Cloud Native Computing Foundation Serverless Working Group, 6 Jul 2017

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: CNCF Serverless WG 7/6/2017

Description

https://github.com/cncf/wg-serverless

The CNCF Serverless WG meets to explore cloud native serverless technology and concepts. This video is the Serverless WG July 6th meeting.
Join us for KubeCon + CloudNativeCon in Barcelona May 20 - 23, Shanghai June 24 - 26, and San Diego November 18 - 21! Learn more at https://kubecon.io. The conference features presentations from developers and end users of Kubernetes, Prometheus, Envoy and all of the other CNCF-hosted projects.

A

A

A

A

Hello, so that mean I hear me.

B

Yes, I can hear. Oh okay.

A

C

D

A

E

F

C

I just printed the agenda docking to the slack channel because I want to add your names to the list of attendees.

B

They is Ken, no one's going to be moderating Doug today or I.

C

Haven't heard these not so hopefully on occasion, but we'll give him a few minutes a blow as well plow forward without him, okay and orey's.

G

C

C

Topics on the agenda that you would like to add I tried to remember what we agreed to last time.

B

Yeah I wasn't here last time. Was there anything pressing that came out like these as news couple would I don't.

C

Think it was anything major I think it was more just the break gave status I think the most part people wanted another week or another two weeks, I should say to sort of do some edits and clean ups and stuff, and then I think on this call we're going to decide whether we thought we were ready to take the next steps about. You know like merging the dock together and then trying to make sure all pieces fit together nicely for two weeks and then then consider getting a broader CTF review.

G

Now we also did some homework yesterday with Kathy to advance close for the discussion on the spec cool.

E

Hey Doug I'm here sorry thank.

C

E

Connecting with my new job is a little bit more challenging I thought.

E

You lock everything down here all right, including all Google Docs I, have no idea no way. Look at the docs. No, oh.

C

It's weird for a while there, whenever I tried to look at a Google Doc from the IBM sites, I couldn't do it. I had to go home to do it. So luckily they changed that, but yeah I found.

E

A way to request that this morning to get access like a whoever thought you need to get access to it cool. Are you baking first floor for somewhere and based in st. Louis hit headquarters.

E

Which I mean a lot less travel for me? Thankfully, all.

C

Right I think we have pretty much every we're going to get you and I got and take it off here. Yes,.

E

I think I'd. Remember correctly. Today's meeting we were hoping to have pretty much all the different sections completed and reviewed by everyone.

E

I'm just participated to try to make sure that there's some consistency in flow between the different sections, and so um our goal is to try to have this submitted to the TOC at the next EOC me, which is n, Dom I think was like three weeks two weeks from now. I guess.

E

So there I had a chatty.

D

E

The documents different sections so.

G

With myself, an irate commented that, based on on the different papers, also, we had to discussing it with the Kathy on the neck. One we've worked out out the you know details on cert the workflow at the bottom and agreed on the different aspects. So we feel it's ready to include broader review.

G

A

I think, although we're going to continue working on that, I think it's not yet people can start. You know, review that and maybe um I think other stacks, maybe other like use case and other documents to write, not.

E

B

There's some sections I think that I still haven't see the flesh out, but I think they could be consolidated into a single deck. I think maybe that's a good step as you go into the next phase. It'll you anyway, people only have one document to look at they're, not a stinking linked right now. So if someone tried you to a consistent view across the board, it's a little harder, probably now, there's a lot of consonants and separate backs. Now.

E

I can I can take a stab at that and have Doug review it with me to kinda see we can pull as hard together.

F

Looking through the pipe so introduce myself, my name is Amir I'm from Dhaka and manage.

D

F

Invited me to joined this group because I believe an invite was sent to him. So this is the first meeting that I've been able to join, given the timezone shifts, I've been going through I've been going through the docks, leaving some comments here and there I think I'm through about half of them. So far, so I'll be going through them of the course the next week as well. Okay appreciate it.

E

G

Point I made on the use case document we may want to try and grow from the use cases, implications on like requirements or respect related issues, because otherwise, like every use case, is just highlighting a use case without growing a conclusion. Then it's sort of less powerful yeah.

E

So the again, the use case section when you sort of make sure that you know a couple of times about the problems being solved. Yeah.

D

E

Oh, the prophetic: we need to kind of follow that methodology for most of the use cases yeah.

B

Exactly I said the goal for this, for in this case one word lay out because services both new and we also have some initial data on how to move the goal here is first talk about those theoretical areas where they could be apply what's promising and then follow that up for successful cases. So I think that that part of doc is a little yeah. That's I've got them placeholders in there. I want to have some something sells out, but that's definitely we want to film because we don't want to just consume. We talk about theoretical.

B

We want to quote about how it's going success. We use la yeah.

G

Again, I think. The point is that, from the use cases we can throw information about what are the requirements? What you know usually, when we're working on specs internally we serve. Oh, we use the use case. Sections too risky help us define the circle requirement. Spec.

