►
From YouTube: CNCF Serverless WG Meeting - 2019-02-14
Description
Join us for Kubernetes Forums Seoul, Sydney, Bengaluru and Delhi - learn more at kubecon.io
Don't miss KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020 events in Amsterdam March 30 - April 2, Shanghai July 28-30 and Boston November 17-20! Learn more at kubecon.io. The conference features presentations from developers and end users of Kubernetes, Prometheus, Envoy, and all of the other CNCF-hosted projects
A
Okay,
we'll
catch
up
with
Doug.
Later,
okay,
let's
go
and
get
started
three
after
the
hour.
Okay,
so
I
don't
need
to
know
guys.
I,
don't
think
is
anything
too
exciting
on
the
eyes
other
than
I
I
didn't
at
Clemens
earlier
he
had
some
things
on
his
list,
so
he
promised
we
could
work
on
that
community
time.
Is
there
anything
from
the
community?
People
would
like
to
bring
up.
A
A
Small
attendance,
not
a
whole
lot
to
mention
there
other
than
for
those
of
you
who
are
watching
the
goaline.
Sdk
Scott
is
working
with
the
VMware
guys
to
do
some
sort
of
harmonization,
because
there
was
sort
of
two
SDKs
floating
around
there
for
a
period
of
time
and
they're
working
hard
to
see
if
they
can
sort
of
bring
those
together
and
it
seems
like
they're
making
some
good
progress
there.
B
A
A
B
B
A
Alright
and
any
questions
for
Scott,
okay,
obviously
love
to
have
more
people
involved
in
this,
the
more
people
to
get
involved,
the
sooner
the
better.
This
makes
everybody
can't
support
it
and
get
you
know
some
really
cool
ideas
out
there
more
people.
Earlier
we
have
the
better
ideas.
We
usually
come
up
with
all
right
moving
forward,
then
coop
complaining.
So
we
did
have
a
call
last
week,
I
believe
or
having
another
one
right
after
this
one
to
talk
about
what
we're
gonna
discuss
during
an
intro
and
deep
dive.
A
I
believe
the
current
planning
is
the
intro
is
gonna
have
our
standard,
you
know
what
are
we,
what
are
our
goals
and
stuff
like
that
and
general
information?
And
that's
what
I'm
going
to
take?
You
know
maybe
10
15
minutes
at
most
kind
of
a
thing,
but
then
use
the
rest
of
time
to
talk
about
some
things.
That
might
be
more
a
broader
interest.
Things
like
you
know
the
SDKs,
perhaps
do
a
demo
run
the
SDKs
and
stuff
like
that,
and
then
a
deep
dive.
C
A
Very
similar
world
in
the
intro
and
then
a
more
advanced
one,
the
deep
dive
that
kind
of
stuff.
Probably
the
most
interesting
thing,
though,
is
originally
when
I
submitted
the
request
for
us
to
have
an
intro
and
deep
dive.
I
thought
that
having
just
two
sessions
which
are
35
minutes,
each
should
be
sufficient
for
everything
that
we're
doing
meaning
not
just
crowd
events,
but
also
the
servlets
working
group
itself.
Based
upon
the
discussion.
A
Last
week,
though,
we
kind
of
realized
that
maybe
we
should
do
is
have
a
server
list
dedicated
session
just
one
session
and
make
it
an
80-minute
one,
as
opposed
to
35
minutes
and
kind
of
turned
it
into
a
little
bit
of
a
birds
of
a
feather
type
session
as
well.
So
talk
a
little
bit
about
the
status
server
list.
A
Since
we
put
up
the
white
papers,
perhaps
even
update
the
white
papers
in
the
landscape,
doc,
but
then
kind
of
turned
around
and
get
input
from
the
community
in
terms
of
where
they
perhaps
would
like
to
see
us
go
in
terms
of
other
areas
of
work.
They
might
want
to
focus
on
and
stuff
like
that
and
just
basically
make
it
a
little
bit
more
interactive,
so
I
did
put
in
a
request
for
that.
A
It's
a
second
or,
if
I'm,
sorry
for
the
additional
session,
just
for
the
service
working
group
and
I
think
we
are
gonna
get
it.
So
that's
gonna
be
an
issue,
so
we're
gonna
continue.
Our
talks
like
as
I
said
after
this
call
and
we'll
try
to
fill
out
the
details
of
what
we'll
talk
about
in
this
service
session,
but
I
did
want
you
guys
on
the
call
to
be
aware
that
we
are
planning
this
third
session
and
not
just
the
intro
and
deep
dive
for
cloud
events
all
right.
A
Any
questions
all
right,
good,
moving
forward,
then
PRS,
so
great
Joe,
I,
don't
think
I
things
change
with
your
PR
and
I
think
we're
on
hold,
because
Clemens
was
gonna,
put
down
some
ideas
that
he
was
talking
on.
Last
week's
calls
at
the
current
status.
That's.
A
C
A
Agreed
with
that,
yes,
I'd
love
to
get
more
conversations
in
the
PR
dishes
themselves,
yep
all
right.
So
do
we?
Anybody
have
any
questions
or
comments
like
to
bring
up
on
Rachel's
PR.
Before
we
move
on
all
right,
maybe
forward
then
Kristoff
I'm
trying
to
write
where
we
were
on
this
one
I
think
you
actually
cursed
offline.
Are
you
able
to
talk
to
others,
even
though
you're
on
the
train
Kristoff?
Oh.
F
A
I,
don't
know
okay,
so
I,
just
refresh
everybody's
memory,
I
believe
I'm
last
week
is
called
the
direction
we
decided
to
head
was
to
change
the
mus.
It
should
and
decrease
the
size
down
to
46
I'm,
sorry,
64,
K
I,
don't
think
the
rest
of
it
is
really
much
the
same
as
before.
It's
just
basically
general
guidance
on
how
to
measure
things
and
stuff
like
that.
But
so
that's
that
first
paragraph.
That's
really
the
key.
A
C
I
think
this
is
fine
I,
like
I
thought
that
we
were
supposed
to
use
this
past
week
to
see.
If,
like
do,
we
have
any
qualms
with
this
like?
Does
this
not
the
kidney?
Is
this
not
okay
with
any
one
system?
I
did
not
personally
do
that,
but
I
think
I
have
reasons
wait.
This
is
gonna,
be
fine,
no
matter
what
so
I
like
I
am
personally
fine
with
this
okay.
B
D
D
B
A
A
Was
kind
of
implied,
but
if
you
don't
do
it,
if
you
don't
have
time
to
do,
if
you
don't
have
time
to
do
it,
it
might
be
good
to
say
so
in
the
issue
itself.
So
someone
I.
A
D
So
so
that
will
that
will
address
this
issue
effectively.
The
content
encoding
is
gonna,
be
echoing
what
HTTP
does
and
then
that
in
basically
describes
this
is
basics
for
encoded
and
that
could
also
obviously
fit
that
you
have
Jesus
encoding
or
whatever.
