►
From YouTube: CNCF Network Service Mesh Meeting 2020-02-25
Description
CNCF Network Service Mesh Meeting 2020-02-25
A
A
B
B
B
If
you
haven't
gotten
yourself
yet,
please
add
yourself
to
the
attendee
list.
We
have
this
particular
column,
which
appears
every
Tuesday
at
8
a.m.
we
also
have
a
call
every
other
week
at
3
a.m.
Pacific
time.
We
also
have.
We
also
participate
in
the
cnc
of
telecom
user
group,
which
occurs
every
Monday
at
8
a.m.
and
every
every
first
Monday
at
8
a.m.
at
every
third
Monday
at
3
a.m.
Pacific.
B
B
B
We
also,
we
also
have
a
few
events
coming
up.
So
on
March
18th
there
is
a
go
San
Francisco
meetup,
which
I
will
be
talking
about
found
a
2-0
trust
and
March
30th
through
April
2nd
is
Q
Khan
and
cloud
native
con
Europe
at
the
REI
and
Amsterdam
schedules
are
up
and
the
cencon
is
going
to
be
on
March
30th,
the
co-located
with
Q
Khan.
The
schedule
is
now
up.
So
if
you
would
like
to
see
what
we
will
be
talking
about
it
and
a
cell
phone,
please
go
take
a
look.
B
The
CFPs
will
open
in
April
22nd
so
the
day
after
ons
and
they
will
close
in
June
12th
announcements
will
be
in
September,
14th
I.
Don't
think.
There's
other
things
that
we
know
about
so
there
we
have
again.
This
reminder:
we
have
a
project
page.
The
link
is,
is
listed
on
the
on
the
meeting
notes
and
are
there
any
other
announcements
that
we
want
to
do
before
we,
everyone.
D
Everybody,
and
so
last
week,
as
far
as
social
media
went,
was
pretty
exciting.
We
reached
out
a
smile.
Stone
are
officially
having
700
followers
on
Twitter,
so
that
means
starting
to
see.
We
gained
17
followers.
In
the
last
week
we
followed
15
in
additional
counts
and
tweeted
and
retweeted
26
posts,
as
I
mentioned,
that
surpassed
the
700
followers.
As
far
as
other
things
that
were
tweeted
about
and
a
semca
unrelated,
we
got
some
registration
reminders
out
there.
D
D
That
happened
in
Austin
this
week,
so
that
was
promoted
a
few
times,
a
tweet
that
went
out
thanking
the
attendees
as
well
as
some
retweets
from
others
that
had
got
some
news
out
there
that
had
attended
that
event.
Some
other
general
retweets
telecom
user
group
meeting
notes
the
NCS
blog
and
some
VMware
open
sourced
tweets
and
then,
as
far
as
LinkedIn
a
bit
of
a
slower
week,
we
only
gained
two
additional
followers,
but
at
least
we
are
still
growing
there.
So
hopefully,
this
next
week
we'll
continue
to
to
follow
and
I
guess.
A
Sounds
excellent,
so
really
quick
note
for
the
folks
who
are
speakers
at
NSM
con.
You
will
find
that
your
your
talk
is
actually
individually
linkable
from
the
events
page.
So
if
you
want
to
go
and
promote
your
talk,
you
can
literally
have
a
link
that
takes
people
directly
to
your
talk
on
the
events
page.
So
it's
very
good
stuff.
Thank
you
very
much
Ashley.
This
is
awesome.
It's
super
good
to
see
us
go
over
700
followers.
Oh.
A
B
A
A
A
B
A
Talk
about
some
things:
I
have
been
sort
of
heads
down,
so
I'm,
not
following
as
much
what's
going
generally,
so
other
folks
have
things
that
encourage
them
to
add
them
to
the
list
as
well
in
the
agenda.
So
the
sort
of
things
that
the
sort
of
got
my
attention
were,
the
the
command
for
door.
Vpp
agent,
repo
has
opened
and
there's
an
initial
code
drop
PR
I'm,
still
trying
to
figure
out
why
the
CI
is
not
running
on
that
repo
so
that
that
hasn't
been
merged.