E

A

I think that's a good suggestion. I can help with that I think I'm going to go through the use case document and I can write the ERISA requirements and then get it ready for people to review, maybe by next week. Yeah.

A

Yes, with a function.

E

The function spec is you know or it, and you know Cathy you guys already kind of a sign. I said you would have kind of work on that, so definitely worth looking through that and then trying to clean it up some along with these, you know we're going to use cases in to it'd, be a good idea. Yeah.

A

Yeah, that's that's so it really requires coming from the use cases. We derive the requirement and then we compare that with the functional stack and to see you know whether the functional stack satisfy those requirement and.

E

A

E

A little bit crazier I'd like to kind of go back after we get those two, those two or three things done Kathy and look at the scope of the space as it exists today and kind of add what use cases and requirements are being addressed in the existing scope of what we have in the different offerings and open source projects. Today. Do.

G

We want to address anything around for the development workflow. You know for this, the icd pipeline. This is the life cycle. You.

E

Know I think when I yeah I think when I hear that question I kind of look at it from two at least two, which one address it one is: are there any you know gaps, but that we can help these projects and these companies fulfill today by leveraging us SUV pipeline, is de ciencia, provides and then to to the point you're making is. How does this impact you see SUV pipeline I? Think addressing both of those would be good. Is that a phase one refers to I think is.

D

E

Is maybe more of a like? How does this impact your pipeline was phase? Two would be more of the his house team. You know seen CF could help these projects now.

G

Maybe we can also add to the spec serve a small section on what would be a traditional sort of pipeline. You know you create a function and you build it. You submit it somewhere, you know then consume it. Never like a you know, serves a letter diagram or something or not a little. You know something's more simplified, maybe even just bulleted.

E

Hang on, if you can might come up with you know, a initial credit I think that we give us all something to kind of comment on work on select the.

B

Excel section, or is that part of like the function, Spencer I, think.

G

That I think the deserve its own sort of subsection or because it looks at the things more from the developer. Workflow, not necessarily a you know the location or like.

B

That yeah developer experience yeah at the end user consumption model.

G

Yeah, specifically from because we did list their like individual lifecycle, actions like create a function, the little function etc, but there wasn't any anything that described. This is the sort of the flow or the chronological steps.

A

I mean last week, I remember: we are going to reach out to Amazon and Microsoft. How is that going? It will be good. We can get an error involvement so.

C

There were two AI is related to that, so I went to reach out to Microsoft and I did reach out to them, but they haven't gone back and yet with the definitive, yes or no they're, still sort of investigating internally or discussing internally mark. Did you get a chance to reach out to AWS? I did.

H

I have a meeting set up with one of the senior product managers on Monday, the 10th in.

I

A I had a rough conversation with Tim Wagner over at a of us a couple weeks ago and invited them to start participating in the working group. They had. Some interest in participate are in a presenting, their server lists. Application model work that they have been up to I, don't know if people are familiar with that in the group. It's you know, kind of vary it I do specific, but they have an interest and kind of broadening it to the not AWS specific, so I have some conversations going there.

I

So mark would be good to think of you too than ever you're talking to over there. So we kind of collapse the threads okay.

H

Yeah I'm the person I'm talking to or Weinstein okay, if we know or I don't.

I

So I know Tim pretty well so, okay.

C

So you're on, in terms of for the notes, I wrote you down, is taking an action item to draft up something and I can't remember: did you say you were going to create a whole new section or just create something under an existing document? Yeah.

G

Just in the existing spec, just underneath the lifecycle we'll add some more content on the serve the relations between the elements of the lifecycle. Now like what would be the workflow of a deployment workflow, you know Sara, okay,.

C

Okay and can I put you down a stake in the first pass, trying to merge the ducts, yep, okay and just some directed since can I know you can't see the doc Chris and I went back and forth. The next TOC call is on the 11th. I suspect there might be too soon for us to present link to them, since we may not have a chance to really casually the merge doc. 1.

I

C

I

There Chris was saying that one make it cancelled. Well, I figured with Alexis I'm. You may decide to cancel of Duty attendants, but we'll see then there's August, 1st or 15. Let's.

E

Target I guess I guess then just to be safe: okay, okay,.

C

Let's go safe, we want to do the 18th. We even need to set up another call for us to talk um every.

I

Now and then yeah that the 15 is wide open too. So it's up to your first first we'll have envoy presenting with some of those.

A

So the UM the meeting will be August right. All this yeah.

I

This first is probably fine. Okay,.

A

So three past three weeks: okay, yeah doc- you can put my name on the device requirement that pack so I'm, going to add that into ah um a use case document is that okay I got event. Your work on the module is together right.

C

Fitness question, so you guys are going to making edits. Do you can do you want to wait till after they're done it can a ping you when they're done or do you want.

