►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting 2021-01-19
Description
CNCF TOC Meeting 2021-01-19
A
B
A
Excellent
richie,
I'm
pretty
sure
your
mic
actually
works.
Give
me
like
speak
to
me.
A
No
need
no
need.
You
were
fine,
it
was
a
moment
of
like
maybe
maybe
things
aren't
working
this
morning.
Who
knows?
Okay,.
B
A
I
know
we've
got
some
folks
that
won't
be
joining
us
this
morning,
but
I'll
give
folks,
probably
another
minute
or
so,
and
we'll
get.
A
A
A
Okay,
I
have
four
after
on
mine
and
I'm
not
seeing
too
many
people
come
on
in.
So
I'm
going
to
kick
us
off
richie
unless
you've
got
any
objections
and
want
to
wait
longer,
because
you
are
speaker
today.
A
All
right
go
ahead
and
get
started
then
good
morning.
Welcome
all
of
you,
a
normal
anti-trust
policy
notice,
meeting
logistics-
you
are
here,
you
have
made
it
to
this
meeting
or
you're
watching
on
the
recording
later,
which
is
also
fine.
This
will
be
updated
over
in
the
toc
public
working
doc.
All
as
well,
and
our
agenda
today
is
which
is
going
to
be
talking
about
open
explainer.
A
So
take
questions
as
well,
and
one
note
this
is
our
last
meeting
with
the
some
of
our
toc
members,
so
big
thanks
to
matt
klein
who's
here
with
us
today
and
yeah.
B
All
right,
thank
you,
and
also
we
have
steve
flanders
here.
So
I,
if,
if
I
get
anything
wrong
on
the
open,
telemetry
side,
that's
perfect,
because
you
can
fact
check
me
like
immediately.
That's
that's
really
good
and
I
mean
so
yeah.
If
you
could
go
one
forward,
please
so
the
I
was
asked
by.
I
think
it
was
listed
list
initially
to
to
give
a
quick
overview
of
what
all
the
open
things
are,
and
that's
what
I'm
aiming
to
do
feel
free
to
interrupt
at
any
time.
B
There
might
be
mistakes.
Christus
was
done
not
at
leisure,
those
slides,
so
there
might
be
dragons
and
something
wrong,
and
if
anything
is
weird
or
if
you
have
any
questions
or
anything
feel
free
to
just
interrupt
or
to
just
write
it
down
and
ask
at
the
end,
both
is
fine.
Yeah
super
short
history
of
all
that
naming
confusion
because
we
have
so
many
opens
here.
As
is
usual
with
buzzwords
and
open,
is
a
buzzword.
By
now
it
gets
used
a
lot.
B
You
saw
this
initially
with
open
source,
then
open
standards,
you
see
it
outside
of
cncf
as
well
with,
for
example,
openstack
and
opentsdb,
and
there
are
many
many
many
many
many
more
examples
of
this
which
doesn't
lead
to
less
confusion.
Let's
suppose
like
this,
especially
if
the
similar
terms
are
used
in
pretty
much
similar
fields.
B
Yeah
so
open
metrics
is
standardizing
the
prometheus
wire
forward
and
evolving
the
prometheus
wire
format
open
service
machine
yeah.
It's
like
it's
endless
at
some
point.
It's
probably
makes
like,
but
you
always
have
this.
The
pendulum
swings,
eternal
death
take
briefs.
It
goes
back
and
forth.
We
will
have
more
unique
names
again
and
then
we
have
more
descriptive
names
again
and
then
it
goes
back
and
forth.
B
So
yeah
openmetrics
is
focused
on
the
prometheus
wire
format
and
evolving.
That
open
tracing
was
focused
on
standardizing
code
interfaces,
api
interfaces
and
such
of
various
tracing
libraries
with
indie
cloud
native
space
in
the
wider
cloud
native
space,
open
census,
was
about
open
sourcing
census,
which
is
google
internal,
and
you
can
think
of
this
roughly
as
similar
to
how
borg
is
the
closed.
