►
From YouTube: 2021-05-25 CNCF TAG Observability Meeting
Description
2021-05-25 CNCF TAG Observability Meeting
A
B
C
D
A
E
A
A
If
I'm
too
silent
just
tell
me
because
it's
trivial
to
fix
in
software,
if
I
know
about
it,
but
it
seems
to
be
resetting
on
its
own
and
sometimes
it
stops
working
completely,
but
it
was
too
expensive
to
just
throw
it
away
anyway.
So
we
are
at
five
minutes,
then
we
can
get
started.
We
mainly
have
the
document
and
we
don't
have
the
main
authors
of
the
document
or
main
orders
of
the
document
here
of
the
observability
white
paper,
which
is
kind
of
not
good
on
a
meta
level.
A
What
we
can
discuss
and
what
we
should
discuss
is
potentially
splitting
up
the
document,
because
we
are
at
I
checked
and
then
I
forgot
how
many
pages
these
are
26.,
30,
35,
yeah
35.,
to
be
fair.
One
of
them
is
its
references
and
there's
stuff
which
is
not
yet
approved
or
or
merged,
or
what
have
you?
But
but
yet
I
feel
as
if
35
pages
is
too
long
for
for
someone
who
just
wants
to
onboard
themselves.
A
E
Far,
I'm
I'm
not
100
sure
what
we
what
we
want
to
achieve
with
that
splitting.
So
if
I,
for
example,
look
at
the
white
paper
that
the
tag
security
did
so
this
one
here,
I
would
need
to
count
how
many,
how
many
pages
they
have
but
like
it's,
it's
2021
right
like
I
mean
it's,
not
not
that
we
need
to
think
about
that
tree
or
whatever,
like
we
can
read
it
on
the
kindle
or
other
kind
of
stuff
like
what
are
we
trying
to
achieve
with
that
with.
A
E
A
I've
learned
the
hard
way
in
in
various
different
contexts
that
if
I
write
a
design
doc,
which
is
which
which
goes
over
two
pages,
that
people
tend
to
not
read
it
anymore,
and
if
it
goes
more
of
like
three
or
four
pages,
no
one
ever
reads
it.
Unless
they
really
really
have-
and
I
my
fear
is
if
we
present
someone
with
a
super
long
paper
as
an
introduction,
they
will
get
scared.
F
A
C
A
E
I
I
think
I
agree
with
with
your
sentiment.
I
don't
think
that
a
that
randomly
or
arbitrary
cutting
down
the
the
white
paper
makes
sense
again
just
for
reference.
I
not
put
the
right
link
in
there
the
the
security
one
has
41
pages,
and
I
you
know
I'm
also
having
issues
with
attention
span
and
everything
I
like
love
to.
Have
everything
in
tweet
size
form?
Wonderful,
wonderful,
but
there
are
also
these
times
where
you
know
I
I
snuggle
on
the
couch
with
the
dog,
and
I
actually
like
to
read.
E
You
know
things
like
like
actual
books
that
that
are
500
pages
and
so
on.
Right,
and
I
guess
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
I
I'm,
I
would
say,
let's
maybe
not
cut
down
on
the
pages.
Let's
find
a
different
way
to
to
transport
the
same
thing
that
could
be
a
slide
deck.
That
could
be
a
video
that
could
be
anything
else
that
you
know
actually
literally
fits
into
into
tweets
where
we
actually
have
for
this
10
seconds
15
seconds
30
seconds
elevator
pitch.
E
Maybe
if
you
think,
for
example,
the
only
fest
had
this
this
these
these
drawings-
I
don't
know
how
they
are
they're,
even
live
drawings
where
they,
you
know,
during
your
talk
capture
what
your
talk
was
about.
You
know,
let's
invest
that
I'm
happy
to
pay
it
out
of
my
own
pocket.
If
that
money
is
an
issue
or
we
can
get
it
via
cncf
whatever,
but
I
think
such
a
you
know
hand-drawn
overview
that
captures.
The
main
points
based
on
the
white
paper
would
be
a
much
better
way
to
address
this.
A
C
I
think
I'm
inclined
to
agree
that
having
a
single
document
not
cut
down
is
a
little
bit
easier
to
read,
especially
when
you're
presenting
it
somebody-
and
it
also
follows
the
convention
of
other
documents
and
we
can
produce
an
additional
higher
level
or
a
higher
order.
Abstraction
of
what's
inside
here-
that's
just
my
personal
opinion,
because
I'm
used
to
reading
these
sort
of
technical
documents,
but
I
do
appreciate
where
you're
coming
from
actually
like.
Sometimes
it
can
be
information
overload.
A
E
I
think
I
think
you're
spot
on.
I
think
we
I
mean
that's.