E

It that sounds good, going perfecting me next week, when you're done and once I get all cleared from you, I'll go ahead and merge it together, make it all flow correctly. From section to section: okay,.

J

This is clearly furry I've added a couple of a use case into the document. Maybe you want to just put my name on that list of contributors there there's a section on this is logic. Yes,.

A

That would be good, maybe release you can't help me together right there, a requirement yeah.

J

I can help you me. Yes, okay,.

B

Well, that is, you move to the top of that to go. Definitely right.

J

C

All right, so it sounds like the plan is Co people have a couple edits. They want to make and then sometime, possibly early next week, well pink n, letting I ready, letting him know that it's safe to now, Marissa dachshund to one he'll, take missile step at that, and then it should be up for review for those for the group and then we'll get back together in two weeks with the plans of presenting this to the TOC on August 1st. That's all right, yep, alright!

C

A

I I didn't quite get that so what's the first align force action item.

C

There was a couple people who wanted to make some edits to the documentation in terms of adding a couple new sections, so they're going to make those edits and then they're going to ping Ken when they're done so he knows it's safe to to merge everything into one doc. Oh.

A

Okay, so for for the real common run of logic, okay, eloping, okay, okay, I, don't care I'm gonna! Send you our email. Okay sounds.

F

Good, would you be able to send a note to the list can just before, so everyone knows that from that point, you're going to be merging the doc I won't. Thank you.

C

All right in terms of the actual agenda that we had.

E

Neither purpose.

C

E

Hood topics or sections we want to kind of review together on the contrite, a closeout of you like comments or questions have been made on the docks.

B

Yeah actually, because there's that one about the terminology animated following chocolate, let me just quickly give them I. Do we have a half hour or is it the full hour? I might get a little R.

C

B

Okay, all right look look at that terminology, and so the question here was the way terminology was originally expressed.

B

We assumed that we were talking about functions of the service and we know that there's still some confusion out in off the market about weather service is equivalent to functions of the service or if service also includes a related concept of backend of the service, which is less about compute, that is about a consumption model, so the original Turtles- and this this is pretty well laid out in that piece from Mike Roberts on Martin, Fowler, calm, I, think that maybe link at the bottom of the news sources, but even if we don't consider that as part of scope, the question was, you know we kind of have to address it, because it's it's in the conversation and other documents that are well-known, so I think there's just as we look over this document here.

B

If anyone has any comments on, should we limit ourselves to community service? Should we also really let's go before we define all.

C

Right I took initial stab at defining back into the service and obviously, if I got text wrong, people feel free to obviously suggest alternate text. For me, the bigger question, though, is: do we want to try to differentiate between service and functions of service?

C

Emiram pointed out that the distinction is pretty thin and it may actually cause more confusion than then actually help. So I want to get feedback from the group its terms of whether we should even try to make that distinction.

B

Well, yes, I think you want to say barrels of the umbrella not versus functional terms, but that it might be interpreted as covering the function geysers and back in the reserve. So I would move in that line. That's highlighted by they're, just a sailor's first part.

C

Okay, I yeah I think my hair net cut up a lot there. Can you make the edits that you're suggesting there Dan, because I kind of quit here all of it? Okay of you and I? Don't want me to repeat it this for me.

H

When I've been talking about it from a private cloud point of view, I've succumbed to just using serverless. At this point, I tried, flexions as a service and that everyone just has glommed on has ever listened. There's not much I can do about it. Wow.

B

A

I think we I think it's good to expect her to use service. I. Remember someone gave a comment. I remember someone from Google, so you know function as a service. You know there are other meanings.

A

You know people that that terminology people might interpret it in different ways, but for surveys I think you know how it's better to you know people have a better tool for different people the same about what is surveys as long as we define here clearly I. Think that's good yeah.

D

A

D

This is personally I think a toss. My hat into the same ring same ring. That mark was just saying which is I kind of view it.

D

As you know, when you're talking about cloud you you need to know that was public cloud or private cloud, and you know my mind: that's sort of the same thing for service, whether you're, you know consuming from some some public cloud or you're running that in houses, I, don't know, I, don't see faz as I think it's only more confusing to have another term versus laying it into something that people are already familiar with public and private yeah.

G

I think the connotations I've seen is the more used as no server software sector to deploy locally and service is really more. When you have a platform like AWS is sort of more of service, I think there's also more connotation Alf as as something that serve think more, like you know, Google App, Engine or you know apt orientation of invoking a function. You know SLA kind of workload.

F

G

F

Across these terms, with conversation, I've had is that I used interchangeably and they're used in different ways, but given the background of the people, so the engineer that I've talked to prefer functions as a service, because it's more precise and less aid and fluffier than serverless or as most the other folks I've talked if we're not necessarily deploying code I just used it during the term service. So in my experience these two have practically interchangeable right now, any new ones we try and draw out I think it's potentially confused and.