B
Google
version
of
what
is
now
kubernetes
in
the
open
and
how
borgmon
is
the
closed
version
of
what
is
now
prometheus
in
the
open
and
how
you
can
argue
that
that
monarch
is
in
part
what
stackdriver
is
not
in
the
open
ended,
but
at
least
as
an
offering
to
to
to
the
outside
world,
and
that's
not
fully
correct
census
or
open
senses,
is
an
effort
to
to
bring
or
was
an
effort
to
bring
the
census
library
set
into
into
the
open
and
open
telemetry
in
turn.
B
So
going
a
little
bit
in
in
in
depth
on
on
the
open
metrics
side
back
when
cncf
was
pretty
new,
there
was
a
large
political
problem
around
anything,
supporting
anything
called
bridges
like
massive,
except
for
influx
data.
B
At
some
point,
everyone
was
trying
really
really
hard
to
stay
away
from
supporting
anything
which
had
the
promises
name
in
it,
which
is
part
of
why
dan
and
chris
who's
also
here
asked
prometheus
team
to
standardize
the
wire
format
outside
of
the
prometheus
team
to
to
just
have
an
independent
standard
with
an
independent
name,
where
you
have
a
thing
which
you
can
support
without
having
to
to
carry
that
prometheus
name
which,
obviously,
if
you,
if
you
want
to
have
a
competing
project
or
even
sell
a
competing
product,
can
be
harmful
to
your
marketing
efforts.
B
Of
course,
you
basically
have
to
admit
that
you're
supporting
something
which
someone
else
came
up
with,
which
is
never
nice.
That's
not
a
technical
concern
to
be
clear.
Yet
it
is
a
concern
which
needs
to
be
taken
seriously
myself.
I
needed
an
ietf
rfc
course.
I
was
still
working
at
an
isp
and
the
the
language
in
which
you
speak
to
network
vendors
is
rfcs
and
you
slip
that
one
rfc
into
a
tender
and
all
of
a
sudden.
They
are
required
by
contract
to
support
that
thing.
B
So
that
was
the
intention
there
and
how
the
open
name
came.
Chris
convinced
me
that
openmetrics
is
the
name
course
I
wanted
to
have
epimeters,
but
as
a
brother
to
open
to
prometheus
and
such
but
yeah
we
ended
up
with
openmetrics
instead,
which
is
fine.
I
guess
next
slide.
Please.
B
Openmetrics
is
invoice
and
will
remain
100
focused
on
the
prom
core
thanos
ecosystem,
so
it's
basically
aligned
with
what
prometheus,
cortex,
thanos
and
also
kubernetes
instrumentation
do
and
want,
and
it's
more
of
a
follow
or
a
coordination
and
not
so
much
a
trailblazing
where
openmetrics
defines
where
prometheus
needs
to
go.
It's
the
other
way
around.
The
one
notable
exception
is
exemplars,
which
we
on
the
openmetrics
site
took
and
put
into
into
open
metrics
and
as
such.
For
me,
this
cortex
thanos
took
over
funnily
enough.
B
That
is
a
direct
result
of
open,
metrics
and
open
senses.
Talking
back,
and
I
think
it
was
2017
about
potentially
merging,
and
that
was
one
of
the
highlight
features
which
which
made
clear
sense.
So
we
took
that
over
into
openmetrics,
even
though
we
never
merged
or
anything
openmetrics
is
pretty
opinionated
about
the
happy
path
and
is
doing
this
unix
thing
of
do
one
thing
and
do
it
well.
B
Stable,
really
happened
last
year
end
of
year
last
year,
currently,
client
goaling
course
that
is
relevant
to
cncf.
Is
the
29th
most
used
go
library
on
github.
B
There
were
quite
some
concerns
about
the
openness
of
openmetrics,
which
I
get,
and
I
don't
believe
in
in
not
talking
about
stuff.
So
here
it
is
oh
yeah,
too
much
context.
Sorry
that
is
flipped
was
in
our
heads
and
even
people
who
only
had
a
short
absence
of
of
or
from
the
cause
found
it
impossible
to
re-on-board
themselves,
because
we
had
so
much
context
in
our
head
and
we're
not
making
enough
progress
with
writing
this
down,
which
is
obviously
on
us.