So,
basically,
I
think
that
section
is
going
to
steal
straight
from
HTTP.
Okay,.
A
B
I'm
not
concerned
about
the
size,
I
think
it's
just
the,
for
example,
if
you
base64
encode
something
it
becomes
bigger,
because
it's
it's
more
bytes,
so
the
representation
that
the
message
is
before
encoding
for
json
format
is
not
a
potentially
an
accurate
way
to
measure
the
over
the
wire
size.
Of
this
message:
oh
I
stood
there
saying
is.
H
A
F
Can
I
ask
a
question,
so
I
wrote
this
big
for
the
last
paragraph,
where
I'm
trying
to
describe
that
it's
the
over
the
wire
size
doesn't
matter
what
matters
is
like
sort
of.
We
try
to
measure
it
independently,
just
only
the
crowd
event,
and
for
that
we
use
the
JSON
format,
but
it's
just
for
measuring
it.
The
over
the
wire
from
slides
doesn't
really
matter
because
it
will
be
different,
depending
on
which
format
we
use,
so
that
paragraph
not
make
sense
or
am
I
missing.
Something
well.
F
A
D
In
general,
it
should
be.
We
should
be
talking
only
about
the
wire
size,
because
that's
that's
what
matters,
and
maybe
maybe
the
the
discussion
of
many
of
minified
is
maybe
a
little
much
here
weight
from
a
personal
phase,
because
you
know
it's
it's
that
big
and
if
you
have
any
recoding
mechanisms
to
go
and
make
it
less
big.
Well
then
go
do
use
that
but
I'm
not
sure
I'm,
not
sure
we
it's.
D
A
Trying
to
figure
how
to
make
progress
here,
because
this
issue's
been
out
there
for
a
while
and-
and
I
don't
know
whether
Christoph
is
feeling
frustrated
or
not-
that
it's
just
from
my
point
of
view,
because
this
thing's
been
out
there
for
a
while
and
and
and
we
need
to
sort
of
figure
out
some
way
to
wrap
this
up
without
letting
it
linger
on
too
long
and
Clemens
you're.
Now
suggesting
that
perhaps
we
shouldn't
be
talking
about
this
minification
kind
of
thing,
it's
rather
just
well.
What
are
the
bites
on
the
wire
period
right.
D
A
A
J
A
So
I,
don't
I
feel
like
I
have
to
say
this,
but
I
don't
want
to
because
Clemens
already
have
a
lot
on
your
plate.
But
if
you're
suggesting
an
alternative
here,
could
you
write
that
up
so
people
can
look
at
it
and
compare
it
cuz
I
don't
want
to
sit
there
and
say:
hey
cristoph.
Can
you
don't
do
Cummins
idea?
It's
not
fair
to
him.
Yeah.
D
Okay,
basically,
there's
a
there's,
a
I
understand
what
the
thought
process
here
is
of
the
measured
by
sterilizing
that
that's
Jason
right,
but
yeah,
I'm,
yeah
I'm,
not
happy
about
okay.
Well,
I!
Don't
want
to
rush.
No,
it's
not
clear!
It's
not
clear
to
me
that
on
the
particular
route
we
go
and
resize
and
resize
the
event
so
much
and
that
and
normalizing
on
Jason
house.
Let's
watch,
let
me
I'll
put
that
on
my
homework
list.
Okay,
I'll
write
something
yo
he's.
D
A
Okay,
so
so
Christopher
are
you.
It
sounds
like
there's
at
least
a
little
bit
of
concern
between
Scott
and
Clemens,
that
maybe
the
wording
isn't
quite
right
here.
I
assume,
you're.
Okay,
with
with
this
being
delayed
a
little
bit
I,
don't
think
it's
critical
that
this
gets
in,
but
we're
also
not
asking
you
to
do
any
work
to
modify
this
I
want
someone
else
to
put
board
a
slightly
modified
proposal.
Then
we
that
we
can
consider
is
that
fair
with
you.
F
A
A
F
F
A
And
and
their
stuff,
thank
you
very
much
for
your
patience
and
work
on
this.
One
I
really
appreciate
it.
No
worries,
okay,
any
other
questions
or
comments
on
this
one,
all
right
cool.
Thank
you
guys.
Moving
forward
the
date
of
rf1
I
know
Christoph.
You
made
a
minor
update
here,
but
that
wasn't
actually
what
we
were
really
blocked
on
so
I'm
just
quickly
sure
that
matter,
update
hold
on
a
second
did.
F
Casey
had
some
questions
I
think
there
were
some
relevant
I
made
this
evidence.
One
sentence
that
should
be
should
clarify
that
data
and
data
rest.
The
information
behind
it
must
always
be
exactly
the
same
must
be
tentacle
yep,
so
that
was
sort
of
confusing.
Before
maybe
and
now
it
should
be
really
clear.
A
D
D
I
think
it's
a
little
I
think
that
extra
attributes
is
something
that
we
can
also
do
as
that
can
be
an
element
in
the
payload,
but
I
also
see
that
the
the
the
advantage
of
having
something
that's
generic,
so
the
generate
generic
implementation
could
potentially
go
and
then
pull
the
you
know
the
data
from
the
reference
place
and
then
it
kind
of
presents
the
event
as
if
it
was
flowing
all
the
way
through
s1,
so
I
could
see.
I
could
see
both
sides
right.
A
D
K
A
F
F
F
A
Actually
might
be
a
broader
question
here
about,
as
a
receiver
must
support
all
the,
but
might
un
mustn't
support
the
semantics
of
every
single
property,
or
can
it
reject
a
message
because
it
doesn't
support
it
and
still
be
compliant,
but
Tam
I
think
you
had
your
hand
up
further
secta.
Did
you
want
to
ask
something?
Oh
no,.
L
A
A
Personally,
I
would
almost
rather
wait
until
we
sort
of
nailed
down
what
the
final
proposal
looks
like
before
we
try
to
answer
that
question
because,
for
example,
let's
say
we
come
back
with
a
proposal
that
says:
okay,
we
don't
need
data
wrap.
We
can
do
this.
This
claim
check
thing
using
just
the
data
attribute.
I,
don't
think,
there's
any
doubt
that
everybody
must
support
the
data
attribute
in
general.
The
question
is,
then:
do
they
need
to
support
this
claim
check
pattern?
K
A
A
E
F
I
would
say:
I,
don't
know
what
exact?
What
do
you
exactly?
You
mean
reject,
so
you
would
say:
I
cannot
process
this
un,
but
what
what
is
supposed
to
happen
at
this
by
mean
you
get
events
and
either
you
understand
them
or
you
don't,
and
in
this
case,
for
some
reason
you
don't,
but
this
can
happen
for
any
sort
of
reason,
like
the
sender
introduces
a
new
type
of
rent-
and
you
don't
understand,
say
when
there
will
be
another
case
where
you
can
process
the
events
right
or
maybe
I'm,
on
a
wrong
track.
