►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting - 2019-05-07
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
Six
I'm
nine
wit
quorum
yeah,
let's
get
started
so
moving
on,
keep
going
so
in
terms
of
agenda
today,
we'll
cover
a
little
bit
about
where
we
are
with
SIG's
have
a
couple
presentations
from
the
community:
that's
an
open
telemetry,
which
is
the
emergent
merger
of
open
tracing,
open
census
and
then
the
cloud
events
in
your
review.
If
we
have
time
and
a
little
bit
of
discussion
around
archiving
projects
and
means
so
I'm
happy
to
kick
it
over
to
Liz
to
steer,
if
you
so
wish.
As
chair.
B
Okay,
well
I
think
everyone
knows
that
that
project,
presentations,
yeah
good
okay,
say
CNCs,
SIG's
I-
think
one
of
the
one
of
the
goals
that
we
would
like
to
get
done
this
year
is
get
the
six
and
kind
of
up
and
running,
and
you
know
running
like
clockwork,
so
we've
got
progress
here,
but
the
security
sig
and
the
storage
sig,
so
the
security
sick.
It
says
here
that
it's
created
and
operational
and
we
actually
voted
to
approve
its
creation
case.
A
B
To
do
I'm
not
quite
sure
what
the
process
is,
but
we
probably
need
to
have
that
step
know,
but
at
least
the
sig
is
kind
of
it's
doing
things.
They
are
actually
kind
of
assessing
project
and
and
doing
things
so
I
think
that's
a
very
good
kind
of
bit
of
progress
there
yeah.
So
can
we
get
a
to-do
item
Chris
or
an
issue
actually
getting
the?
If
there
isn't
one
already
about
getting
the
chair
to
create
Nori's.
C
That
is,
you
know
that
it's
very
like
we
had
a
charter
in
the
repo
and
then
there's
a
proposal
like
it
is
the
Charter
supposed
to
be
part
of
the
CN
CF
repo.
Is
it
part
of
the
you
know
the
the
project,
the
cig
repo,
this
likes
details
right,
and
so
we
have
a
charter
dock,
that's
part
of
our
repo.
We
have
some
co-chairs
that
are
willing
to
keep
going.
Should
we
just
do
an
async
quote
or
comment
and
request
component
that
we
don't
have
that
many.
B
Think
so
too,
and
I
agree
with
Chris,
saying
I
think
the
every
sake
should
own
its
own
charter
and
they
should
be
part
of
their
own
repo
makes
sense
to
me.
Thank
you
and
the
storage
sake.
I
saw
and
made
a
couple
of
comments
on,
in
fact,
the
pr
for
getting
the
storage
sake
up
and
running,
but
that
I
think
again,
that's
a
transition
of
an
existing
group
of
people
who
are
doing
things,
but
I
think
we're
in
good
shape
to
have
these
two
six
we're
gonna
announce
it
keep
Condorcet
the
plan
Chris.
If.
A
No,
you
know,
we've
had
discussions
in
the
past
of
you
know,
having
more
project
and
program
health
for
CN
CF,
and
we
hired
a
me
to
help
with
that
and
she'll
be
focused
on
more
importantly,
getting
all
these
CN
CF
SIG's
up
and
operational
and
helping
those
work
well,
along
with
supporting
our
projects
on
other
initiatives,
so
sure
you
shoot
officially
starts,
may
20th
and
will
be
a
Q
Khan.
So
you
could
say
hi.
B
Well,
so,
alright,
what's
up
next
okay
I'm
kind
of
in
projects,
so
there
is
a
pull
request.
We've
been
talking
about
this
for
a
while
I
think
we
are
pretty
close
to
the
point
where
we
should
just
start
doing
it.
There
is
a
pull
request.
Does
anybody
want
to
make
any
final
comments
about
this
before
we
call
a
vote?
I.
B
D
Hopefully,
a
pretty
quick
one,
so
we've
had
some
requests
to
expand
the
Envoy
XDS
data
playing
API
beyond
Envoy,
so
the
first
consumer
will
be
G
RPC.
They
are
adopting
the
Envoy
XDS
api's
for
their
local
side,
load,
balancing
and,
as
part
of
this
process,
we'd
like
to
evolve
the
api's
you
know
beyond
just
for
use
and
envoy
to
use
in
other
load,
balancers
and
other
control
planes
that
are
that
are
against
those
other
load
balancers.
So
we
would
like
to
form
an
official
API
working
group.
D
Initially,
this
will
include
folks
from
Google
working
on
envoy
and
G
RPC
myself.
We
have
commitments
from
people
and
Azure
as
well
as
Amazon,
AWS
and
we'd,
also
like
to
invite
the
you
know,
folks,
working
on
other
load,
balancers
and
other
control
plans
around
the
industry.
I
think
initially.
This
will
probably
eventually
live
under
the
networking
sake.
Once
we
get
that
started,
I
think
we
view
this
as
a
pretty
lightweight
thing.
We'll
have
some
meetings
hopefully
make
sure
that
we're
evolving
the
API
in
a
direction?