A
Yet
because
I
don't
want
to
merge
code
that
hasn't
got
the
DCI,
but
the
initial
code
drop
is
super
simple.
It's
like
a
50
line,
main
file
effectively
at
a
docker
file.
Everything
else
is
being
pulled
through
from
the
SDKs,
so
that's
landed
and
then
there's
some
improvements
to
mechanism
testing
and
that
resulted
in
a
bunch
of
generic
things.
So,
basically
there's
a
link
here
to
examples
of
the
mechanism.
Testing
mechanisms
are
interesting
because
we
end
up
writing
a
bunch
of
them
right.
A
You're
gonna,
have
you
know:
we've
got
like
four
or
five
different
kinds
of
mechanisms
and
then
you're
gonna
rewrite
those
mechanism
chain
elements
for
each
border
that
supports
them.
So
there
are
things
that
people
are
going
to
write
a
lot
and
so
I
I
put
together
a
generic
test
suite
to
check
that
Network
channel
elements
for
test.
A
Suites
four
mechanisms
did
the
right
thing,
because
their
contract
is
fairly
simple
but
straightforward,
which
is
they
should
set
the
mechanism
preference
before
they
call
the
next
chain
element
and
then,
when
the
next
chain
element
returns,
they
should
do
whatever
they're
supposed
to
do
to
for
whatever
they're
doing
for
the
mechanism.
But
they've
gotta
wait
for
the
return,
because
that's
where
they
get
the
complete
that's
on
the
client-side,
then
on
the
server-side.
When
they
get
there
they're
called
they
should
have
the
complete
connection.
A
So
they
they
just
do
whatever
they're
going
to
do
and
in
doing
that
ended
up
building
up
some
very
generic
machinery.
So,
for
example,
if
there's
a
whole
set
of
network
channel
mints
that
do
simple
checking
right.
So,
there's
one
to
check
to
see
if
your
chain
returns
an
error
because,
as
it
turns
out
sometimes
when
you
test
a
chain,
it
gets
wrapped
up
in
other
pieces
and
which
is
the
case
for
mechanisms,
and
so
you
want
to
make
sure
you
crisply
understand
that
you've
returned
an
error.
A
You
know
check
to
see
if
the
client
propagates
GRP
see
options.
One
of
the
things
that's
different
between
clients
and
servers.
Is
these
extra
periodic
grcc
options
thing
and
because
it's
very
attic,
meaning
that
if
it's
not
there,
it's
fine,
I
literally
forget
every
single
time,
and
so
this
is
a
simple
thing
that
lets
you
write
tests.
This
simply
check
that
I
checking
the
contents
of
context
after
a
nun
returned
from
a
chain.
A
Likewise,
if
you
care
about
things
being
in
the
return
connection
at
certain
points
in
the
chain,
you're
testing,
you
know
basically
a
chain
element
that
will
inject
in
there
or
injector.
Grp
software
see
options,
and
then
it's
very
helpful
at
times
to
have
a
null
chain
element
that
you
can
use
so
some
basic
stuff
here,
generally
speaking
and
I,
think
you
made
some
points
about
this
andrey
in
the
previous
call.
A
You
want
to
try
and
keep
your
testing
as
simple
as
possible
if
you've
just
got
a
chain
element
that
does
a
thing
and
returns
the
thing,
then
you
probably
want
to
be
checking
just
that
and
not
wrapping
it
up
in
additional
complexity,
but
sometimes
it
matters
win
in
a
chain
of
things.
This
happens
so,
for
example,
in
the
case
of
the
mechanism,
stop
where
it
lives
in
the
context
of
a
broader
chain,
yeah.
E
A
Totally,
you
know
I,
that's
one
of
the
nice
things
about
the
way
the
VPP
agent
SDK
is
put
together
is
the
only
one
that
actually
touches
VTP
agent
is
to
commit.
Everything
else
is
just
setting
up
the
config
for
that
and
then
one
of
the
other
things
that's
kind
of
interesting.