F
F
H
K
D
What's
the:
what
are
the
rules
for
for
visibility
of
that
location?
What
what's
your
thinking
over
because
it
could
work?
But
since
we're
ultimately
cloud
offense
is
a
messaging
path
and
that
may
go
through
routers
and
go
across
the
network
across
network
boundaries,
which
means
you
might
quite
well
have
as
an
area
where
you
come
out
of
a
private
network
environment
on
the
edge
and
then
you
transition
into
a
cloud
environment.
And
then
you
transition
back
into
a
v-net.
And
now
you
haven't
called
oven
and
you
have
a
data.
D
F
F
My
view
on
that
is,
it
kind
of
is
similar
to
olia
is
the
schema
URL
or
even
the
source,
which
are
also
your
I
references.
There
is
no
guarantee
necessarily,
but
because
they
can
be
relative
or
they
can
be
also
absolute,
but
there
is
no
guarantee
that
you
can
actually
access
this
your
eye,
even
those
are.
D
Designed
that
is,
let's
keep
our
eye
and
a
schema.
Your
eye
is
typically
important
to
your
cache,
even
though
it
might
be,
it
might
be.
A
real
location
source
is
very
clearly
only
an
abstract
identifier,
and
so
both
of
those
are
just
your
eyes,
but
here
I
think
you
literally
need
to
have
a
URL,
because
you
need
to
go
and
get
at
that
data.
That's
being
pointed
to.
F
D
A
route
you
have
to
go
and
write
down
earlier
that
that
speaks
about
the
relationship
of
you
know
publisher
and
consumers,
and
that
they
have
to
have
this,
because
the
data
is
an
integral
part
of
that
message
they
already
do.
Is
your
basic
needs
you're
pushing
that
off
to
a
different
place,
but
it
needs
to
be
assured
that
anybody
who
received
that
event
is
able
to
consume
the
entirety
of
that
event
in
some
way,.
F
Okay,
so
so
that
is
an
assumption
that
we
can
make
and
then
I
can
change
the
text
in
the
message
I
didn't
like
in
the
East
I
didn't
make
this
assumption.
What
a
one
assumption
I
made
is
that
similar
to
encryption
may
encrypt
the
message
and
make
sure
that
only
a
pre-selected
set
of
consumers
can
decrypt
the
message
right.
That
is
one
use
case
we
may
want
to
support,
and
so
this
one
here
will
be
similar
to
encryption.
You
don't
encrypt
it
or
you
put
the
data
into
the
data
res
and
you
don't
tell
anyone.
F
D
Like
if
this
is
the
data
and
the
data
payload,
then
you
are
ready.
Then
you
have
an
odd,
a
constraint
audience
which
understands
what
that
data
payload
is.
It
can
then
go
and
agree
on
what
they,
what
their
specific
semantics
are
of,
attributes
that
are
in
the
in
the
data
of
that
particular
event,
which
may
include
you
know
being
able
to
go
and
get
at
particular
data
items
that
are
too
big
to
include
or.
D
Objects
the
pictures
that
are
being
referenced,
whatever,
with
alternate
representations
of
some
sort,
and
that's
that's
something
like
if
you
have
the
we
started,
we
started
with
our
first
demo
more
like
the
you
know,
the
blog
created
events
for
for
storage
and
they
all
point
to
two
images
that
are
too
large
that
you
would
not
include
in
that
event,
and
but
that's
a
that's
a
cliche.
That's
a
claim
check
pattern,
implementation.
D
Arguably
that
then,
is
garnished
in
Sydney
for
the
particular
cloud
storage
system,
because
they're
all
somewhat
different,
and
so
in
that
they're
in
the
interrupt
demo
that
we
did,
we
had
three
different
cloud:
storage,
services
or
four,
and
so
the
implementations
have
basically
got
the
the
respective
events
they
could
generically
figure
out.
You
know
where
does
I
come
from?
What's
the
source
of
this
and
what's
the
event
site
and
based
on
that,
they
could
go
dispatch
into
a
handler.
D
Find
you're
proposing
you're
proposing
is
super
generic
mechanism
right,
but
that's
the
same
time
there
seemed
to
be
a
ton
of
exceptions
for
then
that
then
require
kind
of
negotiation
amongst
a
set
of
consumers
and
producers,
and
and
so
I'm
wondering
how
generic
that
I
should
make
negatives.
Look.
You
really
can
be.
F
Okay,
so
I
mean
they're
right,
I
tried
to
make
it
very
generic.
There
was
my
first
approach,
but
it's
completely
wanted
to
make
a
really
concrete
approach
and
say:
okay,
it
has
to
be
an
HTTP
URL.
It
has
republic,
has
we
accessible
from
anywhere?
That
cares
out
a
few
use
cases,
but
it
makes
sort
of
everything
else
easier.
I'd
say
what
it
also
means,
basically
that
the
data
is
then
always
on
the
public
Internet.
F
A
D
A
A
Right
doesn't
public
right,
but
they
the
text
that
I
highlighted
on
the
screen,
the
Christoph
put
into
the
thing
where
it
says
the
location
may
not
be
accessible
without
further
information
such
as
a
shared
secret
or
some
like
that.
I
interpreted
that,
as
you
know,
there
are
may
be
environmental
concerns
or
details
that
you
need
to
work
out
before
you
can
actually
talk
to
that
URL.
But
that's
something
that
we
can't
necessary
in
the
spec.
Do
you
think
yeah.
D
Find
it
a
little
weak
for
it
for
that,
for
that
particular
or
for
that
particular
concern,
and
that
is
so
so
here
when
I
read
this
I
would
think
about
oh
yeah.
Of
course
you
need
to
have
some
some
credentials,
but
it's
it's
really
like
because
of
the
complication
comes
in,
because
we
might
be
propagating
cloud
events
across
these
boundaries
and
it's
not
clear
that
winces
consumer
gets
that
event
that
it
then
in
turn
and
has
access
to
the
particular
location
at
all,
that's
a
little
different.
D
D
D
D
A
Right,
okay,
so
it
sounds
like
basically
what
you're
saying
is.
There
may
be
some
additional
information
that
may
be
appropriate
for,
say
a
primer
for
additional
guidance
around
this
stuff,
because
the
spec
can't
be
too
prescriptive
yeah,
but
there
may
be
primer
material
here,
somewheres,
but
he's
basically
just
sitting,
and
that's
that's
funny.
A
The
the
other
aspect,
though,
is
I
guess
it's
the
one
that
subpoena
is
bringing
up,
which
is
what
is
optional,
mean
in
this
visitor
case.