D
That's
not
just
useful
for
Envoy,
and
you
know
this
might
might
in
the
far
future
lead
to
these
API
is
becoming
standardized
and
some
more
official
but
I
think
right
now
we
just
like
this
to
be
a
lightweight
process
of
all
the
api's
beyond
envoy,
so
I
think
what
we're
asking
for
here
is
just
general
TOC
approval
to
start
this
lightweight
working
group
and
then
I
think.
Once
we
get
the
networking
sig
started,
the
working
group
would
just
roll
up
into
that.
Sig.
E
I'm,
supportive
I
think
I
think
there
is
a
larger
question
of
like
you
know
how
much
of
a
standards
body
is
the
CNC
F,
because
this
is
essentially
patterns
and
documentation
without
code.
Largely
that's
not
really
an
I
mean
open
tracing
and
spiffy
are
both
sort
of
in
a
similar
vein,
but
I
think
you
know.
We've
we've
had
this
on
again
off
again
discussion
around
this
time.
It's
not.
E
Caught
events
is
no,
that
is
not
an
official
project,
also
which
is
a
weird
sort
of
like.
If
there
isn't
it
a
a
thing
right,
so
you
know
I'm
a
little
bit
I'm
a
little
bit
like.
We
have
working
groups
that
do
work,
and
then
we
have
projects
and
there's
a
question
of
like
well.
Should
this
be
a
project
or
working
group
and
like
at
what
point
is
a
working
group
turn
into
a
project
and
I?
Think
cloud
events
is
a
great
example
of
that.
E
E
E
D
Yeah
and-
and
this
is
I
mean
this-
is
not
just
a
working
group
like
we're
taking
existing
proto's,
so
there
there
isn't
it
there's
an
actual
project,
so
I
mean
these
proto's
live
effectively
in
a
repo
called
data
playing
API
and
as
part
of
this
working
group,
we're
going
to
be
splitting
them.
You
know
from
the
Envoy
portions
into
the
universal
portions,
so
there
is
actual
code
here.
Well,
okay,
so
then
I
guess
that
begs
the
question:
why
not
just
make
this
a
sandbox
project.
E
D
Think
we
were
just
trying
to
start
this
as
a
lightweight
thing
and
Chris
and
Chris
suggested
doing
a
working
group
I,
don't
think
we
really
want
to
go
through
the
entire
project
life-cycle.
So
I
think
it
sounds
great
to
have
this
be
a
vendor,
neutral
location
where
we
can
start
having
meetings
and
get
a
zoom
link
and
and
stuff
like
that.
But
I
think
we're
not
looking
for
like
a
more
heavyweight
process.
Right
now
and.
D
G
Just
gonna
say
that
what
you
just
said
about
open
metrics,
but
also
this
is
we're
not
a
standards
body
we're
not
ISO
or
IETF.
We
don't
have
a
formal
approval
process
for
something
then
declaring
something
to
be
a
standard.
Someone
could
come
up
with
other
mesh
library
api's
if
they
wanted
to
and
do
projects
there,
and
that
would
be
fine
I
think
it
should
be
run
as
an
open
source
project.
Even
if
the
deliverables
are
documents,
as
well
as
code.
D
D
Okay,
let
me
let
me
take
that
back
offline
and
we
can
think
about
how
we
would
want
to
do
that
again.
I
think
right
now
we're
just
looking
for
for
a
vendor
neutral
home
I
mean
you
know.
To
be
honest,
we
can.
We
can
start
a
Google
Groups
mailing
list
and
we
can
yeah
so
so.
I
think
we're
just
trying
to
strike
the
balance
between
vendor
neutral
home
and
in
not
too
much
process.
Yeah.
H
E
D
It's
it's
certainly
not
super
super
clear
to
me
and
I.
The
reason
that
I'm,
hesitant
to
go
straight
to
a
sandbox
project
is
that
we
would
it's
not
even
clear
right
now
what
we
would
put
in
that
sandbox
project,
because
a
bunch
of
this
code
lives
effectively
within
the
Envoy
repo
today
and
part
of
this
working
group
is
going
to
be
to
figure
out
how
to
actually
split
it
out.
So
I
I
wouldn't
like
there's
no
code
that
we
could
put
in
a
in
a
repo
currently
like
we
have
to
start
discussions
well.
F
D
Like
again,
I
think
really
what
we're
looking
for
is
is
just
a
place
where
we
can
host
a
mailing
list
and
start
having
some
meetings
and
again
I'm
perfectly
happy
to
organize
that
outside
of
the
CN
CF,
but
I
think
Chris
suggested
that
we
do
it
within.
So
III
really
don't
have
a
strong
opinion
here.
I'm.
B
Totally
supportive
of
the
idea
of
the
Cinzia
being
a
good
home
for
this
kind
of
discussion
and
I
do
kind
of
find
myself
questioning
wait
a
minute.
We
just
turn
working
groups
and
configs
and
how
does
excited
laughs
and
I'm
inclined
to
agree
that
there's
been
a
few
projects?
I'm
not
just
saying
yeah,
make
it
a
working
group
and
keep
it
simple,
which
does
make
a
lot
of
sense
to
me.
B
D
Well,
you
saw
I,
think
I,
think
my
my
thinking
there
and
there's
an
email
from
Lee
in
my
inbox
currently
which
I
haven't
responded
to,
which
is
I,
think
we
we
want
to
bootstrap
the
networks
sake.