B
But
at
that
point
we
were
four
people
doing
this
on
the
side
so
yeah,
it
is
what
it
is.
B
We
thought
we
would
be
quicker,
writing
it
down
and
then
helping
people
on
board
from
that
which
didn't
work
out
in
the
end,
as
you
probably
noticed,
the
other
thing
which
didn't
help
is
that
2019
was
absolute
hell
for
myself,
with
yeah,
run
out
depression,
acute
also,
loss
of
hearing
everything-
that's
better
now,
but
still
it's
part
of
that
story
and
part
of
why
why
we
weren't
able
to
do
it
as
quickly
and
as
openly
as
as
we
intended
and
also
there
were
some
attempts
to
try
and
take
open,
metrics
away
from
prometheus,
something
which
took
quite
some
energy
to
just
not
not
fight
but
still
reject
or
to
to
make
sure
we
kept
the
focus
on
prometheus
and
honestly,
we
overshot
in
protecting
this
alina,
and
such
we
talked
about
this
in
the
past-
also
know
more
context
of
this.
B
It's
it
is
what
it
is
next
slide,
please
open
to
open,
telemetry
and
steve
feel
more
than
welcome
to
to
interject
at
any
point
or
to
just
take
completely
over,
because
that's
that's
just
me
talking
about
someone
else.
B
So
open
telemetry
is
intended
largely
as
a
data
pipeline
set
of
libraries.
What
have
you
for
the
three
pillars?
Metrics
locks
and
traces,
with
some
other
things
for
like
errors
and
such
but
those
are.
This
is
the
main
focus
here
we
are
focusing
on
the
metric
side
quest.
That
is
the
direct
comparison.
B
There
have
been
many
recent
meetings
between
the
prometheus
cortex
thanos
kubernetes
instrumentation
groups
and
also
open
telemetry
to
to
try
and
hammer
out
where
to
go
from
here
and
how
to
increase
how
to
increase
cooperation
as
much
as
we
can
the
last
meeting
just
to
just
to
show,
because
that
is
a
nice
number
to
show
how
how
how
committed
on
the
prometheus
side
we
are.
B
The
last
meeting
was
last
friday
that
was
five
hours
in
the
night
for
emea,
most
of
prometheus
team
are
anemia,
and
yet
most
of
prometheus
team
showed
up
and
stayed
till
the
end.
At
least
a
few
of
us
myself
included
during
that-
and
I
found
that
very
good
and
very
very
positive-
that
open
telemetry
reiterated
their
their
commitment.
D
B
Prometheus,
which
makes
sense
within
cncf-
I
guess
yet,
no
king
making
and
such
so
still
it
makes
sense
for
them
to
be
able
to
experiment
with
otlp
and
and
do
things
outside
of
this.
Obviously,
we
still
have
basically
the
the
same
technical
input
in
combat
in
cockpit.
B
You
know
the
word
you
can
read
it.
I
can't
speak
it.
Sorry
between
the
different
projects,
the
most
the
strongest
ones,
would
be
that
the
histograms
are
flipped
and
it's
mathematically
impossible
to
have
to
to
convert
from
open
telemetry
histograms
into
prometheus,
compatible
histograms.
As
of
right
now,
there's
a
host
centric
model,
which
is
not
bad
from
open,
metrics
and
prometheus
point
of
view.
Course
we
can
take
whatever
data,
yet
it
might
prove
cumbersome
with
with
like
serverless
and
such.
B
So
that
is
one
of
the
things
which
is
on
the
agenda
and
there
is
like
more
data
forwards
which
need
to
be
recast,
blah
blah
blah
blah
blah,
and
one
thing
which
was
raised
by
kubernetes
is
I
wasn't
aware
of
this
beforehand
that
kubernetes
has
a
hard
requirement
on
in
process
metric
endpoints,
which
currently
is
not
something
which
open
telemetry
can
provide.
So
it
cannot
be
a
drop
in
replacement.