I
did
something
it
that's
something
we
need
to
think
about
once
we
agree
on
the
exact
mechanism
that
we're
gonna
potentially
add
to
the
spec,
because
I'm,
not
her
purse,
I'm
sure
that
everybody's
on
the
same
page
about
what
optional
means
for
this
particular
feature,
and
possibly
even
for
the
entire
spec
and
as
a
receiver.
A
So
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
I'll
take
you
actually
have
to
open
up
an
issue
just
so
we
don't
lose
track
of
this
to
make
sure
we
revisit
it
and
I
do
think
it's
important
one
to
think
of
understand.
The
optionality
of
all
our
properties
is
very
important
to
make
sure
you
understand
who's
responsible
for
supporting
it
and
when
they
can
not
support
things
and
I'll,
be
talking,
make
sure
that's
very
clear,
so
I'll
take
the
X
line
and
open
up
an
issue
to
discuss
that,
but
so
clemency.
A
I
D
I
O
One
consumer,
if
there's
such
a
reference,
so
the
event
consumer
does
not
need
to
go
deep
into
the
data
payload
and
just
get
the
information
from
this
reference.
But
please
regard
to
clements
other
comments
about
this.
The
type
I
see
probably
weaker
and
work
a
little
more
on
that,
because
I'm
not
sure
whether
the
URI
can
represent
all
the
locations
that
the
payload
is
saved.
A
Interesting
to
tell
you
what
Kathy,
because
I
think
what
I
think
what
you're
concerned
about
there
is
almost
a
tangental
issue
to
the
mechanism
of
how
to
represent
this
in
the
messages
or
any
event
itself.
Could
you
think
about
what
you'd
want
to
use
instead
of
a
URI
and
when
you
think
of
what
you
want
that
to
be?
Can
you
add
that,
as
a
comment
into
the
PR
itself,.
O
Yeah,
okay,
I
can
add
that
but
I
I
myself
I,
don't
know
how
to
you
know
what
other
types
I'm,
also
whether
you
know
like
Clement
mentioned
before,
if
there
are,
if
the
informations
is
stored
in
several
places,
different
types,
how
we're
going
to
represent
this?
It's
less
is
a
single
URI
enough
or
we
need
to
have
a
big
stuff
that
I.
O
That's
good
okay!
So
if
there's
a
beast
of
the
URI
or
something
like
that,
okay,
yes.
A
But
but
but
it
sounds
like
your
concern
is
whether
URI
is
the
appropriate
type
and
I
think
that's
the
first
time
that
that
question
has
been
brought
up.
So
if
you
think
there
is
another
type
other
than
URI
that
might
be
appropriate
to
represent
the
location
of
the
data,
I
think
it'd
be
useful.
If
you
could
put
the
put
a
suggestion
for
what
you'd
like
to
use
other
than
you
are
I.
A
All
right
cool
in
that
case
again
Christoph.
Thank
you
very
much
for
your
patience
and
work
on
this.
One
I
know
this
one's
not
that
easy,
but
we
appreciate
the
effort
you
put
into
moving
it
forward.
It's
apini,
deprecation,
I,
don't
think!
We've
actually
talked
about
this
one,
yet
I'm,
not
here
for
sure
I
think
I
might
have
mentioned
it
than
last
week's
call.
Since
you
were
right
on
the
call,
do
you
want
to
talk
to
this
one
and
give
a
summary
of
what
you're
thinking
here
sure.
K
So
there
was
this
year
open
by
seven,
have
no
recollection
who,
about
so
to
say
no
deprecation
if
events
or
delivery
methods
or
anything
I
guess-
and
there
was
a
discussion
where
some
radius
week,
I
made
a
lead
and
I
think
tonight
and
something
else.
Oh
so
he
basically
said
yeah.
It
would
be
cool
to
see
from
the
single
deputation
one
below
we
thing.
K
Gonna
prescribe
too
much
specifics
beforehand,
because
it's
gonna
be
the
lead
in
the
use
case,
for
definition,
can
be
quite
varied
same
use
case
use
case
something
I
wrote
a
place
as
a
draft
of
what
I
think
should
be
the
direction
as
I
think
it
would
be
valuable
to
have
an
extension
to
standardize
the
single
contribution.
So
consumers
can,
for
example,
alert
an
operator
to
react
if
they
don't
know
how
to
handle
the
specifics
of
the
single
attribute.
K
A
A
Okay,
nobody
raised
my
hand,
AA
question:
it's
it's
not
clear
to
me
what
the
values
would
be
for
these
two
properties.
Yeah
description
here,
almost
sound
like
a
balloon,
I.
K
Mean
yes,
but
as
I
was
trying
to
describe
that
is
kind
of
the
idea.
That's
why
I've
been
laughing
at
trying
to
come
up
with
an
example,
because
I
don't
really
want
to
make
an
example
I'm,
just
because
I
think
it's
it's
valuable
as
an
exciting.
This
is
why
I
don't
want
any
may
expect
by
the
way,
I
think
it's
valuable
to
have
somewhere
to
look
at
for
deprecation
that
you're
not
going
to
get
these
events
anymore.
Let's
say:
you're
listening
to
a
github
pool
requests
version.
K
One
events
they
eventually
ten
years
from
now
decide
to
discontinue
the
delivery
of
those
ven's
because
it's
a
legacy
system
to
me.
It's
quite
valuable
to
know
that
if
I
look
at
deprecated
field,
I
can
know
something's
up
within
the
bed.
I'm
not
going
to
get
that
anymore
at
some
point,
but
how
to
signal
that
I
I,
don't
quite
believe,
I
know
how
to
answer
that
question
and
I
kind
of
agreed,
very,
very,
very
much
with
your
viewpoint
in
the
issue
that
we
even
shouldn't
be
describing
that
and
that's
why
it's
intentionally
left
so
open-ended.
K
A
A
deprecated
string
and
the
fact
that
the
property
is
there
at
all
means
it's
deprecated
and
the
string
just
tells
you
some
human
readable
description
of
why
it's
going
away
where
to
look
for
replacement
that
kind
of
stuff
and
that
sort
of
producer
to
find.
But
you
could
certainly
actually
all
that
within
just
a
single
property.
That's
completely
fine
with
me.
K
As
I
said,
I'm
not
heavily
invested
in
everything.
That's
in
the
proposal,
deprecated
type
was
I
included
it
because
it
was
an
idea
that
might
help
someone,
because
if
we
prescribe
nothing,
it's
basically
a
pool
in
I
wanted
to
encourage
someone
developing
a
more
sophisticated
use,
I
think
than
bullying
for
the
field,
but
I'm
completely
definable,
removing
it
I'm,
just
letting
it
play
out
I'm
sure
someone
will
come
up
with
something
more
useful
anyway.
I
was
thinking
more
in
the
line
of
a
URL
double
link
to
an
explanation
of
the
deprecation.
