of
the
key
principles
at
the
beginning
of
the
CNC
f
is
that
we
wouldn't
end
up
like
some
other
foundations
with
projects
that
had
died
or
lost.
You
just
lost
their
way.
Contributors
had
moved
on
to
other
things,
so
we
had
a
very
explicit
decision
that
we
could
archive
a
project
as
well
as
bring
it
in,
and
the
archival
model,
as
I
understand
it
has
now
been
set
in
you
move
into
the
LF,
which
means
from
an
intellectual
property
perspective,
things
don't
change.
If
somebody
subsequently
decides
to
revive
the
project
they
can
yeah.
A
Leveraging
CN
CF
resources
right
because
you
know
we
are
a
full-service
foundation
with
tech,
writers,
developer
advocates
and
so
on.
So
it
is
a
limited
set
of
resources.
I
think
you
know,
I
have
some
other
questions
that
I'm
happy
to
like
you
know,
ask
the
audience
cuz,
you
know
I,
you
know
it's
probably
every
day,
I
get
pain
like
how
do
I
get
a
project
in
ciencia.
How
do
I
do
this?
A
So
this
is
now
a
opportune
time
to
ask
these
types
of
questions,
especially
if
you're
interested
in
you
know,
feedback
on
you
know
potential
project
directions
or
have
complaints
or
praises
now
the
time
is
essentially
to
to
do
it.
So
anyone
have
any
questions
concerns.
Oh
here,
I
will
make
this
happen
because
we
have
to
solo.
My
kit.
G
All
right
is
this
working.
Yes,
it
is
so.
Last
year
I
asked
you
a
very
incredible
question
about
diversity
on
the
committee
and
you
listened
and
you
did
something
about
it
and
thank
you
there's
more
to
work
to
do,
but
you
you
did
it.
Thank
you
and
I
think
that's
hugely
admirable.
So
one
year
later
progress.
Thank
you.
G
My
question
is
more
so
I
open
sourced
a
project.
It
is
not
code,
it
is
a
an
evaluation
framework
for
organizations
that
want
to
become
cloud
native
and
essentially
it's
a
selfless
when
questionnaire
says.
Have
you
thought
about
this
in
your
org?
Have
you
thought
about
that?
In
the
organ?
These
are
all
the
things
that
are
blockers
for
cloud
native
adoption,
but
it's
not
code.
It's
not
code
is
there?
Is
there
a
world
in
which
the
TOC
or
the
the
CNC
F
thinks
about
adopting
projects
that
are
not
code.
B
B
That's
definitely
being
actively
discussed
at
the
the
CNC
F
governing
board
meeting,
and
so
there's
there's
a
bunch
of
of
hazy
plans
that
are
there
we're
working
on
on
making
more
concrete
there
so
yeah,
because
we're
not
we're
not
only
anybody's
happy
with
where
we're
at
here
with
respect
to
sort
of
non
code
projects
I
think
there's
a
lot
in
common
with
what
you're
talking
about
there
plus
the
idea
of
like
do.
We
have
projects
that
are
solely
a
specification,
I
think
they're
shared
things
where
it's
like
these
things
are.
There's
there's
interesting
thinking.
B
There's
people
coming
together
there
there
may
be
versions
of
it,
but
it's
not
actual
code.
There's
not
a
there's.
An
artifact
and
I
think
you
know
it's
been
a
fuzzy
area
for
the
CNC
F
with
respect
to
specifications.
I
think
we
we
do
have
some
projects
which
are
the
bulk
of
what
they
are
as
a
specification.
B
I
think
spire
and
CNI
and
tough
are
good
examples
of
that,
but
we
try
and
distinguish
between
a
specification
and
a
standard
right.
A
standard
is,
like
you
know,
proof
of
you
know
stamp
of
approval
type
of
thing.
So
so
we
don't
see
ourselves
as
a
standard
body
with
respect
to
other
content,
I
think
there's
things
like
white
papers
and
best
practices
and
those
things.
Oftentimes
are
one
of
the
things
that
we
we
I
think
are
looking
to
actually
be
output
of
the
sig
process,
where
they
can
actually
produce
some
of
these
artifacts.
B
The
thing
you're
talking
about
with
the
questionnaire.
It
feels
like
it's
a
little
bit
in
the
middle
here,
because
there
is
more
structure
to
it
than
just
a
once
and
done
type
of
white
paper,
but
it's
not
quite
sort
of
a
technical
specification,
so
I
think
that'd
be
something
that
you
know.