That's
coming
down
with
VP
Asian
3.01
is
the
G
RPC
guys
recently
realized
that
it's
hard
to
test.
A
If
you
pass
the
struct
into
everything,
so
the
G
RPC
client
connection,
which
is
a
struct,
has
been
replaced
in
most
places
with
the
G
RPC
client
connection
interface
in
generated
code,
which
is
an
interface
which
means
you
can
mock
it.
So
we
can
actually
mock
that
out
with
unit
tests
as
well,
once
we've
made
that
transition,
so
there's
a
lot
of
good
stuff
going
there.
B
Yeah
as
a
person
who's
reviewing
a
lot
of
this
stuff,
definitely
I
think
we.
It
would
help
if
we
can
get
some
examples
for
people
pointed
out.
They
give
me
examples
in
the
code
just
to
show
show
off
some
of
the
more
interesting
areas.
I
know,
there's
a
there's
a
lot
on
the
agenda
to
give
you
know
so.
I
I
know
that
that
may
not
happen
immediately,
but
just
something
we
can
absolutely
Iran.
Well.
A
There's
been
something
bouncing
around
the
back
of
my
head
is
have
been
doing
this
and
it's
because
Denis
actually
poked
me
and
said:
maybe
we
should
have
a
style,
a
style,
guide
and
I
think
what
he
was
meaning
by.
That
was
less
like
indent
for
spaces,
but
more.
If
you're
doing
something
sort
of
like
this,
then
this
is
sort
of
the
pattern
that's
been
established,
and
this
is
why
the
pattern
is,
and
that
might
be
super
interesting
and
helpful.
A
C
Okay,
so
there
is
a
new
initiative
I'm
in
the
CNCs
policy,
enough
conformance
and
this
it
is
basically
it's
kind
of
an
outgrowth
of
what
the
test
there
was,
but
basically
checking
CNS
cloud
native
network
functions.
So
within
this
community
it's
really
network
services
and
we're
needing
to
have
some
examples
for
the
conformance
we'd
they
come
out
of
the
box.
C
There
are
some
trivial
examples,
just
that
that
we're
using
now,
but
one
of
the
things
that
we
need
to
develop
is
a
good
story
of
a
journey
from
a
maybe
a
DNF
world
or
just
a
non-conforming
or
non-compliant
CNF
into
one.
That's
more
compliant,
pretty
pretty
sure
that
an
exam,
what
you
did
a
good
fit
for
as
many
different
pieces,
but
declarative
portion.
So
just
from
our
experience
from
taking
VN
apps
from
lots
of
hard
code,
it
some
Nance,
IP,
dresses
and
all
that
stuff
is
there.
C
Maybe
we
can
grab
some
low-hanging
fruit
from
maybe
some
examples
that
and
SMS
where
someone
might
be
hard
coding,
some
things
in
the
wind,
a
addition.
The
additional
benefit
makes
it
easier
to
have
things
be
in
a
more
declarative
fashion,
so
trying
to
put
that
out
there.
If
you
guys,
can
point
me
to
something
or
if
you
want
to
help
get
that
into
the
testbed
I'm,
sorry,
the
scene
of
performance,
would
that
would
be
great.
A
Thinking,
which
is
an
application,
should
learn
things
from
its
environment,
and
things
like
that
dresses
are
literally
things
that
you
learn
from
your
environment
and
the
Sun
your.
So
basically,
things
should
learn
from
their
environments,
and
the
system
should
be
dynamic
because
dynamic
things
are
resilient,
static,
things
tend
to
be
really
really
under
resilient
and
then
the
other
one
that
comes
to
mind
is
a
scoping
argument,
which
is
if
I
statically
part
of
white
static.
Things
are
not
resilient,
as
if
I
statically
configure
a
bunch
of
stuff
in
a
bunch
of
places.
A
The
scope
over
which
I
have
to
get
that
right
is
the
global
scope
and
the
global
scope
is
really
fragile.