That's
definitely
going
to
happen
and
I
think
it
would
be
a
natural
place
where
this
working
group
would
live
under
that
sig.
I
Reflecting
honor,
that's
probably
my
suggestion
as
well
that
the
traffic's,
a
better
networking
say
you
use
something
of
an
umbrella,
for
there
are
very
near-term
in
the
coming
weeks,
probably
wrap
around
Q
Khan
other
related
projects
to
come
forth.
That
would
be
I
could
see
other
working
group
proposals
under
that
same
umbrella,
coming
from
way
from.
D
Yeah
and
again,
I
think
that
all
we're
looking
for
right
now
is
an
email
list
and
a
Jim
link
for
meetings.
I'm
happy
to
offline.
We
can
discuss
I
think
there
is
a
suggestion
on
chat
about
having
a
time
box
in
here.
You
know
so
we're
happy
to
report
back
once
per
quarter
or
if
we
bootstrapped,
then
the
network
traffic
segment
through
that
sake,
but
I
think
right
now
we
just
want
to
kick
this
off
and
get
people
talking,
because
we
don't.
We
don't
even
know
what
we
want
to
do
yet
effectively.
J
K
This
is
Derek,
sorry
for
taking
a
listen
for
us.
That's
is
a
messaging
system
that
was
designed
to
actually
be
the
control
plane
for
call
foundry
way
back
in
the
day.
I
still
think
it.
It
has
pieces
inside
of
compound
Rianne
Bosch,
but
it's
a
messaging
system,
that's
multi-pattern,
meaning
you
can
do
request.
Reply
can
do
Cubase
ups
up
and
we
also
have
streaming
it's
been
around
for
almost
ten
years
now
it's
been
in
production
for
over
eight
and
a
half
years
in
different
companies.
K
It's
built
as
a
kind
of
cloud
native
micro
services,
very
lightweight,
very
resilient
type
of
a
system,
and
at
the
beginning
of
2018
around
March.
We
decided
to
ask
for
inclusion
inside
of
the
CNCs
next
slide.
Please,
since
he
accepted
there's
lots
of
different
metrics
that
we
can
look
at
where
most
people
have
access
to
all
of
them
as
we
do.
K
But
what
we're
looking
at
is
both
the
doctor
pulls
and
then
the
Nats
streaming
doctor
pulls
have
increased
quite
a
bit
since
2017
all
right,
we're
about
to
pass
40
million
for
the
Nats
core
server.
We
have
about
5500
Nats,
github
start
and
what's
interesting
is,
is
we
have
a
lot
of
production
use
cases
that
we
are
simply
totally
unaware
of
like
we
will
learn
of
that
after
a
year
and
a
half
of
their
go
in
their
own
work
and
getting
into
production?
K
And
when
you
might
see
questions
on
the
slack
channel,
our
selectional
has
about
1,200
or
so
active
participants
left,
for
example,
we
just
had
a
large,
dating
company,
say
yeah.
We
just
rewrote
our
whole
back-end
using
Nats,
and
it's
been
in
development
for
a
year.
We
had
no,
no
clue
so
I
think
these
at
least
for
our
project.
We
have
some
of
these
statistics,
but
we
also
realizes
or
a
lot
of
that,
we
don't
know
about
because
they
don't
really
necessarily
need
anything
from
us.
K
It
just
kind
of
works,
at
least
for
what
they're
trying
to
do
next
week.
So
it's
an
ecosystem
of
servers
and
streaming
servers.
Think
of
a
streaming
server
as
being
akin
to
Kafka
and
then,
of
course,
the
various
clients.
The
majority
of
our
diversity,
admittedly
so
is
in
the
client
ecosystem.
It's
very
straightforward,
easy
to
write
a
client
because
it's
a,
although
a
very
high
performance,
it's
a
text-based
protocol,
so
it's
very
approachable
for
lots
of
different
developer
types.
K
But
if
you
look
at
the
maintained,
client
there's
one
in
rust,
which
is
not
a
weekend
project
type
of
a
client
given
the
language
and
given
the
fact
that
things
are
happening,
asynchronously
and
there's
definitely
memory
passing
on
the
course
server
in
the
streaming
server
Al.
The
majority
of
those
contributions,
admittedly,
are
from
the
Nets
team,
both
from
VMware
transitioning
through
a
company
called
ops
Aaron
out
to
cinavia.
However,
we
are
starting
to
see
people
inside
of
the
core
server
looking
around
and
we
do
have
lots
of
contributions
there.
K
We've
actually
went
to
certain
large
users
and
customers
that
we
have,
and
the
ones
either
say
we're
good
for
now
does
what
we
needed
to
do,
or
the
ones
that
say:
Oh,
we'd
love
it
adjust
to
this
one
thing
off
to
more
towards
NRI
versus
training
up
one
of
their
own
engineers.
Today
again,
that
being
said,
there's
probably
a
couple
big
companies
that
will
all
sudden
show
up
in
the
core
server
and
the
streaming
server,
but
that
is
a
weakness
in
terms
of
strict
graduation
criteria.