G

Those developers do you think they do. They talked about size and sort of a generic thing, including in a larger service in HTTP based function, invocation or the generic.

F

They see, they see functions as a service as the generic term for what it is and, in fact, they're actually frustrated at some of the projects who've taken on the name for their own uses, because I see as a generic term.

A

Yeah I think somebody's also involved events or triggers right, I tend to agree with I just saw the Emir's comment. I tend to agree with that. I think you know some days like you know. If look at Amazon Oh Microsoft, they all involve events trigger.

C

So, okay, so I think what I'm cooking around here but I think what I'm hearing is do not try to make a distinction between the two. Is there any disagreement with that? Okay.

D

C

Okay, so then the question then is: should we make a statement that says something on lines of you may hear one or both terms for our purposes or for the purpose of this document? They're interchangeable. Is that something we would like to add to the doc so that people don't get confused? Yes, yeah.

F

A

Thought I think that's.

F

What I would that's what I would be leaning towards? Oh okay, I shall make that so. Okay, I think.

B

And so I, can you just repeat that that last statement says that we all do things I was.

C

Going to make a plane to the dock that says, for the purposes of this document, they were putting together the term serverless and functions of service. Are interchangeable, correct, exactly yeah, that's my point.

B

Here the reason that I did raise the back end of the service is that I think the do it to really have a separate concept in addition point to to the elephant a ring rather than just it just so people don't ask why they're not in there, because it's library.

F

I completely agree with what Dan said and I think the a reference to back-end is important because it's a useful context.

G

We weren't sure what does it mean for back into the service yeah.

B

I thought well definitional. The context in this car comes from precalculus trusted service helps put my grabber true, and this is more more of a consumption model right, functional service, you're right in customer object that responds to events or triggers right here to focus on a few aspects of it custom code, the backend service idea is your action I the right anchor stage, therefore more functions. What you're doing is assembling existing services into something, of course, there's this like and glue code in there.

B

But that's in my mind the general distinction is, you know, function service, rewriting the code that service those your events, those retrieve things that are responding to versus your little single page application that has no back-end infrastructure. It's not simple at all: zero for authentication! It's that simple for commerce. Maybe it's got something for like github for hosting static pages. We.

H

Can consider that that also along the lines is the azure logic apps.

B

It's going to be I, don't know enough about the distinction. I saw a little bit of demo of it, but I think if that is that composing something out of external services. I know it's very driven but in my mind the first difficult patience of a cannoli services. Just a web website that you've written no back and logic for he's assembled it for something else to do it for you or.

F

A mobile app plus another example, the the heavy user of back-end, deserve this type offerings well,.

G

Yeah but I'm not sure there is a big distinction, because you know if you wrote the function or someone else. You know at least our vision as though there will be sort of at markets for functions and for that we need those levels of abstraction that we're kind of cutting this into spec and and then, if someone else wrote it and you bought it for two cents and invocation or to spend so much or I write it I, don't think it's a big enough distinction. Oh.

F

That sounds like a yeah I'm.

A

Sorry miss any of this correct me if I'm wrong or if I can't as a service I said here. What to me is some function need to access another service. Maybe in the cloud platform, for example, when the function is acute, write, an e to store or some some results into some database or I need to you know access some other service in the cloud in the cloud right. Is that what you mean.

C

I

B

C

B

Orange no I'm just kind of checking out my comment. Sorry I'm on the stock itself, it's kind of pricey, if I'm sorry I missed that I think is just so much yeah. I think this code, you aren't. Writing, may be the biggest story.

G

Turn so maybe we should just say that functions could either be developed by you or you can have a consumption model for for functions. You know the where you can just basically use someone else's functions and just route data into it. You know an event into it and get results so.

F

Good I, don't think this back into the service definition is necessary to title functions, particularly I. Think it's just highlighting the fact that back end as a service exists, and we should be aware of it in the context of thinking about service I think that's the reason that none wanted it to be there and I would agree with that. Tell me if I'm getting this wrong Daniel, no.

B

You're right, that's exactly yeah, so.

G

You look at a desk is a use case for functions.

C

Well, it's it's not! It's also a use case as much as it's a it's part of the kind of I'm, not sure that's right, frayed, a part of the infrastructure of a function right a function may need the access additional services and that's what back into the service comes into play. Yes,.

G

That's particularly.

C

G

Part of a function, composition or functional identity,.

I

F

I think we confusing also Blackwell poisoning I.

G

Think we didn't check.

K

If the name agrees, we got a binding or something like that. We see something that a function is using is to access the backend. So.

G

It you mean backing stores like database services and things like that, or you mean other functions. They're going to produce I was.

C

Thinking more back-end test for type of, and it has an example. Yes,.

G

So yeah that if you look at the definition by by a juror that we also serve a doctor, this is talking about data bindings and we sort of you sort of create a policy for it for what you want to connect to and that's or externalize from the function. So, if I have the same function, let's assume it's doing, I, don't image processing on set of objects? Okay, so I can decouple this function.