You
make
one
little
mistake
and
you're,
whereas
if
you've
been
localized
things
to
a
smaller
scope,
then
the
scope
over
which
you
have
to
get
them
right
is
very,
very
limited
and
so
you're
much
less
much
more
likely
to
get
it
right.
So
many
sense.
C
That
does
make
sense
so
yeah
if
there
is
anything
where,
where
you
guys
have
examples
from
from
maybe
some
type
of
network
services,
people
were
working
on
before
network
service,
mansion,
it's
open
source
and
then
after
network
service
mesh.
That
story
and
the
code
we'd
like
to
use
as
a
sample
I
missed
a
good.
If
you
could
point
me
in
that
direction,
and
it
would
be,
you
know
another
outlet
for
network
service
mix,
it
is
part
of
sample
code
for
the
performance.
A
B
C
Well,
I
mean
even
the
what
is
it
Sarah?
You
know.
Example,
we
I
don't
know
if
which
they're,
using
that
with
the
where
we
we
make
it
to
where
it's
easier
to
just
declare
what
you
want
for
the
security
context,
whereas
before
people
were
trying
to
maybe
car
code
act
for
specific
ports
to
be
open
and
all
that
stuff
I
mean
it
can
be
denied
simple.
B
B
B
B
C
I
mean
that
that's
all
I
had,
if
you
guys
want
to
I,
mean
the
the
code
base
is
out
there
as
far
as
with
the
different
tests
that
we
want,
and
it's
still
very
much
open.
So
the
declarative
part
is
definitely
I
mean
there's
so
many
parts
that
and
it's
something
the
part
of
its
forage
best
practices.
I
know
this
community
has
definite
like
certain
opinions
on
what
would
be
best
practice.
What
is
cloud
natives,
and
the
thing
that
has
always
jumped
out
to
me,
is
a
declarative
portion.
A
Just
being
very
careful
about
with
just
just
talking
about
declarative
is
you
can
declare
all
kinds
of
things
that
are
stupid,
so
I
can,
for
example,
construct
a
system
where
I
have
to
declare
all
the
fine
minutiae
of
every
little
detail
of
the
infrastructure
that
I'm
in
what
I
mean
I'm
working
in
and
then
still
declarative,
but
it's
also
not
a
terribly
smart
approach
to
the
problem.
So
I
think
declarative
is
one
piece
of
it,
but
I
think
also
like
I.
A
F
Ken
and
I
believe
should
be
managed
outside
I
mean
approach
from
the
example
that
I'm
trying
to
construct
with
with
NSM
and
actually
I'm
working
on
something
you
know,
which
I
hope
I'll
be
able
to
announce
forward
from
the
example
that
you
come
from.
The
practical
way
of
applying
NSM
I
see
a
lot
of
problems
exactly
regarding
to
hi
Pam,
and
we
we
have
seen
this
also
with
Ericsson
with
the
bridge
and
then
load
balancer,
who
main
I
mean
I.
F
A
I
think
you
and
I
would
agree
that
that,
basically
something
has
to
manage
the
account.
What
I
was
getting
at
is
an
IBM
story
that
involves
putting
an
environment
variable
into
your
pod,
assigning
it
it's
ipam
in
the
world
and
therefore
that's
statically
defined,
which
means
all
your
pod
specs
everywhere
have
to
come
into
proper
agreement.
That
was
what
I
was
railing
against.
Does
that
make
sense?
Yes,.
F
But
to
me
like
no
one
in
the
world
should
be
writing
pods
their
own
I
mean
there
should
be
an
old
top
level.
Orchestration
actually
distributes.
This
IP
address
is
in
figures
out,
for
you
like
having
the
inline
I
palm.
You
know
all
the
DHCP
and
stuff
I
mean
you
don't
get
you
don't
get
the
the
top
level
picture,
it's
very
hard
to
deduct
it
from
the
running
infrastructure.
A
You
know
things
like
the
sourcing
just
type
T
coming
back
and
for
network
service,
which
there's
a
purely
optional.