A
Where
you
just
were
you
thinking
of
at
some
point,
perhaps
information
in
these
two
fields
could
be
used
to
programmatically
figure
out
how
to
fix
things
like
something
in
there
would
tell
you,
okay,
this
fields
going
away,
but
maybe
in
the
future.
It's
it's
called
this
instead
and
people
should
be
able
to
programmatically
analyze
that
and
make
some
changes
on
the
receiving
side
as
a
result,
or
is
that
sort
of
AI
ish.
K
Well,
yes,
Lindo
sly,
for
example.
If
you're
going
to
duplicate
an
extension,
that's
how
would
you
do
that
in
the
future?
I
guess
the
duplicated
type
actual!
Now
that
we
discuss
it
doesn't
add
that
much
value
I
think
the
main
point
I'm
looking
for
is
the
fact
that
it's
just
singled
and
you
can
find
more
information
somewhere
yeah
having
the
information
encoded,
actually
doesn't
make
that
much
sense
anymore.
To
me.
K
A
A
A
A
K
Really
through
it,
you
know
any
freaking
thing
you
want.
Oh
I
missed
that
I
apologize,
that
is
part
of
the
intentionally
open
and
you
can
use
it
to
indicate
anything.
You
want.
Oh
you're
messing
with
my
head
now
so
Clemens
might
let
me
say
to
you:
yes,
of
course
you
can
deprecated
it.
If
you
don't
want
to
having
deprecated
attribute
ie,
you
don't
want
to
signal
the
removal
of
features
in
any
way.
Then,
why
not
deprecated
an
extension?
K
A
K
A
H
A
K
A
Clements
already
got
nagging
reminder
up
that
one.
Oh
this
one,
it's
fun
to
mention!
There's
an
issue
out
there
about
the
scope
of
the
date
of
the
ie
of
events.
I
think
we
say
it
has
to
be
unique,
but
we
don't
formally
say
the
scope
of
it.
Like
I
said,
maybe
I'm
sorry
I
think
we
say
within
the
scope
of
the
producer.
But
then
there
was
the
question
about.
Should
we
basically
be
more
formal
and
say
source
plus
identifier,
though
the
combination,
those
two
fields
needs
to
be,
for
example,
global,
unique
or
something
like
that.
A
I
wanted
I,
don't
mind
right,
have
a
proposal
for
that
and
taking
the
lead
I'm
trying
to
push
something
through
if
we
want
to,
but
I
wanted
to
get
a
sense
from
the
group.
Do
you
guys
in
general
agree
that
source
plus
ID
needs
to
be
global,
unique
or
is
there
some
other
sort
of
mechanism?
You
guys
were
thinking
of
to
determine
uniqueness
for
these
things.
A
B
Because
well,
there's
there
is
no
there's
guidance
on
what
source
can
be,
but
there's
nothing
that
says
that
it's
like
a
resource,
pointer
and
there's
guidance
on
you
ID,
but
there's
a
it
could
be
a
sequence
number
if
you
really
wanted
to
and
still
be
compliant
with
the
spec.
So
I
could
have
internally
unique
events
being
produced,
but
they
conflict
with
another
cluster
or
another
producer.
O
Yeah
I
think
I'm
going
to
say
the
same
thing
unless
we
can
have
some,
but
it
is
some
place
some
repository
some
place
for
people
to
register
this.
Otherwise,
if
the
different
sources
they
do
not
call
cooperate
with
each
other.
H
A
Okay,
so
let
me
ask
this
question:
do
you
think
it's
pointless
to
even
get
more
clarity
on
this
point,
or
is
it
just
a
matter
of
finding
the
right
wording
to
to
correctly
define
what
uniqueness
means
I.
A
I'm
not
suggesting
we
use
the
word
global,
unique
anymore.
What
I'm
saying
is:
is
there?
Is
there
the
right
Trump?
Is
there
right
either?
Is
there
a
good
wording
that
we
can
come
up
with
to
to
add
some
clarification
here
or,
if
or
aren't
I'm
wondering
is
whether
trying
to
add
more
clarification
is
actually
gonna
make
things
worse,
and
we
should
just
close
this
issue
and
not
touch
it
at
all.
It.
A
The
question
this
was
raised
because
the
spec
says
the
ID
must
be
unique
within
the
scope
of
the
producer,
and
there
is
some
questions
about
ok.
What
does
that
actually
mean
to
be
unique,
and
is
it
unique
within?
Does
that
mean
it's
unique
within
the
scope
of
some
nebulous
thing
called
producer,
or
is
it
mean
that's
unique
within
the
scope
of
this
source,
URI
kind
of
thing
right?
How
did
they?
How
do
people
determine
uniqueness?
I?
Think
that's
where
this
thing
came
from.
A
And
I'm,
okay
with
us
coming
back
and
saying:
hey
we're
gonna,
leave
it
a
little
bit
vague
and
leave
it
as
is,
but
if
you
guys
think
no,
we
need
some
kind
of
clarity.
We
just
haven't,
find
the
right
wording
yet,
but
I'll
keep
noodling
on
it
and
and
try
to
come
up
with
a
better
language,
and
we
can
keep
going
back
and
forth
on
it.
I
just
want
to
know
whether
I
should
bother
to
waste
my
time
on
it.
I.
O
F
F
So
one
thing
that
maybe
we
could
put
the
type
the
event
type
into
it,
because
the
event
type
should
be
prefixed
with
a
reverse
DNS
name.
So
at
least
that
hard
should
be
really
globally
unique,
because
only
one
person
can
register
a
DNS
name
right.
So
if
we
put
that
into
it
and
then
people
have
to
make
sure
their
sources
are
unique
in
a
way.
F
A
E
F
Let's
say:
I
patty,
Kafka
and
I
for
some
reason:
I
produce
events
and
that
is
employed
until
many
places,
but
Andy.
Then
each
user
of
my
open
source
products
must
then
make
sure
there
are
sources
unique,
because
source
can
be
a
year.
I
reference
so
and
I
would
maybe
Kafka
would
have
slash
message,
slash
ID,
but
that
wouldn't
make
it
unique.
If
I
had
two
different
deployments
of
it
right
if
I
D
start
counting
at
one.
So
then
that
is
not
a
good
source.
F
A
So
I'm
gonna
have
to
call
time
here
just
because
I
want
to
be
respectful
people's
running
off
throughout
the
maze
and
stuff
I.
Think
I
got
enough
information
for
me
to
just
try
to
come
up
with
another
proposal
and
see
what
people
think,
but
I
do
think
it's
gonna
require
a
little
bit
of
wordsmithing,
but
with
that
let
me
just
do
the
roll
call.
Last
last
round
before
we
adjourn
and
keep
in
mind,
we
do
have
a
phone
call
after
this
for
the
coop
concessions.
Favio.
Are
you
on
the
call?
N
A
Everything
offline,
so
you
definitely
hear
a
dougie
there
Doug
do
it
this
year.