G

That does image processing from the data repository that you want to do the image processing on and that there's a report repositories server could be connected through configuration facility, that's part of an environment variable or data binding. The context variable- and this is how you sort of create a consumption model for function, because you decouple the server incoming and outgoing feed and require data from the function. Implementation. That's exactly sort of those data bindings, I.

A

Think it's good to define this pattern as a service and I. Think that's good I think this is more towards you know. This is all about in function, will access the infrastructure service and not more about accessing another party's on function, library, yeah,.

G

But if there is, we want to refer to the back end of this. Specifically, this is a persistent back-end. It's not just another function which can be stateless. So, let's give it the name of first data binding. You know, and not just generic back in the search, because I can create a back-end that does assent occasion or does I, don't know what you know calculates one plus one, and that will still be my back-end.

G

So in order to be clear, we've addressed this with a data binding, which is one or more concrete definition and also adopted by you, know guys like Asia, so.

C

Damning, it's a question because I think that's the tall's on with I think leaves comment in there, which is do we need to mention this at all I I kind of understand the desire to include it because it's part of the bigger picture and people may be confused between serverless versus back into the service. But there's there's a little part of me. That's wondering whether mentioning it might actually cause some confusion, because I'm kind of looking at this as an implementation detail how I choose to implement my function right.

B

Well, I think yeah I'm, a mere chiasm I'm. Sorry, we got I think we have to just mention two else in the room that even if we did you know it's not naturally there, it's just because it's been included in through these conversations, I think, however, we will describe it or, however, we disown it. It just should be. Listen, there's this term up there. This is how it relates. It's not with the really discover what we're talking about. Okay,.

C

So you wanted mint in it to make sure people understand that it's not the same thing right right,.

B

So I even added as a call-out box or a note, you know something that's kind of like a meta information, Zen brand. Okay,.

C

Maybe a family.

B

C

Mexican things like I need to add some additional text to make it clear that we're mentioning in this it for that purpose, to make sure people understand, there is a difference there that this really is something that's used for behind the scenes. But there may be some confusion as to its relationship to function. It I'm, sorry, it's race it to service and that's why we're mentioning it not because there's necessarily one are the same. Some like that, okay and- and there is another.

B

Spatterdocks, where it's mentioned I, don't know if that was yeah.

K

And I think we should also add that it's is the same as data binding, since we are using this terminology within this function. Specification is since it's relying on a back-end service, which is a data binding, so yeah. We.

G

K

G

Invented that term, that's part of 12 factor, you know so I think it really depends what you mean if you're starting talking about sort of something which is invisible from the user, and there is some some sort of data that as the platform provider I I'm using that's one thing. If it's visible to the function consumer, where he actually needs to specify something. In order to use that resource, then it may be a different line for.

K

Example, its secrets and education stuff like that which would be needed for data binding, and so it wouldn't be transparent to the function user.

A

I'm doing it all to describe the mechanism, I feel data, finding it mechanism right. So here we are just defined. The terminology. um I think it's good as its defined. Is that necessary to my knowledge, it or people understand you know and you're right, though, when you're writing function, you can access some back-end service. Providing the service is not part of the kind of the service are so many definite itself.

G

Yeah but I think that this term of backing back-end is too too loose. You know you got the both of us here confused about this term, because back-end can mean many many things to many people.

C

Okay, I think I have my AI and I'll take a take a stab at trying to address the the concerns brought up here.

C

Okay, are there other topics or are there? Questions on other documents? Can.

H

We talk about framework for a quick second, this.

C

H

Here the point I'd like to make on this is I've seen framework used, for example, in serverless comm uses it as a surrealist framework to build their applications, whereas, like fish and io uses it same vision is a framework for serverless functions on kubernetes. Do I think frameworks being overused between those two use cases. One is an implementation of serverless. Another is a library that helps you, create applications and deploy them out onto serverless.

H

How? How does the team think about framework good.

B

Question I think, as is what is here, it's big enough that it covers those linking faces, but I think it might make sense, then right to say yeah hit. For example, this can be this more forward to the runtime such decision or the library. The programming model that she's, but only big enough, which.

C

One you guys wanted 340i purposely wrote a vague because I wasn't quite sure which way to go with it. To be perfectly honest,.

A

So for free, what we talking about framework, yes,.

L

A

For framework when I think of this is where generics terminology, where generic, so when I think of framework in storage, I'm thinking about the you know, the server is R cos. Theta some days are in for structural architectural framework from the unusual service providers, the sort of the platform framework or or architecture that support the somebody's functionality. That's what I would think of when one people's made frame somebody's framework.

C

We have all the different exactly in your mind, what would be the difference between a framework in that case and say: serverless runtime? Yes,.

A

Also, a strong pot, yeah I think that that's more unclear somebody's wrong time is very specific to email, the the packages right, the environment, the packages yeah, not framework, yeah,.