That
was
my
kind
of
like
worry.
When
I
looked
at
the
the
tag
security
white
paper,
I
was
like
dude.
Am
I
supposed
to
read
all
the
50
whatever
pages
before
I
even
have
an
idea,
or
should
I
derive
it
from
the
table
of
contents
or
whatever
so
yeah?
It
makes
sense.
It
absolutely
makes
sense
to
me
it's
just
a
question
like
how
can
you
summarize
these
things
best.
A
It
should
be
in
review,
and,
and
so
it
should
be
more
or
less
done
and
we
were
supposed
to
walk
through
it
and
accept
changes
to
it.
But
the
two
owners
of
the
document
are
not
in
this
call,
so
I
I
would,
I
would
not
like
to
yeah
if
they
were
here,
we
would
currently
be
walking
through
through
the
document
and
and
approving
sections,
but
as
they're
not
here,
and
I
don't
want
to
to
to
steal
their
document
yeah.
We
are
using
the
time
differential.
E
I'm
not
necessarily
100
in
agreement
that
it's
already
kind
of
like
you
know.
Oh
it's
just
about
reviewing
and
accepting
whatever
like,
for
example,
if
you
look
at
the
use
cases
and
that's
yeah,
yes,
it's
my
fault,
and
I
haven't
yet
done
that,
and
that
was
on
the
plan
for
me
for
this
week
to
work
on
that
and
also
to
review
and
give
feedback
to
whoever
else
already
provided
stuff
there
in
the
us
case
section.
E
A
That's
a
fair
point,
but
I
think
at
least
given
given
like
but
you're,
also
more
than
welcome
to
voice
your
opinion.
If
you
want
this
to
be
split
up
or
not,
but
as
two
people
have
currently
have
the
opinion
that
we
don't
split
it
up.
That
question,
I
think,
is
mood
of
course,
because
if
it's
ten
pages
more
or
five
pages
less
that
doesn't
change
the
the
underlying
question.
So
I
think
from
that
perspective
we
don't
split
it.
Unless
there
is
someone
strongly
in
favor.
A
And
then
we
can
still
summarize
in
a
in
a
short
overview,
doc
or
maybe
extract,
and
we
can.
We
can
look
at
different
presentations.
I
mean
on
the
topic
of
different
presentations.
That's
also
one
of
those
things
which
I
learned.
The
hard
way
is
the
people
who
attend
conferences
tend
to
not
be
the
people
who
who
read
the
white
papers
tend
to
not
be
the
people
who
read
blog
posts
like
the
people
in
this
call
are
not
the
norm
because
we
care
more
about
these
topics
than
most
other
people.
E
E
If
we
all
use
the
same
vocabulary,
the
same
terminology
for
pointing
to
certain
things,
then
we
establish
something,
and
that
is
something
that
as
a
tag,
I
think
you
can
really
help
to,
on
the
one
hand,
educate
folks
out
there
like
just
you
know.
Oh
this
thing
has
a
name:
it's
actually
called
exemplar
right.
I
don't
need
to
half
an
hour.
Explain.
Oh,
this
is
the
thing
I
just
say,
example,
and
everyone
understands,
and
how
do
I
know
that?
A
I
think,
to
some
extent
the
vocabulary
is
already
defined
like,
as
you
mentioned,
examples
and
such,
but
the
problem
is
people
outside
of
that
space
are
not
fully
aware
of
what
vocabulary
is
already
being
used
and
what
precisely
it
means
I
mean
in
particular
with
ex-employers,
even
within
graph
on
our
labs.
I
got
questions
about
what
they
actually
are.
Of
course,
it's
just
non-obvious.
E
What
like,
what
you're
more
working
around
the
conformance
right,
where
we
say
like
look,
here's
a
bunch
of
folks
who
who
really
care
about
that
who
kind
of
like
are
the
domain
experts?
And
we
say
this
is
this.
So
if
you
are
trying
to
like
I've,
seen
that
recently
happening
with
githubs,
where
everyone
is
doing
github's
nowadays
right,
there
was
a
very,
very
clear
vision
that
alexis
interface
had
right.
E
E
If
someone
says
like
I
support
ex-employers
in
my
offering
or
whatever,
then
you
know,
we
should
be
able,
or
a
customer
user
should
be
able
to
say
like
oh
the
tag
observability
has
put
together
the
criteria
for
what
that
actually
means,
and
that's
not
what
you're
shipping
so
can
you
please
clarify,
or
can
you
please
be
in
line
with
that?
That
would
be
my
long-term
vision
for
it.
A
The
problem
is
that
that,
as
soon
as
things
enter
buzzword,
phase,
people
will
just
start
using
them
anyway,
and,
and
if
you
have
an
official
definition,
people
will
just
create
a
different
official
definition
if
that
allows
them
to
sell
stuff.