K
I,
don't
think
it's
a
bad
reflection
of
the
project
or
its
ability
to
solve,
needs
and
run
in
production
environments
for
lots
of
customers.
We
have
a
lot
of
community
maintain
clients
where
they
write.
They
write
the
code,
they
do
everything
about
it
and
it's
getting
bigger.
We're
probably
missing
a
couple
there
next
slide.
K
Since
we
joined
the
CNC
f,
Nats
was
kind
of
a
standalone
outside
of
integration
with
engine
X,
for
rapid
updates
of
its
routing
layer,
which
we
use
that
EPS
era
and
I
believe
they
used
that
for
Cloud
Foundry
as
well,
for
their
layer.
Seven,
we're
now,
obviously
looking
at
being
a
good
CN,
CF
citizen,
and
so
we
have
been
putting
a
lot
of
effort
and
are
actually
using
ourselves,
the
kubernetes
operator,
which
can
control
both
Matt's
core
server
clusters
and
streaming
clusters.
K
Nats
can
grow
to
very,
very
large
cluster
sizes,
if
need
be,
I'm,
also
a
Prometheus
Explorer
with
bro
fauna
integration,
and
we
also
have
a
Kafka
branch
and
empty
series
bridge,
which
is
the
majority
of
the
interest
from
the
fortune.
500
user,
slash
customers.
Today
they
wanted
explicit
integration
with
those,
so
we
negotiated
even
under
NRE
that
those
would
both
be
Apache
too
and
part
of
the
larger
Nats
project
inside
the
cnc.
K
Yet
so
we
feel
good
about
that,
and
then
we
have
a
ton
of
community
maintain
connectors
and
utilities
from
all
different
types
of
of
things.
As
you
can
see
next
slide,
the
community
is
great.
We
we
feel
that
we
do
a
great
part
in
ourselves
of
being
on
the
slack
channel
on
being
responsive,
but
they're,
always
saying
very
nice
things
about
us
in
terms
of
just
works.
You
know
it's
been
in
production.
K
You
know
big
one.
Guy
said
his
t-shirts
gonna
wear
out
before
you
have
to
recycle
the
the
server,
so
we
really
try
to
encourage
that
and
at
the
same
time,
if
someone
says
it's
not
working
for
them
were
actually
even
more
attentive
and
want
more
information
from
from
those
as
they
pop
up,
but
they're
they're.
K
And
we
Matt
and
I
had
a
really
I
think
good
discussion
on.
How
does
that
in
terms
of
the
the
way
a
project
is,
is
viewed
from
a
user
eco
system?
How
does
that
affect
how
it
fits
inside
of
the
CNC
F
and
it's
criteria
and
things
like
that
next,
so
these
are
just
certain
partners
we're
starting
to
see
a
lot
of
sis
come
onboard
specifically,
they
are
being
pushed
towards
us
because
of
the
license
change
in
situation
with
Kafka
and
confluent.
So
we
are
not
outbound
marketing.
K
Yet
we
are
about
to
go
into
a
file
marketing
mode,
probably
at
the
end
of
this
month,
beginning
of
June,
but
we
do
have
quite
a
bit
of
inbound
interest
and
it's
going
up
very
quickly
and
it
you
know,
fluctuates
between
control,
playing
or
events
streaming.
But
there's
a
lot
of
s
I--'s
coming
in
or
people
saying
the
license,
change
on
the
kafka
side
has
to
have
them
considering
other
options.
I'm
sure
you
guys
are
aware
of
that.
But
it's
interesting
it's
a
very
specific
pattern.
So
next
don't.
B
K
B
K
So
this
is
just
a
small
group
of
the
end
users
and
again
I
think
for
us.
We
very
rarely
see
any
of
these
companies
come
out
until
one
of
two
things
happen.
They
are
really
happy
with
the
result
and
they
want
to
share,
which
is
a
good
thing
or
they
run
into
some
issue
which,
for
the
most
part,
people
get
resolved
on
the
support
channel.
K
But
we
do
have
a
pretty
global
representative
community
and
we
also
have
most
of
these
are
very
strictly
production
they're
already
in
production
they
run
their
production
user-facing
systems
using
that's
as
a
control
playing
servicing
addressing
discovery,
type
of
a
system
next
and
then
here's
the
I
saw
some
comments
this
morning
on
the
graduation
PR.
We
see
the
website
getting
up,
docker
stacks
slack
again.
K
We
have
about
1200
members,
or
so
that's
slowly
been
growing
over
the
last
year
and
a
half,
we
have
a
Google
group
that
gets
a
little
bit
of
traffic,
but
most
of
the
traffic's
on
slack,
Twitter
or
reddit,
and
so
want
to
make
it
short
and
sweet
but
happy
to
answer
any
and
all
questions
that
you
have
and
appreciate.
The
time.
E
What's
you
know
the
and
I
want
to
see
personally
I
want
to
see
some
clear
lines
between
sort
of
the
company
and
the
open
source
projects?
I
don't
want
these
things
to
actually
be
conjoined,
and
so,
if
you
don't
mind,
answering
and
I
don't
want
to.
You
know:
ask
things
that
you're
uncomfortable
with
what
is
the
sort
of
commercial
offering
that
complements
and
apps
that
actually
justifies
your
investment.