B
What
was
stated
from
open,
telemetry
site
during
the
last
call
is
that
something
stable
sorry,
I
I
forgot
a
word
that
the
plan
on
open
telemetry
side
is
to
have
something
usable
specific,
whatever
stable
enough
to
to
to
really
drop
in
at
the
latest
by
end
of
year
this
year,
yeah
next
slide,
please.
B
There
are
many
interpretations
of
what
compatible
actually
means,
and
we
identified
quite
a
few
like,
for
example,
on
on
the
api
level.
How
do
I
talk
to
the
libraries
in
the
code?
Can
I
just
replace
it?
Would
I
need
a
wrapper
things
like,
for
example,
in
process
things
like
the
wire
formats
things
like
the
underlying
data
formats.
B
There
are
many
different
ways
to
to
to
define
compatible
as
it
were
and
why
we
do
have
quite
some
technical
guidelines
and
such
and
why
we
have
all
the
reference
documentation
which,
for
example,
datadog
used
to
re-implement
open
metrics
on
their
end,
we
don't
have
something
where
you
can
self-certify
or
certify
like
as
a
service
like
julius,
did
it
for
prom
cal,
which
most
of
you
will
know
about,
but
this
is
a
focus
area
for
this
year
for
prometheus,
not
just
on
on
the
levels
which
are
important
to
to
open,
telemetry
or
just,
but
also
on
other
levels
like,
for
example,
how
to
get
data
out
and
such
remotely
right,
probably
blah
blah
to
to
enable
this
to
be
more
of
an
independent
ecosystem
where
people
can
just
test
against
canonical
test
suites.
B
B
Nothing
cool,
okay,
so
yeah
questions,
discussion,
whatever.
E
Rishi,
thank
you
for
the
presentation.
I
guess
I
have
a.
I
have
a
little
question
about
the
about
the
name
open,
so
we
have
it
in
in
in
so
many
in
so
many
projects
and
katie
just
mentioned
in
the
slack
that
there's
also
open
service
mesh,
there's
no
trademark
on
this
name
right
and
we'll
probably
continue
having
projects
with
this
name.
E
So
I
wonder
what
would
be
the
best
way
we
we're
going
to
share
this
presentation
with
with
whoever
was
on
the
call
and
and
others,
but
what
would
be
the
best
way
to
to
put
it
maybe
up
in
writing
or
put
it
somewhere
on
the
website
for
others
to
reference
and
to
understand
like
if
I'm
a
project
and
I'm
picking
a
name
like
I
probably
wouldn't
want
to
pick
open
as
there
are
so
many
projects
having
it?
I
want
to
avoid
the
confusion.
B
That's
that's
part
of
why
I
I
wanted
to
have
a
unique
name,
not
a
descriptive
one,
but
we
are
where
we
are,
and
I
I
don't
have
complaints
I'm
on
the
derby
and
trademark
team,
which
is
why
I
have
quite
some
context
on
how
u.s
trademark
works.
But
please
anyone
correct
me
because
I'm
not
a
lawyer
in
particular,
not
a
trademark
lawyer
by
having
an
establishing
prior
use.
You
can
use
this
when
you
register
a
trademark
even
late
at
the
latest
stage,
so
we
don't
have
to
register
it
right
now.
B
You
can
register
it
later
as
per
cncf
policies.
Sandbox
projects
do
not
get
a
registered
trademark.
That
happens
upon
graduation.
B
We
did
have
discussions
with
cncf
about
pulling
about
pulling
the
trademark
razor's
registration
for
open
matrix
earlier
than
graduation,
for
the
simple
reason
that
there
is
so
much
movement
around
the
whole
project
and
so
much
use
of
the
name
already
as
as
shown
in
the
end
user
radar
and
such
where
right
fifth
place.
I
think,
like
it
is
already
a
household
name
or
it
is
already
an
active
use.
B
B
The
only
entity
which
has
any
right
to
the
name
is
is
cncf.
We
have
chris
here
so.