If
you
manage
in
a
different
way,
that's
part
of
why
those
parameters
are
optional
number
one,
because
you
may
not
be
number
one,
because
you
may
not
actually
want
them
right.
There
definitely
network
services
for
which
you
wouldn't
want
item
at
all,
but
number
two
you
may
get
them
from
someplace
else.
C
G
A
Your
class
need
to
be
what
I'm
sorry
yeah
no
I
mean.
This
is
actually
a
good
point.
Somebody
somebody
has
to
go
set
those
you
know
and
and
that
somebody
has
to
be
privileged,
that
in
network
service
handles
that,
because
the
forwarder,
which
has
to
be
privileged
to
insert
things
like
kernel
interfaces
anyway,
goes
that
does
that.
F
A
I
mean
just
as
much
as
we
expect
on
the
enterprise
side.
Almost
all
enterprise
applications
are
gonna
ask
for
a
kernel
interface
because
they
written
on
kernel,
East
off,
but
they're
also
not
going
to
be
super
smart
about
their
own
iCal.
On
the
CNF
side
of
the
house,
we
would
expect
almost
everything
on
C
enough
to
be
using
something
faster
than
a
kernel
near
face
to
move
packets
around,
whether
that's
a
sorry,
Oh,
V
or
Maya
for
the
hosts
or
whatever
does
that
match
what
you're
expecting
to
see
you.
A
G
G
G
G
A
Thank
you
for
bringing
this
up.
This
actually
brings
up
an
important
point
that
we
should
probably
go
just
literally
just
go
fix
right
now.
It
is
like
literally
as
soon
as
this
call
ends,
so
when
we
started
out
with
so
what
I
think
you're
saying
is
that
there
are
other
things
you
might
want
to
put
in.
The
connection
context
is
that
correct?
Okay,.
G
A
The
truth
of
matter
is,
you
still
need
some
kind
of
a
generic
context
that
gives
you
that
map
support,
because
even
if
you
do
eventually
get
to
a
place
where
you
converged
on
all
the
things,
someone
might
say
me
want
to
pass
they're
number
one.
You
want
people
to
be
able
to
innovate
without
having
to
come
and
get
something
upstream
right.
So
you
giving
your
example.
If
you
wanted
to
provide
a
fit
right
and
I,
don't
know
the
full
depth
of
what
you
want
to
do,
but
just
on
the
face
of
it.
A
That
sounds
like
an
eminently
reasonable
thing
want
and
I.
Don't
know
whether
or
win
or
if
that
would
ever
make
its
way
up
to
being
like
a
good
context
that
might
not
make
any
sense
or
it
might
I
don't
know,
but
what
I
do
know
is
there
ought
to
be
in
the
connection
context,
some
sort
of
a
map
that
you
can
use
for
that
kind
of
thing
does
that
make
sense.
G
A
A
Perfect
with
all
things
you
want
to
go
out
to
the
API
right
so
and
if
you
go
push
that
PR
I'd
love
to
get
that
because
you're
absolutely
right,
we're
never
going
to
be
able
to
see
all
the
things
people
are
going
to
watch
here.
Right
and
all
we
can
do
is
codify
the
things
that
we
think
are
going
to
be
super
common.
A
A
Thank
you.
So
much
I
do
appreciate
it
and
thank
you
for
bringing
it
up
right.
If
people
don't
bring
these
things
up,
number
one,
even
if
they're
things
that,
like
I,
said
that
spend
the
back
of
my
mind
every
you
know
four
months
now,
but
it
never
quite
got
done,
or
sometimes
you
bring
up
things
that
haven't
occurred
to
people
and
eventually
I'm
super
curious
to
see
what
you're
doing
with
that.
That
parameter.
Is
that
does
sound
interesting
as
well,
but.
G
A
Certainly,
definitely
an
interesting
discussion.
You
know
that
there's
definitely
interesting
discussion
and
this
gets
to
be
so.
I
mean
one
of
the
things
this
we're
getting
more
flexible
with
the
foreigners.