E
K
That's
a
great
question
Joe
and
it's
very
it's
kind
of
like
talking
about
religion
right,
so
we
all
have
our
opinions,
but
I'll
definitely
give
you
kind
of
where
I
don't
pass
judgment
on
like
whether
I
think
it's
a
good
idea
or
not
that's
totally
fair.
You
know,
we've
a
lot
of
us
I
think
have
been
in
this
environment
for
quite
a
long
time,
myself
included
coming
up
on
37
years.
K
My
stake
in
the
ground
that
I
put
to
be
frank,
is,
is
that
I
really
felt
that
there
were
only
three
open-source
commercial
models
going
forward
long
term.
Most
people
will
disagree,
but
I'm
trying
to
give
justification
for
Joe's
questions.
Bundle
it
with
hardware,
run
it
as
a
service
or
augment
it
with
a
service
running
with
a
service
is
not
applicable
for
NAT,
because
it's
dropped
that
simple
GE
nuclear
runs
their
servers
for
two
years
with
no
monitoring
at
all
in
their
nuclear
reactors,
and
they
only
shut
it
down
when
they're
doing
fuel
rot
stuff.
K
Alright,
that's
horrifying
right,
so
so
running
as
a
single
server
in
a
silo
technology.
You
that's
not
gonna
help
now
augmenting
with
a
service.
People
could
say:
oh
that's
kind
of
a
play
on
open
core.
Maybe
it
is,
but
it's
a
very
clear
delineation
that
we're
never
going
to
have
a
single
code
base
that
has
certain
parts
of
their
cinavia
and
certain
parts
that
are
gnats
and
Apache.
K
But
what
we've
done
is
is
we've
created
technology
inside
of
mats,
that
is
open-source
that
allows
us
to
run
a
global,
secure,
multi,
tenant,
digital
doll,
tome,
which
does
not
appear
as
a
silo
that
we
can
inject
value-added
services
and
streams
that
don't
have
to
be
open
source
and
we
can
charge
for
them.
So,
for
example,
you
can
possibly
see
a
case
where
we
might
have
services,
which
are
you
send
a
message
and
you
get
a
response
of
some
nature.
K
Let's
say
it's
a
secure
store
or
a
Cavey
store,
or
something
like
that
that
we
could
actually
offer
for
people
who
are
running
Nats
clusters,
large
ones
on
premise
and
bridging
to
the
cloud
they
would
pay
us
for
that.
They
also
pay
us
for
training
education,
consulting
in
Ori
work,
but
our
long-term
buy.
Your
prop
is
to
be
treated
like
a
utility
with
that
digital
doll
tone
which
connects
everyone
securely.
Okay,.
E
K
So
it
makes
a
complete
solution
where
you
just
need
Nats,
which
has
a
very
good
security
story
with,
oh
that
we
spent
about
a
year
and
a
half
on
and
if
and
if
everything
is
a
message
not
only
to
communicate
but
also
to
do
lightweight,
but
80/20
type,
storage
of
Kb
stuff
and
a
toast
cure
multi-cloud
way.
That
might
be
something
that
could
help
commercially
and
we
could
keep
that
closed
source
and
not
have
to
pollute
or
affect
any
of
the
Nets
ecosystem.
Hopefully,
that
makes
sense
great
yeah.
D
J
Share
I
share
your
concerns,
but
I
also
read
the
updated
portion
of
the
proposal
or
the
graduation
proposal,
and
that
made
me
feel
better
a
little
bit
but
I
agree.
We
should
have
a
longer
conversation
on
that.
What
I
would
what
I
would
be
or
what
I'm
also
looking
for
or
what
I
look
for
in
the
repo
was
some
outline
of
how
security
concerns
are
resolved.
So
Matt
I'm
not
trying
to
be
wrong
here
topic,
but
I
do
want
to
get
some
context
around.
J
How
do
security
concerns
get
raised
and
resolved
Derek,
and
are
there
any
SFA's
around
that
because
I
get
the
the
part
about?
You
know
there
are
only
so
many
people
who
really
understand
the
whole
system
and
and
that
and
that
paragraph
but
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that
there
is
some
s
lays
around
security
process.
So
if
you
could
go
over
that,
that'd
be
great
yeah.
K
So
that's
a
it's
a
really
big
deal
to
us
because
again,
that's
kind
of
a
big
push
for
us.
Cariah,
innovate
in
that
area.
We
did
with
with
the
CNCs
help
and
Chris,
especially
I'm
half
cure
53
do
an
audit
of
us.
We
also
have
a
company
out
of
New
York
that
I'm
looking
at
to
do
a
kind
of
a
black
hat
type
of
approach.
You
know
look
at
the
two
over
lease
which
is
coming
at
the
end
of
this
month,
been
in
development
for
about
a
year
and
a
half
it's
been
in
production,
though.
K
Actually,
since
last
November
December,
we
have
had
nobody
raised.
Any
issues
to
us.
Pure
43
had
a
couple
very
minor
ones,
so
we
immediately
fixed
them
and
then
we
posted
the
results
with
the
fixes
there,
but
we
take
it
very
seriously.