Okay,
he
has
my
cashews
Fabio
you
there,
okay
did
I
miss
anybody.
A
A
Q
All
right,
let's
go
and
get
started,
see
what.
E
A
Alright,
let's
see
where
were
we
so
so
Dan
Barker
ping
me
offline,
he's,
probably
not
able
to
make
the
call
today,
but
he
said
he
was
definitely
interested
in
possibly
talking
about
the
who
are
we.
Why
are
we
here
that
kind
of
stuff?
A
A
A
A
Okay,
now
you
in
terms
of
what
you
want
actually
showcase
their.
Obviously
you
can
use
so
much
go
SDK
as
a
sample
of
saying,
hey,
looks
all
the
good
work
we're
doing
around
SDKs
and
look.
Is
your
life
really
really
easy
to
use
this
stuff,
but
were
you
thinking
about
some
sort
of
hello
world
like
live
demo
to
showcase
these
things,
and
therefore
we
need
to
get
the
other
SDK
folks
involved
to
make
sure
that
their
stuff
can
participate
in
that
yeah.
A
A
B
Is
you
know,
I
think
in
the
intro
it's
just
like
if
you
would
like
to
add
sending
cloud
events
into
your
existing
code.
This
is
the
here's
a
little
code
snippet
to
show
you
how
to
get
started
all
right
and
then
like.
Maybe
this
is
what
it
looks
like
on
the
receiving
site
to
receive
the
cloud
event.
Okay,
it's
like
it's
like
active
integration,
all
right.
D
A
P
A
B
E
A
Okay,
that
sounds
good,
so
we
didn't.
We
also
talked
about
tips
and
best
practices.
Now
we
have
35
minutes
if
you
as
Tim
dan
and
this
stuff
is
gonna
take
somewhere
between
10
to
15,
because
this
is
also
good
include.
You
know,
what's
new
since
the
last
time
we
talked
to
these
people,
so
that
could
be
you
know,
summer
to
10-15
minutes
Scott.
That
would
leave
what
about
20
minutes
or
so
left
for
this
stuff.
A
A
B
Guess
you
know
there's
like
the
general
tip
of
potentially
you
your
data
is
not
the
actual
content
of
the
data,
but
like
look
if
an
image
is
uploaded
to
a
bucket,
the
event
doesn't
have
the
image
embedded.
It's
the
ref
back
to
the
bucket
that
had
the
image
dropped
in
it,
for
example
like
those
kinds
of
tips
just
like
noob,
eventing
tips,
okay,.
A
Okay,
so
it
sounds
like.
Maybe
we
need
to
wait
a
little
bit
to
sort
of
brainstorm
a
little
what
those
ideas
might
be
and
if
it's
a
long
list,
then
maybe
we
don't
have
time
in
the
intro.
What,
if
the
short
list,
maybe
we
do
have
time
to
mention
it
in
the
intro
right.
So
we
can
wait
on
that.
I
guess:
yeah,
okay,.
A
Technically
we
have
the
primer
which
we
already
do
have
some
it's
it's
a
mixture
of
things.
If
I
write,
some
of
it
is
explaining
the
rationale
for
some
of
our
design
decisions,
but
I
think
there
are
some
guidance
things
in
there.
I
think
I
need
to
go
back
and
double-check
what
they
might
be,
but
happens
vague
recollection.
A
We
have
at
least
one
or
two
things
in
there
for
guidance,
great
yeah,
so
that
might
be
something
to
pull
from
so
yep,
okay
and
we
definitely
need
to
add
more
I
think,
for
example,
I
think
somewhere
on
Clemons
long
to-do
list.
He
has
at
least
one
thing
to
add
to
the
primer
relative
to
this
stuff
too.
So,
whatever
whatever
that
King
was,
we
can
add
that
to
the
list,
I
just
camera
with
what
it
is
offhand.
A
Yes,
all
right
and
I
guess
same
thing
applies,
then
to
the
potential
demo
right
depends
whether
we
have
time
or
not,
so
you
sort
of
give
a
tease
for
the
deeper
dive
session
demo,
yeah,
okay.
So
let's
focus
on
the
deep
dive,
then
I,
don't
I'm
trying
to
remember
where
we
thinking
of
two
separate
demos.
Here
or
do
we
think
the
hello
world
would
be
no,
because
the
hello
world
is
definitely
not
the
factory
thing
you
talked
about,
so
are
we
thinking
actually
doing
two
different
demos
here?
A
B
I
I
think
that's
that
that
was
the
plan.
Let's
drop
down
in
the
code
a
couple
times
well,
I,
don't
think
you're
gonna
really
show
code
for
the
demo.
You
might
show
some
like
so
leveraging
what
we
just
did
with
the
simple
version.
We
wrote
a
complex
version
and
and
here's
the
rigmarole
of
how
it
operates
and
flow
through
okay,
so.
A
A
D
D
A
F
Can
you
do
me
a
favor
and
because
I
don't
see
us
being
roughly
favored
you're
talking
about
oh
I'm,
sorry.
A
A
A
Okay,
not
hearing
it
thing.
So
what
I
think
we
have
now
is
in
the
intro
Dan
would
do
the
who
are
we
kind
of
thing?
Scott
would
then
talk
about
SDKs
live
sample,
hello,
world
type
thing,
whether
we
do
best
practices
or
now
it
would
be
a
based
upon
where
they've
been
come
with
a
good
list,
and
if
we
have
time,
let's
see
whether
we
can
do
this,
something
with
a
teach.
The
dimmable
thing
there,
Oh
Jude
your
hands
up,
yeah.
M
A
Don't
know
I
could
say
going
either
way
cuz.
Obviously
you
could
probably
spend
a
lot
of
time
doing
it,
but
if
you
don't
necessarily
go
into
the
to
level
2
I
2,
deep
detail,
you
could
probably
summarize
what
the
demo
is
doing
in
like
2
or
3
minutes
and
then
spend
the
rest
of
the
time
just
showing
it
in
action.
I
don't
know,
Scott
would,
since
you're
taking
a
lead
on
this
one
Scott.
What
do
you
think
yeah.
A
Cuz
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
showing
the
demo
should
necessarily
be
too
technical
in
terms
of
getting
onto
the
covers
it's
more
showing
how
cloud
events
can
be
used
in
more
of
a
real-world
scenario
and
maybe,
as
part
of
learning
the
demo,
we
can
show
the
cloud
events
flowing
between
the
system's.
You
know
by
clicking
on
a
button
or
something
you
can
actually
see
the
cloud
event
that
got
sent
between
the
the
factory.
C
A
B
E
A
Cool.
Thank
you
for
the
question,
though
okay,
so
we
got
that
we'll
figure
out.
If
we
do
decide
to
do
the
best
practice
and
tips
and
and
a
tease
of
the
bigger
demo,
then
we'll
figure
out
who
wants
to
do
that
or
we'll
just
open
on
Scott
since
he's
up
on
stage
at
that
point
anyway.