Is
you
know,
there's
no
reason
you
can't
bring
your
own
forward
if
it
supports
your
own
stuff,
for
example,
I
mean,
generally
speaking,
the
one
piece
of
advice
I
would
offer
you
is
that.
A
Logically
speaking,
keep
anything.
Point-To-Point
is
probably
best
thought
of
as
a
network
service.
Now
implementation
wise,
where
you
put
that
network
service
from
the
purpose
from
the
purposes
of
that
may
vary
right,
but
but
the
logical
will
be
implementational
are
useful
to
separate,
because
when
you
you
have
clean
cognitive
breakdown
of
what
you're
doing
and
where
then,
the,
where
you
put
it
to
get
implementation
optimizations
is
unlikely
to
screw
you
up,
but
but
I'm
sure
you've
seen
this
again
and
again,
because
we're
both
in
networking
and
happened
forever.
A
Where
you
you
money,
either
cut
the
conceptual
end
of
it
and
suddenly
you've
got
like
15,000
features
in
one
place
where
they're
driving
you
nuts
and
what
you
can't
pull
them
apart
right.
So
just
just
for
the
sake
of
argument,
it
sounds
like
you're,
using
this
video
uplink
to
multi-point
thing
that
you've
hacked
point-to-multipoint
thing
into
your
forwarder
right.
G
A
Is
a
fantastic
thing
right,
and
so
you
might
might
my
counsel
to
you
would
be
as
long
as
you
consider
continue
to
think
about
as
a
load
balancer
network
service,
which
you
happen
to
have
optimized
by
sticking
it
into
the
border.
So
you
didn't
have
to
jump
through
a
second
VPP
I.
Think
you're
going
to
find
your
life
extremely
pleasant.
A
Anything
that
you
can
break
up
into
multiple
steps.
You
can
collapse
into
a
single
set
yeah
and
that's
that's
very
much
by
design,
because
there
there
are
lots
of
places
where
you
care
more
about
flexibility
in
the
performance,
a
lot
of
them,
but
there
are
definitely
places
you
care
way
more
about
performance
than
flexibility.
G
G
A
No,
it
sounds
like
you're
doing
a
reasonable
thing,
you're
thinking
about
it
in
a
reasonable
way.
You
know-
and
you
have
some
additional
thoughts
that
I'd
like
to
understand
better
about
how
to
make
this
a
bit
more
flexible.
So,
and
so
we
can
definitely
carry
on
some
of
that
conversation
about
how
to
make
things
more
flexible
because
I
like
flexible
but
yeah.
That's
that.
A
F
Yeah
I
was
more
like
with
the
new,
with
the
new
approach
to
implementing
the
forward
is
probably
the
best
thing
is
to
just
you
know,
create
the
forwarder
that
Suites
your
needs
it's
effectively
just
another
endpoint,
so
just
I
guess
that
that
would
be
the
best.
The
best
approach
I
was
why
we
were
talking.
F
I
was
trying
to
figure
out
if
we
can
do
something
like
whatever
the
CN
is
we're
doing
with
you
know
kind
of
chaining,
different
folders,
but
I
guess
that's
it
just
going
to
get
too
complicated,
at
least
at
this
stage,
at
least
until
we
don't
move.
Maybe
at
some
point
we
can
think
about
this,
but
probably
not
not.
Today,.
C
A
Service
match
is
aiming
things
that
speed
the
network
service
machine
for
them
to
collaborate,
sometimes
across
you
know,
space
and
time
and
sometimes
incomplete
mutual
ignorance,
and
in
order
to
do
the
thing
that
you
want,
but
I
I'm,
particularly
heartened
unders,
that
you,
you
should
have
arrived
at
this
solution
on
your
own,
because
it
is
almost
exactly
what
I
would
have
suggested,
which
means
that
they
there's
there's
some
intellectual
coherence
flowing
through
the
system.
Where
we're
where
it
leads
to
the
right
sort
of
thoughts,
which
is
good.
H
A
F
A
Idea
of
how
the
pieces
fit
together
and
the
point
that
you
made
about
it
would
be
nice
if
you
could
go
and
insert
something
with
additional
logic
into
it.