We
don't
know
if
the
CNC
F
has
finalized
a
a
formal
procedure
where
it's
like,
hey
reach
out
and
quiet.
You
know
give
them,
however
long.
You
know
to
resolve
type
of
thing,
but
most
people
in
our
ecosystem
seem
really
nice
and
friendly,
so
I.
Imagine
if
they
do,
they
would
privately
tell
us.
K
The
only
thing
that
we
had
prior
to
the
the
newest
technology
pushed
on
security
was
that
we
beat
cryptid
passwords
and
you
could
change
the
the
computation
factor
right,
which
was
a
trade-off
in
the
newer
system.
That
again,
a
lot
of
people
are
actually
already
running.
We
use
8255
won
nine
keys,
so
we
never
have
private
keys
at
all
and
we
do
a
challenge.
K
So
the
two
areas
that
we've
been
asking
people
to
look
at
and
provide
comment
for
was
on
8255,
one,
nine
in
various
client
implementations
and
such
and
then
generation
of
the
Knox,
which
is
the
biggest
deal.
If
you
look
at
it
from
a
security
perspective,
there
could
be
compromises
and
how
you
generate
the
nonce,
which
is
what's
signed
by
the
the
clients
with
their
private
key.
So
far
we
have
not
had
anything
we'll
come
back
to
us,
but
we
have
had
you
know:
I've
every
shot,
people
I
know
in
respect
to
look
at
it.
K
So
we're
trying
to
be
very
proactive
because
it's
a
big
deal
for
us,
especially
with
production,
but
we
don't
necessarily
have
anything
formal
and
but
we
be
happy
to
take
part
in
something.
If
we
want
to
formalize
I
would
imagine
we
want
to
formalize
it
for
all
ciencia
projects
as
a
just
general
template
of
communication
to
Matt's
point
Matt.
After
our
talk,
which
I
think
was
a
great
talk
and
again
I
I
hear
you
I
went
tonight,
I
talked
to
some
of
our
users
and
customers
and
I
said:
hey.
K
You
know
you,
you
wanted
something
done,
but
you
opted
for
NRI.
Instead
of
having
money
of
your
engineer,
spin-up
and
I
said
why,
and
they
said,
oh,
it's
just
easier.
We
trust
you
guys.
It'll
get
done
way
way
faster,
I
said
well,
what
happens
if
we
all
get
hit
by
a
bus
and
they
go
that's
why
we
only
used
up
as
open-source?
Well,
you
know
because
I
said
I
mean.
Would
you
take
it
out
of
production?
They
go
no.
No.
We
would
then
spend
someone
up
again.
K
K
It's
not
like
yeah
we're
really
nervous
about
this,
like
no,
no
we'd
rather
pay
you
guys
or
ask
you
guys
to
do
it
and
so
I
think
that's
at
least
a
data
point
not
that
we
would
perturb
the
diversity
efforts
whatsoever,
but
it
was
interesting
because
I
did
go
out
and
kind
of
pull
some
people
and
say
you
know,
where's
your
comfort
level
with
this
I
mean
you're
running
it
in
production,
it's
a
big
deal
and
they
consistently
came
back
said.
You
know,
yeah.
D
You
know,
and
it's
and
it's
not
just
that
though
right
I
mean-
and
that
obviously
does
make
me
feel
better
and
again
to
be
clear.
Iii
haven't
personally
decided,
I.
Think
my
own
opinion
on
this
and
I
think
it
just
needs
needs
more
more
discussion,
but
it's
not
just
bus
factor.
It's
you
know.
If
a
project
is
being
driven
primarily
by
one
company
and
for
example,
you
know
not
to
get
back
into
the
into
the
business
model
discussion
which,
as
you
say,
can
be
very
contentious.
D
But
if
later
you
decide
that
you
know,
you
need
to
move
to
an
open
core
model
to
make
your
business
succeed.
And
then
you
know
you
start
blocking
features
or
changing
the
license
or
something
like
that
and
you
and
you
control
that
product
you
know
is
that
what
I
graduated
project
should
be
right,
like
I,
I,
I,
just
don't
know,
and
and
to
me
you
know,
III
think
I'm
really
on
the
fence
here,
because
it's
clearly
a
very
mature
technology,
but
there
there
are
definitely
some
risk
factors
from
a
from
a
project.
Health
perspective,
I.
I
B
K
Yeah
I
think
it's
it's
it's
hard
to
it's
hard
to
to
rationalize
about,
and
the
way
I've
been
trying
to
approach
it
is
is
what
is
the
end
effect
on
the
community
and
I
think
the
end
effect
on
the
community
to
Matt's
point
of
balsa
and
we
decided,
hey
or
like
you
know,
confluent
just
bought
a
company
and
immediately
drop
dead,
stop
their
open-source
project.
You
know
an
apples
in
the
past,
I
think
for
the
CNC
F,
that's
possible
with
something
like
Nats,
where
it's
a
smaller
company.
K
That's
you
know
driving
a
lot
of
the
innovation
for
the
bigger
companies
where
I
think
there
might
be
a
comfort
level.
It
could
be
a
counter-argument
to
say,
but
what
happens
if
they
lose
interest?