We'd
have
to
sort
of
talk
about
amongst
the
TOC
to
see
you
know
how
we
might
want
to
approach
that.
C
Yeah
I
am
fully
supportive
of
the
idea
that
the
scenes
here
should
encourage
non-code
projects,
I
think
I'm
kind
of
echoing
what
Joe
said
to
say:
I'm,
not
a
hundred
percent
sure
how
much
that
falls
into
what
we
do.
You
know.
Maybe
it
falls
into
what
the
end
user
group
discuss.
You
know
so
exactly
how
it
fits
in
organizationally
is
a
question
mark
for
me,
but
I
love
the
fact
that
there
is
work
like
that
happening
in
the
community
at.
E
Least
something
like
a
resources
guide
or
something
that
goes
in
with,
like
the
trail
map
stuff
like
that,
there's
a
probably
a
pretty
good
example
of
that
and
so
I'd
love
to
see.
You
know
us
bring
that
in
now.
I'll.
Take
a
note
mental
note
to
actually
look
that
up
and
see
what
it
could
do
with
that
yeah.
A
I
think
it
could
be
an
interesting
idea
to
present
to
the
end
user
community
potentially
and
get
their
feedback
because
you
know
whatever
you've
produced.
You
want
to
make
sure,
there's
multiple
input
and
stakeholder.
So
you
just
don't
have
that
one.
You
know
organization
type
perspective
and
then
we're
always
happy
to
publish
white
papers
and
other.
F
A
A
H
A
H
So
one
of
the
things
I'm
interested
in
it
I
know
we.
We
say
that
the
CNC
F
isn't
about
defining
standards
yeah,
but
we
do
do
some
work
on
standards
like
the
the
kubernetes
distribution,
certifications
and
that
sort
of
thing
do
you
think
we
should
work
on
any
other
conformance
type
tests,
maybe
for
CNI
or
CSI,
or
things
like
that.
It's
to
kind
of
give
and
users
confidence
that
there
is
a
like
a
standard
set
of
tests
that
you
can
have
for
a
particular
set
of
plugins
or
drivers
or
whatever.
So.
A
That
so
the
question
there
was,
you
know,
CN
CF
is
you
know
not
necessarily
a
you
know
like
a
standards
body
or
you
know,
certification
type
body,
but
we
do
have
efforts
within
CN
CF
that
have
produced
things
like
the
kubernetes,
certification
and
conformance
program.
So
I,
you
know
before
I
hand
off
the
TOC
generally,
that
you
know
our
philosophy
has
been
projects
kind
of
have
to
request
to
do
this
and
there
has
to
be
a
need
for
it.
A
You
know:
herb
Nick
kubernetes
is
really
kind
of
the
first
project
that
went
through
this
because
they
obviously
had
a
need.
There's
rumblings
now
within
the
Envoy
project
that
they're
very
interested
in
potentially
doing
some
conformance
or
spec'ing
out
the
XDS
XDS
api.
So
they
have
this
new
little
working
group
that
they
put
together
to
kind
of
discuss
that,
but
generally
approaches
projects
have
to
come
with
their
needs
and
we're
happy
to
help
them.
But
I,
don't
know
you
know
that
the
TOC
feels
like
we
should
have
performance
programs
everywhere,
but
you
know
I,
don't.
E
Know
I
mean
I
would
double
down
or
echo
that
that's
feedback
from
the
end
user
summit
that
we
had
on
Monday
was
that
they'd
found.
You
know
certain
end
users
that
found
bugs
in
projects
or
scaling
problems,
and
they
were
saying
like
well.
What
does
it
mean
when
you
call
something
graduated
or
what
does
it
mean
when
the
TOC
call
something
incubated?
Does
that
offer
some
kind
of
a
stamp
of
approval
over
quality?
And
it
actually
does
it
right
now?
B
I
think
you
know
when
we
look
at
sort
of
the
definition
of
a
standard,
it's
this
recommendation
that
this
was
the
one
true
way
to
do
X
and
that's
not
something
that
the
CNC
F
does
right.
So
I
think
there
is
an
interest
of
saying
like
hey.
If
you're
gonna
call
yourself
kubernetes,
you
got
to
meet
this
bar,
but
that
doesn't
mean
that,
like
kubernetes
is
the
standard,
Orchestrator
and
I.
Think
just
as
a
subtle
point
here
like
if
say,
hasha
Corp
was
interested
in
moving
Nomad
into
the
CNC
F.