So
what
you're
gonna
find
is.
Basically
everything
is
a
chain
of
small
chain
elements
that
do
a
piece
of
work.
So,
if
you
were
to
go,
take
a
look
at
the
command
4
door,
you'd
see,
all
it's
doing
is
calling
something
that
returns
across
connect
memory
servers
so
that
you
chased
back
to
the
SDK.
A
G
A
But
we
want
to
make
it
as
easy
as
possible
for
people
to
solve
the
other
kinds
of
problems
they
encounter
in
their
life
and,
generally
speaking,
you
want
to
minimize
the
amount
of
code
that
they
have
to
fork.
And
if
the
only
code
you
have
to
fork
is
the
assembly
of
a
chain,
then
that's
gonna
make
your
life
much
nicer.
A
F
Okay,
I
want
to
bring
one
more
topic:
it's
not
on
the
list,
I
put
it,
but
it's
just
a
quick,
quick
one
and
think
what's
still
here,
so
you
probably
have
heard
this
I
don't
want
to
put
names
here,
but
there
was
this
discussion
I
believe
in
the
telecom
user
group,
and
it
looks
like
folks
are
trying
to
pin,
for
the
telecom
usage.
Of
course,
try
to
pin
the
specific
networking
solution
and
we
have
a
good
support
within
you
know
certain
certain
communities
but
effectively
when
the
when
anything
was
brought
on
a
bow.
F
F
B
The
unfortunate
part
is
a
lot
of
people
conflate
like
they'll,
compare
NS,
m22,
locust
or
Danna,
more
or
genie
or
so
on
and
and
the
problem
that
that
ends
up
happening
when
you
make
those
comparisons
is
that
people
will
just
look
at
the
at
the
CNI,
multiplexer
and
say:
okay.
Well,
this
thing
inserts
an
interface
into
into
a
pot,
and
then
they
compare
that
to
an
ascend.
B
That's
with
the
context
that
they're
only
looking
at
that,
and
then
they
say,
oh
and
it
says
already,
but
what
they
don't
see
is
that
I
was
actually
solving
a
different
problem
and
that
we've
had
that
specific
feature
for
well
over
a
year
in
production,
quality,
I
dare
say,
but
the
the
problem
is
that
NSM
itself
is
solving
a
bigger
problem
of
like
how
do
we
solve
the
the
chaining
aspect?
How
do
we
get
multi-organizational
inter-domain
working?
How
do
we
get?
B
B
What
we're
doing
is
it's
very
different
from
others,
but
people
have
conflated
our
project
with
it's,
basically
a
CNI
male
Blitzer
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
scope,
and
so
that's
part
of
why
we're
getting
this
this
interactions
and
and
then
they
are
right.
We
do
need
to
get
a
production
version
out
there,
but
it's,
but
there's
there's
a
little
bit
something
a
little
bit
more.
That's
it's
a
little
bit
bigger
that
we
need
to
try
to
that.
We
need
to
try
and
tackle
yeah.
F
Yeah,
that's
that's
clear,
I
think
like
if
you
are
unbiased
and
you
come
to
the
kubernetes
landscape
and
try
to
find
the
networking
solution
that
will
suite
your
needs
being
kotelko.
You
will
find
certain
projects
whatever
they
are.
Are
they
si
si
si
and
I
based
or
whatever
it
doesn't?
It
doesn't
matter?
I
mean
you're,
just
looking
at
what's
available
and
even
if
we
manage
to
you
know
gather
you
know
attention
which
I
think
is
good,
and
you
know
we
do.
F
A
lot
of
you
know
publicizing,
can
all
the
Twitter
etc
said
and
all
it
obviously,
you
know,
helps
people
and
hear
about
us.
I
want
to
look
at
this.
You
know
we
get
these
nice
blog
posts,
I.
Think
that
we're
doing
great
on
that
side,
but
on
the
other
side,
people
are
expecting
okay,
and
the
same
is
greatest
idea.