So
what
happens
if
Google
loses
interest
in
one
of
the
big
projects
or
whatever
I
think
there
are
similar
ramifications
for
the
end
user?
Community
I
don't
have
any
answers
either.
I
know
that,
from
our
perspective
for
the
health
of
our
you
know
community
and
being
part
of
the
CNC.
K
A
B
D
And
I,
you
know
I
I,
think
Nats
is
a
great
technology
and
again
like
same
same
same
statement.
I
in
some
sense
I
feel
bad
that
you're
getting
caught
up
in
the
in
the
lack
of
clarity
around
this
topic.
But
my
preference
is
that
I
think
we
have
a
private
TOC
meaning
in
two
weeks
or
whenever.
That
is
my
preference
is
that
we
discuss
this
privately
among
the
TOC
and
then
we
decide
on
on
next
steps.
Yeah.
E
I
definitely
look
forward
to
that
conversation
and
I.
Think
we're
gonna
be
looking
at
this
across
a
whole
set
of
projects
that
folks
want
to
bring
into
the
TOC
either
at
the
sandbox
knee
or
incubation
level
and
and
I.
Think
that
you
know,
as
we
look
at
sort
of
the
the
set
of
projects
coming
in.
There
are
a
lot
of
questions
around
what
does
vendor
neutral
mean
and
and
one
of
the
criteria
around
that.
E
K
E
K
A
H
H
I,
can
we
go
to
the
next
slide?
Please
so
there's
a
lot
of
different
types
of
Salama
tree
that
developers
expect
a
lot
of
their
applications.
Tracing
metrics
and
logs
are
probably
the
ones
most
talked
about,
though
there
are
certainly
others.
There
are
different
layers
to
this
so
for
tracing
and
metrics.
You
often
need
language,
specific
API
and
language,
specific
implementations
to
pull
them
out
for
logs
and
other
types
of
telemetry.
You
can
often
get
away
with
an
agent
and
then
there's
other
parts
of
your
infrastructure,
including
collector
side,
cars
interrupts
formats
and
so
on.
H
There
are
obviously
a
number
of
projects
within
the
CNCs
that
Wobblies.
However,
when
we
look
specifically
at
the
combination
of
tracing
and
metrics,
open
census
and
open
tracing
have
been
sort
of
the
most
prominent
ones
out
in
the
community
and
open
tracing
already
being
a
CNCs
project
of
all
open
census
is.
Can
we
go
to
the
next
line?
So
when
we
look
specifically
at
open,
tracing
and
open
census,
there's
a
lot
of
similarities.
H
They
both
offer
api's
both
have
different
implementations
available.
There
are
some
differences
as
well.
Open
tracing
primarily
focuses
on
the
API,
while
it
left
implementations
mostly
up
to
the
community,
so
there
can
be
multiple
implementations
for
language.
Some
vendors
have
their
own
open
census
offers
a
single
implementation
for
each
language.
But
beyond
that,
you
know,
both
projects
have
broad
adoption,
both
have
pretty
good
language
support
and
both
offer
a
lot
of
the
same
functionality.
Probably
the
biggest
difference
in
terms
of
function
now
is
that
open
census
also
focuses
on
metrics.
H
We
go
to
the
next
slide
and
there
are,
of
course,
some
sort
of
issues
that
each
project
has
discovered
and
I.
Think
as
as
Ben
has
put
it
before.
Like
you
know,
after
we've
gone
and
built
a
thing
for
a
few
years,
we
look
back
and
think
of
a
few
things
we
wish
we
could
have
done
better
with
open
tracing
I.
Think
Ben
was
saying
one
of
the
challenges
that
they
interact,
that
they
found
was
that
they
only
deal
with
one
vertical
and
that's
tracing.
H
It
turns
out
a
lot
of
users
want
a
single
dependency
for
all
of
their
different
telemetry
types
with
open
census.
One
of
the
challenges
has
been
tighter
in
some
sense,
overly
tight
coupling
there's
a
great
standard
implementation,
but
there
are
vendors
in
the
space
for
tracing
and
metrics
who
would
like
to
use
a
standard
API
and
include
their
own
implementation.
Historically,
open
census
hasn't
allowed
that
we
go
to
the
next
slide.
This.
M
Is
me
both
projects
are
very
well
adopted.
You
know
you
can't
they're,
not
gonna
read
this
slide,
especially
given
the
time
crunch
and
everything,
but
we
can
just
go
to
the
next
slide,
I
guess,
which
seems
great.
So
we
are
two
really
popular
projects
and
you
can
X
that
again,
it's
sort
of
great
and
that's
the
problem,
so
we
go
to
the
next
slide.
The
fact
that
there's
a
choice
in
it
we're
chasing
down
from
census,
that's
really
problematic.
Both
projects
for
better
or
worse,
have
escape
velocity
I.
M
Don't
think
that
anyone
on
either
project
could
really
expect
them
to
just
die.
He
does
at
this
point
if
we
left
them
to
be,
which
is
you
know,
means
that
they
were
successful
in
the
sense,
but
the
fact
that
there
are
two
of
them
is
hugely
problematic.
You
can
see
this
in
the
ecosystem.