C

Okay, interesting yes,.

D

I think that's a great yeah. You could almost like where we have server this runtime. You could almost have runtime and framework I think it's.

D

This is somewhat the clinic total, but I think it's somewhat unfortunate that the service crew, the services comic route, chose framework as their project name, just because it yeah, because it because it is so generic and people have a kind of stumble over it as they're using the English language to to just talk about the framework that they're using and then people get confused on whether or not they're referring to that specific implementation, and so so runtime framework and then the other one might be potentially management framework. I mean I.

D

Think management take is too too broad of a term to describe the surveillance framework or.

H

Development framework, yes,.

C

So with development, if we replace framework with development framework, then is that just the environment in which you develop your functions themselves, but they're not necessarily played into it, that's right way to view it. Yes,.

D

It goes here right, yeah, the runt of a right run, member okay, well,.

A

Okay, so what was I trying to define here so there's a theory that the environment which functions are developed and deployed? Oh okay, I'll tell you, okay, if I developer and deploy it it's different that they are different things right.

C

This is designed by committee, love it okay. So what I think I'm looking at now is two different terms: development framework versus runtime framework, so development framework is the environment in which you develop your functions. Runtime framework is the environment in which the functions themselves are actually executed. Is that the right way to think of it do.

B

H

Yeah I think that's a good distinction. Okay,.

C

Okay, I can work on tweaking that appropriately this.

J

Is Lydia, can you elaborate a little bit on the workflow function graph? Did you have to come on yeah.

A

I think I'm go yeah. I will I want high that yeah information I got someone else. Yeah I like that.

C

Thank You Kathy Kathy.

D

I don't know if that was a call to health, but I can help.

A

J

Yeah, obviously, that is some form of possibly a coordination function to potentially sequence different functions, something like that anyway. I'll be wanting to help out with any work with I.

C

Do not recognize the voices yet, who is the last person I'm going to help Louis Leakey.

G

C

Who was the person before that I? Think I was Kali yeah.

D

I think yeah it was Lee Cal code and then and Cathy Zhang was I, think Cathy dropped but yeah okay.

C

D

There's almost a.

C

Pvz Cathy I recognize ever Melanie. Okay,.

C

E

C

Yes, I get a dog's name in there now. What about packages and namespace I didn't know what to put on that one, because it almost felt like an implication detail, but someone had mentioned it. So I put it in the list, but it wasn't quite sure with the put what if people think about that, one I.

A

Think it's good to defiant um package namespace.

B

Okay but I think it's open. One support yes, ability to like there's a bit of an API gateway story. Media goes with that, but because, if because functions or actions on kind of the wrong arrow, not necessarily HTTP, therefore without a URI, is there a way to link back to how to actually access something? That's that's more of the process about so.

G

Can you explain the further I'm doing good.

B

So it as you're writing a function. It's it's pride to you know you can associate it to an event and it's a non-http type of work, growth right and you just want our fatal exchange. You want to access some. Some Gators have dropped to a tree bucket, that's sort of fun, um but then the concept, if you do want to use it and make to namespace or you do want to share it.

B

How do you actually do that? How do you make it available? Addressable I think that's what this wasn't anything about and.

G

B

G

Was a think it was mentioned as part of the the spec and foundation is around. Can you normalize some of the event metadata? You know, for example, let's assume you have a property called body or called you know, content type and content type could be something that part of an HTTP message, and it could also be something that when you get a buffer from a message, queue could sort of be the same.

G

So the thing there are some some elements of metadata that could be sort of converged across multiple types of events and some other elements like if you're talking about a database stream that includes all records and new records and primary keys and whatever and and type of operations that will be harder to convert, we're actually working quite a bit on that, because in our framework, we we do seek to have this notion that you can invoke the function from a message: queue or an HTTP call or some other mechanism, but it's it's sometimes harder than itself yeah.

B

I think that more fits under the event data term yeah.

G

Did you review this section in the in the document and then you can't not.

B

Know that the the specification part yeah I did but yeah we definitely. We should make sure these terms align with what's going on there. That goes inside here.

G

There is the there is a clear separation in our view between we had this discussion, also so that we'd catch between sort of the event structure that we then being provided to the function and the actual events. First, it generates this structure because we want to have this abstraction. You know you may run the same function in AWS and use kinetics as the messaging as a streaming engine and maybe on prime you'll run Kafka. So you don't want the series you have the function be aware of what was the actual.

G

You know event source, maybe through properties, but not as a class on you know. You really want it to be aware of what is served event type and the metadata, without necessarily binding to a statistic.

G

Implementation of this examples.

C

Okay, there's a lot of papers when they hear the background. I want to go on mute so.

K

I say it: we sort coordinate a the terminology used in other section. So do you want each section owner to a terminology that it's used within that terminal in this section or you want to do the data way around after reviewing a lot of section, adding those terminology within, and this section as well? Well,.