B
A
F
Personally
would
like
to
see
in
the
future
coming
out
of
the
end
users,
particularly
some
sort
of
business
seal
of
approval
or
some,
for
example,
a
project
could
be
rated
more
highly
if
there
are
more
independent
commercial
companies
that
can
offer
commercial
support
for
it,
and
this
gets
us
to
the
question
about.
You
know
projects
that
just
have
one
vendor
behind
them,
which
has
been
a
recent
topic.
F
I
personally
believe
I
want
those
projects
to
succeed
and
I
want
those
vendors
to
succeed,
but
over
time,
I.
Think
really.
Big
organizations
also
want
to
know
that
if
the
bus
runs
over
the
team,
they
can
go
somewhere
else,
for
example,
so
I
think
this
is
an
area
we
could
look
at
like
a
kite
mark
in
the
industry.
A
F
D
D
Let's
turn
again,
since
you
have
so
far
like
more
working
in
project
I
mean
adopting
project
I
have
been
created
by
the
community
and
so
far
I
only
know
this
one
security
C
seek
I
mean
it's
like
a
cross
across
project
concern.
So
it's
like
two
different
models,
so
projects
that
come
from
the
community
and
cross
project.
F
Repeat
the
question,
so
there
was
an
observation
that
the
CN
CF
has
open
source
projects
and
it
has
special
interest
groups
and
the
open
source
projects
are
said.
Verticalized
and
special
interest
groups
can
be
cross-cutting
and
then
the
question
was:
is
there
any
desire
to
create
say
a
working
groups
where
there
isn't
a
projects?
Yet
there's
a
group
of
people
who
share
a
common
interest?
We
want
to
get
together,
discuss
a
thing
and,
and
who
knows
what
might
come
out
of
that
so
I.
C
Think
a
big
part
of
what
the
TOC
should
do
and
with
the
support
of
the
SIG's
excuse
me,
is
identify
these
kind
of
gaps
that
we
have
I,
don't
think
we're
ever
going
to
be
in
a
case
of
sort
of
going.
Somebody
should
form
a
project
to
do
this.
I
think
it's
more
likely
to
be
more
of
it
and
the
word
shopping
is
popping
into
my
head.
C
I'm,
not
quite
sure,
that's
right,
but
you
know
that
the
idea
of
looking
for
existing
projects
that
would
fulfill
that
gap
and
I
think,
particularly
with
the
six
who
will
know
that
area
and
who
will
know
what
the
challenges
are
and
what
the
gaps
are
in
their
specific
area
that
that
could
help
us
solicit
new
projects
to
fill
particular
holes.
But,
generally
speaking,
we
don't
have
a
problem
with
like.
There
are
plenty
of
projects.
We
don't
really
have
a
lot
of
projects
to
kind
of
look
at
and
assess,
there's
quite
a
big
queue.
B
G
B
B
Is
now
a
sandbox
project,
I
think
the
the
extraction
of
the
the
XDS
API
is
out
of
envoy
into
a
working
group.
It's
like
there's
nothing
there
yet,
but
it's
a
bunch
of
people
getting
together
to
talk
about
it
and
see
if
it's
there
so
I
think
there
are
places
where.
Where
folks
are
you
know
using
you
know,
the
CNC
F
is
an
excuse
to
get
together
and
talk
about
stuff.
But
you
know
you
don't
need
the
CNC
F
to
do
that.
B
Right,
get
a
bunch
of
interested
people
together,
start
talking,
you
know
and
and
that's
how
a
lot
of
projects
go
ahead
and
get
formed
right.
I
think
you
know
we
look
at
something
like
the
the
the
service
mesh
interface
stuff
that
that
that
was
announced
on
staging
in
Gabe's
little
five-minute,
eight-minute
keynote
and
sorry
inside
joke
there
and
and
like
I,
think
that's
just
a
bunch
of
people
getting
together,
saying:
hey
here's
something
interesting,
let's
throw
it
at
the
wall,
whether
that
makes
its
way
into
the
CNC,
F
or
not.
A
J
Hi,
can
you
hear
me
so
I'm
Steven
I
work
on
a
keto
project
and
we're
trying
to
submit
to
C
and
C
F
one
thing
I'm
kind
of
lacking
a
little
bit.
I
might
be
that
I've
just
missed
it
or
something,
but
it's
a
little
bit
of
the
status
once
you
propose
to
to
the
CN
CF
and
where
it
is
and
how
long
it's
going
to
take
before
you
know.