C
D
C
Have
definitely
rights
to
to
the
name
if
we
so
wish
to
pursue
it,
but
I
think
in
the
case
of
open
metrics
and
any
kind
of
spec
project
like
that
is
understanding
the
difference
between
the
actual
name
of
the
project
and
potentially
any
kind
of
conformance
mark
down
down
the
line
that
you
may
want
to
have.
So
this
is
kind
of
the
way
to
think
about.
This
is
there's
a
difference
between
kubernetes
and
then
kubernetes
certified.
Those
are
two
different
marks
that
we
have
registered
for
different
purposes.
B
And
just
to
be
clear,
there
is
already
a
test
suite
for
openmetrics.
The
intent
is
to
use
precisely
that
to
have
a
open,
metrics,
compatible
or
open
metrics
native
or
open
metrics
certified
or
open
metrics,
whatever
that's
still
in
the
air,
but
that's
also
something
which
will
be
done
within
this
year.
Obviously,
because,
with
with
all
with
all
the
actors
entering
this
space,
it
sadly
has
been
shown
that
we
need
to
be
a
little
bit
more
more
self-asserted.
B
It's
a
good
problem
to
have,
but
still
it
is
something
which
we
need
to
solve,
that
we
need
to
that.
We
need
to
be
a
little
bit
more
yeah.
B
Native
metrics,
no
way
honestly,
we
did
consider
renaming
course.
There
were
too
many
opens,
but
if
you
look
at
the
amount
of
of
references
to
the
name,
it's
way
too
late
by
now
the
last
nail
in
the
coffin
for
any
rename
was
was
the
end
user
server,
because
there's
no
way
we
can
rename
this
now
like
absolutely
not.
D
Richard
have
a
question,
so
you
have
the
open
tracing
project
in
incubation
now
and
then
open
telemetry
is
in
sandbox,
but
open
telemetry
includes
open
tracing.
D
Is
there
any
plan
to
face
out
maybe
open
tracing
and
make
that
open,
telemetry.
F
Happy
answer
that
one
so
yeah
that
was
announced
as
part
of
open
symmetry
being
formed,
so
you
should
think
of
open
symmetry
as
the
next
major
version
of
both
open
tracing
and
open
census.
So,
yes,
the
goal
is
that
open,
telemetry
will
move
into
incubation
and
open
tracing
will
eventually
kind
of
phase
out,
so
that
is
actively
underway
right
now
the
community
is
working
on
taking
the
best
of
both
open
tracing
and
open
census
and
merging
it
together,
and
we're
very
close
in
regards
to
that
and
then
there'll
be
further
announcements
about
long-term
viability.
F
We
also
announced
that
there
will
be
deprecation
backwards.
Compatibility
support
so
there'll
be
at
least
two
years
where
you
can
continue
using
either
open
tracing
or
open
census,
and
there
will
be
a
backwards
compatible
shim
available
in
open
telemetry.
For
you.
B
A
B
Yeah
just
two
pieces
of
information,
a
the
standardization
effort
within
itf
is
ongoing.
I
will
be
talking
during
the
itf
meeting
in
march.
I
think
about
the
whole
thing.
It's
already
been
submitted,
blah
blah
blah
as
part
of
the
id
process.
The
other
thing
for
future
work
for
openmetrics,
one
of
the
highlight
features
will
be
the
new
high
cardinal
or
high
resolution.
B
Histograms,
which
is
currently
being
worked
on
within
prometheus,
will
then
be
talked
about
between
prometheus
cortex
and
instrumentation
and
then
basically
specified
in
open
metrics
again
this
will
be
trailing
more
trailblazing,
but
this
is
the
next
major
thing
for
just
to
see
the
trajectory
if
it's
relevant.
It
probably
wasn't
for
this
one,
sorry
but
yeah
whatever
now.
You
know.
A
Okay,
all
right
one
note:
our
next
meeting
is
a
closed
meeting
to
review
the
sandbox
applications.
So
if
folks
want
to
be
able
to
apply
for
sandbox,
this
would
be
the
week
and
that's
pretty
much
it
any
other
comments,
questions
things
we
need
to
cover
today.