C

I think if, if people can edit this document three for say the end of the week with terminology from the other sections, I move it into here, I'd rather get that done. I'd rather have it obviously defined in one spots instead of multiple places and if we can get it done before, Ken takes his first pass or trying to merge the doctor. I think that'd be better. So if you guys can get that done before the end of the week, I think I.

K

Would agree so if you can give a writer permission to address, then we can just edit and and our technology within it. Yep.

C

Okay, I'll go through that civil element. We make sure I read that that man isn't a library. I will forget yes, but.

A

I think you know one key point: we should try it. You should not try to avoid you know using different terminology to you know to define similar thing. For example. Ninety event data here I think is some people buy services like that event, motivator or for other terminology. So just it's all refers. The information I mean pretend you to the event that occurred yeah, but.

G

We made it simpler, it's called event, data and metadata. So well, you know there are portions, which is obviously a data. If you are getting a you know, server blob and there is a lot of the metadata, but these are captives event, data and metadata.

C

Yeah, actually, it's going to be fun to make sure we're all using the same terminology as we merge the docks, but that's something we have to obviously go through and do as part of the Edit stage, all right, any other things to discuss relative to the stock.

C

Okay, what about any other ducks? Are there any topics on say, positioning or scope or any does that way before.

A

We go I'm urging here hold on so when we see the package or context. However, you know when the functions language right, it I thought like wrong hat what kind of language the package I'm not sure what terminology we should use, but when the function is a title, Java or node.js right, it has all kind of running environment of Hecate to go with it together. We should define that right. So.

C

It's like what the function, language itself, yeah.

A

I'm not religiously looked what we should cause I'm, trying to ask people's ah yeah input also for the function. Members I heard. Some people call that the function package- something like that, but we have a package name, slash namespace there, ah I gotta run.

G

I think the run time is the thing which is her of language specific.

G

M

Right, yeah, a function.

A

H

A

H

About getting too precise on that front, but that might be going into I, don't know too much of a specification mode. Would.

C

You so am I hearing correct that people say rather than defining a separate term for this. Maybe talk about how the runtime framework may have a specific set of languages in which the functions should be written. That's the right way to think of it. Okay,.

D

C

I don't agree: okay,.

D

It just give you a nightmare trying to keep up as those languages change and as projects you know commit for frameworks, come and go. We're content.

G

D

G

Is another sort of related thing we've I've listed in the stories and data source thing is as today many frameworks. Jason is the way to provide the data to the function and that that could be nice for some applications, but we're moving it to like screaming or maybe want to deploy the function and like a low powered IOT device. That may not be a good idea, so in some cases we may want to generalize the you know.

G

The data structures to use certain and native language structures- or you know things like boba, for something like that and not necessarily binding to saying JSON- is the way to go with with functions.

C

Any other comments.

D

Mm-Hmm, basically guess we got one side: we've got rules that you know rule to find our triggers our math, Tunica and I. Guess it sort of leads. Me I. Think someone earlier on the call mentioned as logic apps and then which, in my mind, is somewhat congruent with lambdas step function when kind of orchestration and tying these functions together and but I don't know that we'd call out any and I don't know if necessary.

D

Maybe it's not what I would call it any terminology around interconnection of func, showing the input and output from the next and the you know orchestration in general and I. Don't know if this is.

C

That related to the work flow function right, yeah.

J

That's where that would fall under. Maybe we can elaborate a little bit more on that. It's it's needed. Okay,.

D

Yeah that make sense and then.

G

You write as we get started, building that section in the spec working. Yes,.

A

I lied it here, yeah and with Louie assembly together yeah.

C

C

Minutes west, are there other things on this document or any other document that you want to mention Urbanek.

J

Relating to the year that coming Tom, JSON and other formats for the event data, maybe we could just add something on that bullets on event: data to say that there I.

G

Already it's already there, what I wrote there is some limitations focus on JSON may be desired. You know blah blah.

G

Okay, you could just go over the spec and and see if you want to change it. Okay, thank you.

C

All right anything else: okay I think we picked on this back row pretty well, okay, so it's kind of different back in the last seven minutes, I think well,.

B

There's a related talk concept or skill, scaffold I, don't know a yellow mark I guess she wrote this one, but we had some questions, I think about this one as well: okay, okay, let's.

C

Go to the scope commit like paste, a link oops, a some thinking to chat. Okay, there's link yeah.

B

So this seems to be arranged according to the outline and this right, there's um basically I think we're talking about some of the implementations that are out there. So people understand what they are is what they do and how they might differentially so better to talk about the public processes, open source server list and then there's a third item which was unclear, which was open sources services, oh yeah, where I thought it might come back to that bags. Argue the back end of the service argument, but I didn't know.

B

If that was meant to be something else. Yeah yeah.