Can
you
enter
into.
A
A
So
the
question
was,
you
know:
I
have
a
project,
it's
you
know.
How
long
does
it
take
essentially
for
it
to
get
into
the
CNC
F
and
in
this
case
its
key
cloak
being
explicitly
called
out
so
I'm
happy
to
answer
this?
Someone
else
wants
to
do
it,
but
you
know:
we've
we've
I,
think
purposely
kind
of
been
informal
on
like
specifying
specific,
like
deadlines
for,
like
you
know,
it's
you,
you
have
a
week
to
vote
or
you
have
to
get
in
by
a
certain
date.
A
It's
been
purposely
left
to
give
essentially
the
TOC
a
lot
of
flexibility
in
how
they
go
about
their
decision
making
process
right.
You
know
they
may
want
to
go
back
and
you
know
do
a
due
diligence
on
the
project
or
you
know,
they're,
don't
think
it's
ready
and
we'll
tell
you
to
come
back,
but
it's
been
particularly
done
in
a
very
informal
way,
which
I
think
you
know
could
be
frustrating
on
the
other
hand,
but
it
does
give
them
a
lot
of
flexibility
in
how
to
to
operate
at
least
so.
B
With
respect
to
key
Coakley,
close
key
cloaks,
specifically
I
think
you
know
oftentimes.
These
are
back-and-forth
discussions
and
depends
on
the
latency
of
both
the
TOC
members
and
the
folks
representing
the
project.
I've
given
Aaron
feedback,
I
haven't
heard
anything
back
from
her,
so
you
know
as
far
as
I'm
concerned
with
respect
to
key
close.
The
ball
is
and
is
in
the
project's
court.
Yep,
okay,
but.
E
B
I
think
you
know,
some
of
this
depends
on
what
level
you
want
to
come
in
at
I.
Think
if
key
cloak
wanted
to
come
in
at
a
sandbox
level,
it'd
be
done
already,
there's
much
more
diligence,
much
more
discussion
at
the
at
the
the
incubation
and
graduation
levels
and
I
think
that
that
definitely
adds
to
the
latency
hub.
So.
J
I
B
There's
a
there's,
an
awkwardness
here
because,
like
I'll
just
be
honest
like
like,
we
can't
say
yes
to
every
project
and
nobody
wants
to
hear
no
publicly
and
and
I've.
This
is
not
about
Key
Club,
okay,
just
to
be
clear
but
like,
but
like
it's
one
of
these
things
where,
like
you
know
oftentimes,
you
know
it
like.
B
We
don't
want
to
have
a
project,
go
to
a
vote
and
then
fail
at
the
vote
right,
because
that
means
that
it's
it's
just
it's
not
a
good
look
for
anybody
and
so
I
think
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
a
lot
of
these
things
are
are
a
little
bit
more
person-to-person
feeling
things
out,
understanding
how
people
are
leaning
and
and
it's
it's.
It's
I
think
it's
understandable,
but
I
also
understand
frustration
with
that
process
to.
I
Whether
you
believe
that
the
acceleration
of
projects
is
the
primary
thing,
that's
going
to
make
cloud
native
computing
ubiquitous
or,
if
that's
just
a
hiccup
right
now.
That
needs
to
be
focused
on
to
get
through
the
backlog
and
there's
something
else
that
you
think
is
the
thing
that
we
that
we
collectively
should
be
doing
out.
C
I
sort
of
unpack
that
into
two
parts,
so
one
is
you
know:
do
we
have
enough
technology
and
how
much
technology
should
there
be
to
build
this
platform?
I
I,
don't
know
the
answer
to
that.
You
know.
I
was
asked
a
similar
question
earlier
this
week
and
it's
like
well,
you
know
in
ten
years
will
we
have
a
thousand
projects
I?
Don't
that
doesn't
feel
right
to
me,
but
I
have
no
idea
what
the
what
the
right
number
is.
C
C
J
E
Say
two
things
and
it's
a
it's:
the
size
of
the
overall
community
right,
I
think
that's
one
thing.
That
is
just
we
kind
of
overlook.
Like
we
kind
of
take
this.
You
know
size
of
community
for
granted,
but
it's
a
it's
a
very
you
know
the
Linux,
Foundation
and,
and
you
know,
they're
they're
playing
a
process
of
not
you
know
not
trying
to
curate
it
too
much
right.
I
think
that
we
can
make
a
mistake
there
and
that
could
actually
decrease
the
size
of
the
community.