Well
figure
that
out
later
and
then
deep
dive,
I
got
Vlad
for
the
helloworld,
with
extensions
Clemens
with
a
deep
dive,
and
then
everybody
involved
in
the
bigger
demo
for
the
factory
thing.
E
A
Actually,
somebody
know
a
time
say:
I'm,
sorry,
Dan
ping
me
said:
did
you
okay,
yep,
so
Dan
mentioned
to
me
that
he
didn't
they
was
asked
not
just
interested
in
the
who
are
we
kind
of
thing,
but
he
was
also
volunteering
to
potentially
help
us
with
the
updates
of
our
documentation
from
the
service
working
group,
meaning
the
white
paper
and
a
landscape
doc.
If
we
need
to
so
Dan
was
volunteering
to
help
there.
A
Okay
just
wanted
to
get
that
in
there,
but
so
anyway,
we
were
talking
about
the
state
of
server
list
which
obviously
related
to
what's
changed
in
the
community
recently
and
then
turn
it
into
a
birds
of
a
feather
session
with
the
community
telling
us
what
they
want
to
do
or
what
we
want
us
to
do.
Is
there
anything
else
here?
You
guys
want
to
add
to
that
list.
Christophe
I
think
you're
off
me.
You
want
something
yeah.
F
I
think
you
know
I
hoped
you
would
give
me
some
to
play
because
it's
one
topic
that
is
of
interest
to
me,
I,
don't
know
if
it's
of
interest
to
anyone
else.
Well,
it's
because
I
am
busy
working
at
a
software
service
company
and
before,
like,
though,
that
function
has
a
service
in
one
way
it
kind
of
every
places
at
a
virtual
machines
or
containers
in
in
one
view.
F
So
you
would
expect
that
all
of
the
cloud
providers
they
offer
function
as
a
service
and
they
do
but
interesting
we
now
there
are
many
many
more
functions
service
providers,
so
we
see
people
like
CloudFlare
I'm
doing
it
well,
and
it
will
be
what
we
also
see
other
really
focused
on
services
or
platforms,
bring
their
own
function
as
a
service
like
Tyrael
of
zero
Braintree
from
pay
politics
class
or
two
weeks
ago.
So,
what's
really
interesting.
F
Now
is
that
even
if
you
choose
the
single
car
provider,
and
then
you
choose
a
few
external
services,
you
may
end
up
with
a
couple
of
functional
services
that
you
actually
use
and
that's
not
something
you
would
have
seen
before.
So
I
think
that
is
really
interesting
and
it
also
makes
the
service
landscape
different.
F
Then
containers,
because,
like
I
zero
artillery,
you
wouldn't
expect
that
a
host
containers
right,
but
they
host
functions.
So
we
could
kind
of
say
that
talk
live
without
it.
We
can
talk
about
what
the
challenges
are.
Probably
going
to
be
like.
How
do
you
understand
your
whole
system?
How
do
you
keep
metrics
words,
logging
right
and
then
turn
that
into
a
question
for
the
births
of
Peter
session,
because.
A
F
Think
there
is
potentials
we
have
a
somewhat
standardization,
because
Mike
I
was
never
in
a
position
to
yet
but
I
guess
once
you
have
like
three
four
or
five
different
functional
services
that
you
have
to
deploy
to
and
that
you
have
to
code
with
that
will
get
kind
of
messy
if
they're
all
different
in
the
implementation
details.
So
that's
a
topic
that
I
can
offer
and
then
write
that
can
be
extended
in
talking
about
sir
glades
or
French
nurseries
as
their
home.
A
So
I
wanna
make
sure
I
got
this
right,
though,
because
it
sounded
interesting.
So
it
sounds
like
you.
We
wanted
to
potentially
offer
some
advice
on
managing
the
functions
themselves
and
and
how,
when
you
start
managing
lots
of
them,
the
role
of
standards
may
become
more
important
to
you,
because
the
intended
any
a
commonality
across
then
they
don't
have
to
treat
each
one
separately.
Is
that
my
summarizing
that
right.
F
Well,
I
basically
offset
as
an
open
question
so
I'm.
How
would
I
say
that
so
right
now,
for
example,
of
zero,
they
offered
own
functional
service
and
it's
really
two
weeks
towards
their
API,
so
which
makes
sense
in
some
ways.
But
when
it
comes
we're
I
mean
so.
The
question
is:
how
much
can
you
standardize?
Maybe
but
at
least
around
deployment
and
so
on?
You
could
standardize
a
lot.
So
for
me,
it's
an
open
question
because
I
look
I
mean
I
kind
of
did
the
market
analysis
to
understand
what
we
should
do.
F
I
kind
of
came
to
the
conclusion
that
well
I
said
if
every
time
in
like
in
this
enterprise
case,
where
you
buy
five,
ten
fifteen
different
services
and
then
merge
them
all
together
and
then,
if
you
had,
everyone
thinks
their
own
functional
service.
You
end
up
in
a
really
strange
place.
That
was
my
gut
feeling.
What
everyone
else
thinks
it's
fine
to
set
up
their
own
function
of
service,
so
gloomy.
It's
an
open,
Christian
right.
A
Personally,
I
think
that's
a
really
interesting
topic
to
bring
up
if
nothing
else,
just
to
get
the
ball
rolling
in
terms
of
a
discussion
with
the
community
to
see
what
their
experiences,
because
a
people
may
not.
People
may
think
that
they're
the
only
ones
experienced
in
these
problems-
and
it
might
be
nice
to
hear
that
other
people
are
having
the
same
kind
of
issues
and
that
may
then
lead
to
people
saying
hey.
Let's
do
something
about
this
yep.
G
F
A
M
F
Also
approach
it
from
the
other
side
from
the
sub
present
service
platforms,
because
for
them
it
is
really
hard
to
that's
kind
of
what
I
try
to
go.
It's
really
really
hard
to
reuse
the
function
as
the
services
that
are
provided
by
the
cloud
vendors
because
everyone
brings
their
own
interface,
and
so,
if
you
want
to
integrate
with
three
five
ten
different
cloud
providers
bed,
your
customers
has
much
more
trouble
for
us
software
service
provider
than
just
going
setting
up
your
own.
F
R
A
Someone
would
volunteer
to
say:
okay,
I'll
summarize,
where
we're
the
working
group
thinks
the
state
of
service
has
has
evolved
too,
since
the
last
time
we,
since
we
produced
the
paper
and
and
talked
about
potentially
what
changes
we
we've
made
to
the
white
paper
in
landscape
talk
as
soon
we
have
made
any
or
maybe
we
haven't,
and
they
just
talked
about
in
general,
where
the
industry
has
changed
from
our
point
of
view
and
then
yes
turned
into
a
birds
of
a
feather
interactive
discussion
with
the
community.