H

Then the intent here was to just describe the types of services and especially on the open source side that would interoperate with a functions as a server core sorry, serverless infrastructure, because obviously having functions run, isn't as interesting as having the services tied in with them to be able to do things like API proxy or even have data store for the stateless functions.

C

So, are you saying that they basically, this open source services, are basically open source versions of the back into the service category of things.

H

To a certain degree, yeah yeah, it could be ok.

G

H

G

Read this length that you wrote there and it sounds to me like what you refer to as back into the service- is what people usually refer to as platform services, because that's sort of related part of, if you think about Amazon, that's part of the Amazon platform services. You.

C

G

Can be a little bit getting.

C

A little careful, though the concern there is um get the platform serviced. It may imply that you can't necessarily use a service that post it outside of the platform and that's I'm, not sure. That's not sure the case. Yeah.

G

Well, in the context of those things that were mentioned like which are pretty essential, like authentication services, you.

D

G

It's something that has to be integrated as a low-level thing under the framework. It's not something that just the function goes and consumes. If it's just anything that the function goes in, consumes it's no different than any other.

G

You could just go and deploy Redis and a different server and and connected through TCP there's no phone holding you back, but I think the context of this discuss of this blog post that I read was about you know the underlying layer or you know where the service sits above so you know, if you're building sort of a service framework in a vacuum, then user, starting to think okay who's. My authentication service. Where am I showing my monitoring data? You know what which key value am I using to score state, etc?

G

Then, then, those you know from my mind: these are more the platform services that are used by the and maybe platform is like whoever someone needs to do this integration, because it's not service. If you're basically saying the customer is going to do the with authentication service and the databases and etc here, just like open with comes together with CouchDB, and you know Kafka and everything and that's really integrated. This is our the platform where the you know the fast or this whatever. Certainly it.

H

But I didn't feel good. Open. Wisk is opinionated enough that you can't include other databases or key value stores for per year for the functions you own use. No, but I think it's.

G

Different things you do use a couch base as a way to store the in the low levels of the of the fast. You know the implementation within the function. You can access any database, but you cannot just go and switch Kafka used for the messaging in open wisk with any other thing. Without doing changes to the framework.

B

So I've got here, I think.

H

I'm agreeing with you in and I see these services as being add-on services above the implementation of a serverless framework.

H

Serverless runtime framework.

G

If you look at that background that we put in the spec, we sort of put there a layer sort of a base layer of saying platform services, it doesn't really matter who brings them, but they're sort of the foundations that this service runtime and you know, controllers and theaters and all those things it on above it. You know someone may see that and say you know what kubernetes is my platform. Someone else will say you know I'll, build my own stuff and add and add database to this error, and that will be my platform.

G

So sorry, an exact term. But you serve a thing: it's really the foundation where the server list sits on top and then within the function you may access any other services, but that's as far as I understand, not what you meant with the deck end is a service.

C

Not quite sure how to resolve that one I think.

B

If we different keep this in here, it definitely an introductory paragraph that describes basically what the intentions and how it relates, maybe I know mark. Did you want to run with that? Yep yep? Okay, are.

G

You serve basically defining like the prerequisites for for building a service. You know, I, don't know if the right term is framework, but so there are certain Dacian services that you need to use in order to build service. If I understand this, you know this is back in the service term.

G

So maybe let's call that foundation, services or whatever, but it's not back end as a service. It's it doesn't mean anything. Okay,.

C

Right so we're coming to the top of the hour and I want to be respectful people's time. Are there any last minute short items to bring up or can other things you wanted to mention.

C

Okay, so I guess just to just to reiterate then um nope I'm going to.

E

C

Mute: okay! Yes, it's a three: it right. People are going to edit the terminology, doc try to move the terminology definitions into one document by the end of this week. By early next week, people who had AI is to write a couple of new sections are going to ping ken when they're done so they'll know what it's safe to actually merge ducks and then I'll make that available for every way to review. And then we have a call in two weeks and we're shooting for August. First TOC call isn't just those guys yeah.

E

So they go the big go here. Doug. Is it in two weeks who have a single document? That's been all pulled together, so yep. So.

A

Doc, you're gonna spend on making minutes for the action item right. So you know: okay,.

E

Yeah it's in the meeting notes on then you go to the CF yeah.

A

I, don't wanna just.

E

Go to the media.

A

Note sense right: there.

E

A

Agenda, we have agenda in that web page. For you know the next week, yeah.

E

A

Well, oh yeah,.

E

We pretty much follow the same agenda for mitosis, at least at this early stage, you're kind of finalizing the document and reviewing everyone's comment, making sure that's done so as we as we go forward and have more specific agenda items and presentations or more one really that that would definitely be the place to go to look for like the agenda and where it talks about the next meeting and the contact information you get into the meeting or portion agenda, then okay,.

A

Yeah I'll put my name there.

C

All right, I think we're done then: okay, good, okay,.

E

C

A

All right, okay, but.

L