It's
still
useful
to
be
able
to
point
to
that
thing
and
say
well.
This
is
what
we
actually
mean
when
we
talk
about
that
thing.
A
A
E
Do
we
have
any
other
item
on
the
agenda
because
I
had?
I
do
have
one
question,
I'm
kind
of
like
unsure,
because
I
I
missed
that
one
or
two
sessions
when
that
was
discussed.
That
is
what
is
the
current
status
with
the
hotel
due
diligence?
Where
are
we
there?
I
I
it
was
kind
of
like
referred
to
to
the
toc
and
qc
members
are
looking
at
that
or
something
that
was
my
latest
last
update.
F
Yeah
so
the
the
two
c
has
the
two
sponsors
that
were
nominated
have
been
going
through
the
dock
and
working
with
the
the
hotel
governance
board
to
ensure
that
comments,
and
things
are
addressed
based
on
the
feedback
that
the
csc
sponsors
had.
My
understanding
is
that
that
is
wrapping
up.
I
think
it's
this
week.
I
don't
quote
me
on
that,
but
very
very
soon
it
is
wrapping
up
and
my
understanding
is
that
they
will
bring
it
back
to
tag
observability.
E
A
A
A
G
Yep
sorry,
this,
I
guess,
is
my
second
or
third
observability
meeting
and
it's
been
a
long
time
since
I
last
started-
and
I
just
want
to
reintroduce
myself
and
you
know,
ask
everyone
where
I
can
contribute
or
something.
Okay,
I'm
just
a
bit
la
the
last
time
I
attended
like
I
was
looking
to
make
contributions,
but
then
I
got
involved
with
a
lot
of
work,
so
I
wasn't
able
to,
but
I
figured
this
might
be
a
good
starting
point
to
you
know:
ask
people
where
I
can
contribute
or
where
I
can
help
out.
A
E
To
have
you,
the
white
paper
definitely
would
benefit
from
feedback.
So
if
you
haven't
read
the
white
paper
yet,
which
is
linked
from
the
dark
and
again
here
in
the
chat,
you
know,
please
do
that's
definitely
any
any
kind
of
feedback,
be
it.
You
know
especially
gaps,
but
anything
that
is
where
you
go
like
hey.
You
know.
I
would
have
expected
that
you
cover
this
or
what
does
that
mean
or
whatever
so
feedback?
There
would
be
very
much
appreciated.
A
C
Can
you
guys
hear
me
you
can
hear
me?
Yes,
you
hear
me
richie.
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes?
Yes,
you
can
hear
me
sorry
zoom
on
fedora
is
not
as
clean
as
it
is
on
mac.
I
apologize.
I
guess
just
in
the
spirit
of
saying
hello,
hello
to
everyone.
My
name
is
ian
and
I
joined
red
hat
yesterday,
although
I've
been
kind
of
flirting
with
the
premiers
ecosystem
for
a
couple
of
years
now,
but
decided
to
make
it
official
by
joining
red
hat.
C
A
A
D
Well,
I'm
here
and
I'm
late
and
it's
not
going
to
be-
I
mean
yeah,
my
fault.
I
kind
of
I
thought
that
it
was
yeah.
I
missed
it,
but
anyways.
I
guess
yeah,
I'm
ryan
and
yeah.
I'm
building
a
open
source
project
called
pyroscope.
I
was
here
like
two
meetings
ago,
I
think
and
yeah.
I
was
just
at
like
the
financial
services
group
right
before
this
and
yeah
anyways.
A
G
B
A
A
The
way
this
usually
works
is
you
create
a
group
for
your
local
city
on
meetup.com,
and
then
you
coordinate
with
cncf
for
them
to
to
adopt
that
meetup
group,
and
then
they
pay
the
membership
fees
and
everything
it
is.
It
used
to
be
amy.
I
suspect
it's
still
amy
and
if
you,
if
you
want
to
to
do
this
under
the
umbrella
of
tag,
observability
just
send
email,
I
guess
and
and
cc
amy
or
I
can
forward
it
to
amy,
and
then
we
figure
out
how
how
this
goes.
G
Sorry,
sorry,
just
to
give
a
background,
I
am
actually
leading
the
cnc
mumbai
community.
Already,
okay
yeah,
we
I
mean,
like
we
already
have
a
local
chapter
on
the
community
dot
cnc
channel,
that
that
was
recently
created
right.
The
entire
platform
that
was
recently
created
my
question
more
specifically,
was
that
on
the
community.cncf
platform,
if
you
go
right,
you'll
see
that
there
is
a
section
specifically
for
tag
observability.