I,
like
it
I
think
it's
going
to
solve
my
problems.
I
want
to
use
it
today
and
I,
don't
know.
Maybe
we
just
have
to
try
to
figure
out
what
to
Wayne
is
today.
B
B
But
yeah
we
should
be.
We
should
be
relatively
close,
especially
when
you
compared
to
where
we
were
at,
like
the
last
last
Yukon
and
before
so.
But
do
we
definitely
need
to
work
with
that?
What
those
that
sorry
get
something
you
get
something
out
and
I
would
argue
the
most
important
things
that
we
needed
to
finish,
adding
in
where
things
related
towards
the
inner
domain
and
specifically
around
the
security
and
in
the
permissions
use
case,
and
we
now
have
some
stuff
in
the
repo
that
it
still
needs
a
little
bit
more
work.
B
Or
how
do
we
get
additional
things
with
like
with
with
other,
like
the
EPS
or
so
on?
So
so
I
think
there's
there's
some
interesting
stuff
in
that
respect
that
that
we
can
push
towards,
but
yeah
I
think
we
should
try
to
carve.
We
should
probably
try
to
carve
out
sooner
than
later
of
what
the
parts
that
are
stable
and
build
a
story
around
that
as
an
additional
release.
They
said
that
that's
my
opinion
towards
it.
F
A
This
is
a
healthy
discussion.
I
think
your
distinction,
Frederic
is
actually
a
good
one,
because
essentially
the
the
the
CNI
multiplexer
saw
such
a
narrow
corner
of
the
problem
space
that
you
know.
It's
essentially
saying
we're
going
to
settle
on
the
thing
that
we're
not
even
sure
we
can
use
to
solve
the
broader
problem,
but
because
there's
a
thing
there
we're
going
to
settle
on
it,
because
literally
it's
not
clear
that
there
is
a
generic,
broader
solution
to
the
problem.
B
A
So
those
harder
problems
really
are
where
I
think.
Ultimately,
life
gets
interesting
because
effectively
in
a
very
fundamental
level,
I
don't
think
you
can
solve
those
harder
problems
with
a
solution
where
everything
is
set
in
stone
at
pod,
startup
time
and
and
so
I
think
that
fundamentally
makes
any
solution
that
is
constructed
that
way.
At
the
end,
at
the
end
of
the
day,
I
will.
A
Because
here's
the
thing,
if
you,
if
you
here's
a
very
fundamental
thing,
if
I
have
a
CNF
right
and
there
are
other
things
that
need
to
connect
to
that-
see
enough
right.
So
if
I
want
to
do
any
kind
of
training
at
all,
then
I
have
I
need
to
have
some
kind
of
a
connection
between
CNF
one
and
CNF
to
now
those
two
CNF
one
of
them,
no
matter
what
you
do.
One
of
them
is
already
going
to
have
completed
its
startup
process
when
the
other
comes
up.
So
whoever
is
completed.
A
The
startup
process
will
not
be
able
to
change
to
accommodate
the
addition
of
a
new
client
in
any
reasonably
sort
of
way
number
one
but
number
two.
If
you
have
see
nf1
and
CNF,
two
and
they're
supposed
to
be
connected
to
each
other
and
see
enough
to
crashes,
dies
or
otherwise
goes
away.
Cnf
one
is
now
marooned.
Not
only
is
it
no
longer
receiving
the
service
that
it
needs,
but
it
literally
cannot
get
the
service
that
it
needs
from
anyone
else,
because
everything
about
its
networking
was
set
in
stone
at
the
beginning
of
time.
F
A
A
A
B
So
we're
pretty
much
out
of
time,
so
people
have
to
continue
this
discussion
at
a
later
time,
but
there's
clearly
a--
is
truly
a
problem
needs
to
be
solved
and
and
I
think
we're
on
track
and
guard.
Listen.
The
difference
of
opinion
I
think
we're
on
track
to
to
solve
such
a
such
a
range
of
problems,
and
so
is
there
anything
else
and
any
last
minute
comments
that
or
announcement
that
anyone
else
has.