E
You
know
versus
kind
of
like
directing
it
and
I
think.
Sometimes
the
more
you
direct
it.
You
know
the
more
you
have
a
chance
of
reducing
it,
but
I
I
will
totally
double
down
on
the
like
as
an
enterprise
adopting
it
as
an
end-user.
It's
a
very
difficult
landscape
to
figure
out
right
and
you
know,
and
we
had
to
acquire
a
company
that
had
like
these
14
amazing
kubernetes
experts
in
order
to
navigate
it,
not
every
company
is
going
to
be
able
to
do
that
right
and
so
that
I
think.
E
B
But
I
think
we're
also
limited
by
the
model
that
the
CNC
F
is
a
toolbox,
not
a
platform
right.
In
that
we
we
can
have
projects
that
compete
with
each
other.
That
are,
you
know
that
you
know
are
taking
different,
runs
at
the
same
problem
at
solution
to
solving
the
same
problem,
and
that
fundamentally
hampers
our
ability
to
take
strong
opinions
and
give
very
concrete
advice
as
an
organization,
and
so
there's
this
tension
between
actually
providing
sort
of
a
you
know,
cloud
native
thinking
in
general
versus
a
specific
path
through
cloud
native
alexis.
A
F
F
So
I
think
that
we'll
see
a
sort
of
similar
pattern,
which
is
an
initial
acceleration
of
technology
document
specifications
with
the
confusion
that
that
shortly
follows
after
that
followed
by
a
period
of
clarity
as
people
throw
things
away,
they
didn't
need
and
and
double
down
on
the
things
they
do
need
and
then
what
you'll
see
is
you
will
see
acceleration
but
we'll
be
among
the
users,
not
among
the
projects.
At
that
point,
if,
indeed,
we
are
able
to
have
a
toolbox
that
can
support
an
industry-wide,
your
re-platforming.
A
Any
other
questions,
if
not
I'm
gonna
ask
them.
You
know
how
about
how
about
this?
If,
if
we
were,
if
you
were
to
accept
one
project
into
CN
CF
that
you
think
is
currently
missing
in
that
wonderful,
huge
landscape
that
we
have
up
here,
what
would
it
be?
Why
and-
and
why
do
you
think
you
know
it
kind
of
fits
a
missing
piece,
I'm.
F
You
know
here's
another
one,
here's
a
really
interesting
project.
We
we
created
something
called
flagger
more
as
a
sort
of
borås,
our
demo
actually
and
it's
kind
of
taken
off
as
a
way
of
doing
it
say
operator
for
orchestrating
a
canary
release
in
kubernetes
by
talking
to
a
service
mesh
and
also
to
a
router.
If
you
prefer
that
and
it's
a
small
project,
it
doesn't
need
to
have
a
huge
number
of
people
contributing
to
it,
but
it
solves
a
useful
problem.
F
It
corresponds
to
a
project
called
kai,
enter
from
Netflix,
which
is
more
complex,
sort
of
Java.
Ee
thing
I'd
really
like
to
see
a
few
of
these
kind
of
small
projects
that
play
useful
but
limited
role
popping
up
in
CN
CF.
We
have
a
few
really
great
big
projects,
kubernetes
being
the
most
obvious,
but
some
so
there's
some
little
projects
would
be
good.
Yeah.
A
I
E
Flux
combined
and
Argo
flux,
or
something
like
that,
and
we
can
accept
that
as
an
incubator
project.
Yeah,
isn't
she
I
was
having
a
conversation
last
night
with
linker
D,
and
this
is
a
really
interesting
one.
So
sto
is
not
currently
in
the
in
the
in
the
CN
CF
right
and
linker.
Diaz
has
now
you
know
over
the
past
six
months
or
a
year
has
really
kind
of
started.
You
start
to
think
of
them
more
about
as
competing
sort
of
projects.
E
A
E
A
A
C
B
I
mean
largely
no
comment
because
there's
so
many
great
projects
out
there
but
I
would
love
to
see
some
solution
that
is
like
in
Roth
proxy.
That
actually
is
integrated
with
kubernetes,
because
I
think
this
is
such
a
common
problem
that
that
folks
want
to
essentially
put
a
corporate
gateway
in
front
of
their
stuff
and
I
think
you
know
there
was
a
project
that
was
abandoned
and
then
picked
up
and
I'm
trying
to
remember
who
was
abandoned
but
but
like
something
like
that.
I
think
is,
is:
is
that
there's
a
gap
right
now.