If
that
makes
sense
to
you
guys,
hey.
A
R
R
A
M
So,
for
example,
when
I
both
lost,
we
did
like,
like
an
eight
aw
lambda
versus
like
the
service,
like
eight
of
these
functions
versus
our
own
server,
like
a
like
a
stateful,
so
stateless,
like
a
micro
service
and
in
terms
of
cost,
though
the
Mike
microscope
is
hosting
like
like
a
like.
A
service
is
much
more
cost
effective
than
using
a
AWS,
lambda
I,
don't
know
if
this
works
cells,
like
you
know,
like
a
use
case
or
like
an
example,
or
something
like
that.
A
Devices
to
that
the
gate,
yeah
well
yeah
I,
was
gonna,
say
I.
Think
if
you,
if
it
turns
into
a
discussion
of
the
charging
model,
afraid
of
us,
that's
probably
not
a
good
topic
but
I'm.
What
I'm
trying
to
figure
out
is.
Is
there
a
discussion
there
that
says
you
know
everybody
talks
about
services
being
more
cost
effective.
A
However,
there
are
some
use
cases
where
it
actually
may
not
be
more
cost
effective,
so
you'd
also
mention
AWS
specifically,
but
you
could
say
in
general,
you
know
what,
when
you're
doing
this
particular
type
of
deployment
or
type
of
application,
maybe
surplus
is
a
little
effective
because
of
XY
and
Z.
That
might
be
an
interesting
discussion.
Yes,
yes,.
M
So
bliss,
when
you
kind
of
go
to
scale
and
when
I
mean
scale
of
like
say,
processing
like
say,
millions
of
requests
per
second
soulless
does
not
it's
not
really
cost-effective,
so
this
is
kind
of
cost
effective.
Only
when
you're
handling
requests
where
it's
like,
you
know
thousands
for
a
bow
but
finit
when,
like
your
scale,
kind
of
increases
really
large,
then
service
does
not
get
effective
at
all.
It's
in
fact,
more
I
mean
and.
D
M
A
D
Ultimately,
that's
how
the
price
is
determined,
but
that
is
not
that's,
not
truly
an
architectural
concern,
the
better
need
for
start
first
get
and
the
more
competition
and
lambda
gets
the
cheaper
stuff
is
gonna,
given
it's
always
that
way,
but
that
doesn't
change
the
truth.
The
truth
of
the
architecture,
of
course,.
A
But
if
you
can
find
I
do
think
the
general
topic
is
probably
a
good
one
to
bring
up
because
I
think
the
entire
question
of
when
to
use
service
versus
has
versus
containers
of
service
I.
Think
from
my
personal
experience,
I
think
there
is
still
some
confusion
in
the
industry
in
terms
of
people
knowing
when
to
choose
what
or
do
they
even
need
to
think
about
it
right?
You
know
with
something
like
a
native.
The
line
between
all
three
of
those
are
very,
very
blurred
to
me
as
an
example.
A
Right
so
does
it
really
matter
what
you
call
it
you're
just
using
this
piece
of
technology
to
host
something
right,
but
I,
think
I.
Think
people
are
looking
for
some
sort
of
guidance
here
and
if
we
can
think
of
something
to
say
in
this
space,
to
help
to
may
I
hope
make
them
feel
more
comfortable
with
their
decision
making.
I
think
that
would
be
good
I.
Just
don't
want
to
pick
on
AWS
or
any
other
vendor
to
make
it
happen.
I
agree.
A
And
I
think
what's
interesting
is
we
did
talk
about
this
in
the
white
paper
already
and
so
I
don't
want
to
I.
Don't
think
it
has
to
be
right
for
us
to
necessarily
repeat
everything
we
mentioned
in
the
white
paper,
but
if
we
could
sit
there
and
say
you
know,
the
white
paper
gave
some
high-level
guidance
I'm
going
to
use
all
these
things,
but
in
practice
this
is
what
we
found
out,
or
our
experience
has
has
given
us
validation
for
we
put
in
the
white
papers.
A
A
Just
taking
some
notes
here,
these
are
all
good
things.
Don't
say
it's
some
point
we
should
probably
do
is
bake
if,
if
nothing
else
just
come
up
with
this
sort
of
a
list
of
these
questions,
that
we
want
to
sort
of
throw
out
to
the
audience
and
see
what
their
experience
is
and
if
no
one
answers
it,
then
you
know.
Obviously
one
of
us
can
share
our
experience
with
it
just
to
get
the
ball
rolling,
but
yeah
having
a
list
of
questions
for
the
BOF
would
be
good
and
I.
A
L
B
A
Okay,
I'll
ask
them
just
see
if
they
have
any
more
details
and
things
like
which,
day
after
before
kind
of
thing,
okay
topics,
because
if,
if
it's
a
direct
overlap,
well,
that's
the
other
thing.
Is
it's
not
clear
day,
for
example,
whether
it's
going
to
be
just
sessions
where
people
give
talks
just
like
it's
a
coop
con
kind
of
a
conference
or
whether
this
is
meant
to
be
more
of
an
interactive
discussion
among
the
community
like
a
gigantic
BOF?
Because
if
it's
a
gigantic
year
left
and
are
they
duplicating
what
we're
doing
it's
exactly
right?.
A
Okay,
I.
R
A
A
That's
a
good
thing,
we're
bringing
it
up
that
so
thank
you!
Scott
the
sessions
for
us,
like
okay
I'll,
try
to
get
more
information
on
that
all
right,
okay,
anything
else
relative
to
any
of
this
sessions.
You
guys
want
to
talk
about,
because
I
have
a
feeling
right
now
we're
kind
of
at
the
point
now,
where
anybody
whose
names
I
signed
up
to
these
things,
they
need
to
sort
of
take
the
next
step,
possibly
flushing
it
out
or
strategic
questions
fleshing
it
out.
Sorry,
sorry
fleshing
it
out
and.
A
Taking
the
next
round
of
something
relative
to
it,
to
make
it
a
little
more
real,
you
guys
think
we
need
to
meet
again
next
week
or
I'm
leaning
a
little
bit
towards
waiting
little
while
cos.
It's
not
till
May
I
think
they
like
them,
then
may
require
a
little
bit
of
work
relatively
soon
is
stricter
to
do
potentially
updating
our
landscape
and
doc.
A
B
A
I'll
tell
you
what
why
I
do
this
I'll
post
an
as
well
since
he
he
volunteered
it
completely
on
his
own
to
say
he
wants
to
help
there
so
between
you
and
Dan.
Maybe
you
guys
could
take
a
look
at
it
and
see
whether
you
think
something
needs
to
be
done
in
that
space
and
if
so,
we
could
then
figure
out
how
to
make
that
happen.
That's
saying
that's
not
necessarily
the
thing
is
you
guys,
but
just
forgot,
who
does
the
work
then
yeah.