All
over
the
place,
we
talk
mean
I
talked
with
companies
all
the
time
as
part
of
my
job
at
light
step,
and
this
question
of
you
know:
what's
the
difference
which
one
should
we
use?
M
It's
not
just
twice
anxiety,
but
it
actually
creates
increased
paralysis.
This
threat,
I've
linked
to
is
just
one
of
many
many
examples
of
this,
but
it
happens
to
be
a
very
visible
one,
but
to
do
where
they
were
initially
going
to
adopt
up
and
tracing,
then
someone
said,
and
that
seemed
like
a
great
choice
and
then
they
said,
oh,
we
should
adopt
a
consensus
and
they
investigated
that
and
then
they
ultimately
did
neither,
and
so
they
just
have
like
stock,
and
this
kind
of
thing
happens
a
lot.
M
The
goal
is
really
to
expand
the
reach
in
telemetry
projects
into
cloud
native
technology,
and
in
fact
there
are
two
of
these
things
was
a
significant
problem.
So
when
you
go
to
the
next
slide
right,
so
one
more
yeah.
So
this
is
just
from
the
ciencia
proposal
that
we
broke
I'm
not
going
to
read
this
slide.
You
all
can
look
at
it.
You
know
in
your
email
or
whatever,
but
we'll
talk
about
it
in
a
minute.
M
I
did
want
to
address
one
important
issue
in
the
next
slide,
which
is
sort
of
the
elephant
in
the
room
here,
if
you
advance
again,
there's
the
classic
nesting,
CD
comic
about
standards
and
that's
sort
of
the
obvious
concern
here.
We
have
two
I
know:
ciencia
doesn't
like
the
word
standards,
so
we'll
just
call
them.
M
M
F
M
Will
make
it
easier
to
kind
of
wipe
the
old
things
off
the
map
and
just
move
forwards?
This
unified
project
will
offer
a
two-year
compatibility
guarantee
for
those
bridges,
so
people
on
open
tracing,
no
consensus
today
will
be
well
supported
for
a
while
and
in
the
meantime,
between
now
November
it
should
be
safe
to
continue
to
develop
an
instrumentation
and
the
the
you
know.
The
the
translation
process
should
be
relatively
easy,
I
think
it's
you
again
yep
so.
H
What
we're
actually
doing
is
merging
the
two
projects
into
one
you've-
probably
surmised
this
so
we're
taking
open
tracing
and
open
census,
as
Ben
mentioned
or
sunsetting
knows,
and
open
telemetry
will
will
replace
them.
Open
telemetry
will
maintain
a
broad
service
area,
obviously
live
tracing
and
metrics.
That
list
of
different
types
of
Salama
tree
may
grow
over
time,
but,
more
importantly,
it'll
provide
both
api's
and
a
single
set
of
reference
implementations
so
taking
the
sort
of
the
best
parts
of
open,
tracing
and
open
census
together.
H
It
also
will
include
sidecars
data
formats
and
all
the
other
specifications
that
customers
need,
as
I
mentioned
before,
there's
a
loose
coupling,
so
we'll
have
api's
that
people
can
build,
integrations
against
and
the
sort
of
primary
set
of
implementations.
We
suspect
that
a
lot
of
people
will
just
go
use.
Those
or
most
people
will
just
go
and
use
the
standard
plantations,
but
if
there
aren't
vendors
in
the
space
who
want
to
provide
their
own
implementations
of
those
ap
is
that
works
great
and
we
have
open
governance.
H
H
Telemetry
is
obviously
really
important.
The
CN
CF
already
has
open
tracing.
There
are
other
projects
like
Prometheus
that
are
in
the
space
I
think
some
other
CN
CF
projects
would
be
part
of
the
CN
CF,
so
no
surprise
that
a
telemetry
focus
projects
want
to
be
homes
there.
Cn
CF
is
a
great
home
for
implementations
for
api's
and
for
data
formats,
and
so
this
project
wraps
all
those
up
together.
H
M
I
mean
I,
guess
our
actual
ask
here
is
we'd
like
to
be
made
a
sandbox
project.
There's
probably
some
if
you
squint,
maybe
you
can
make
an
argument,
possibly
that
this
should
be
incubated.
We
don't
want
to
make
that
argument.
We'd
rather
see
the
project.
You
know
proliferate
come
back
and
whatever
in
six
months
a
year
and
make
that
argument
with
evidence
that
data,
given
that
the
open,
Tracy,
no
consensus
projects,
are
both
quite
aligned
about
this.
M
E
N
M
M
Basically,
once
I've
been
tracing
becomes
read-only,
which
is
the
goal
for
that
by
the
end
of
the
year.
That
seems
like
a
natural
time
to
consider
what
it's
sort
of
ultimate
fate
as
in
CFCF,
but
but
there
you
know,
trees
and
supports
a
lot
of
languages
and
will
take
us
and
time
to
get
through
all
of
them.
So
until
we
actually
have
a
Florence
pass
for
everyone,
I
don't
think
we
can
really
just
remove
it.
If
that
makes
sense,
no.
E
M
J
And
the
only
thing
that
become
a
tricky
with
making
it
a
sandbox
project
as
I
see
it
is
a
fancy
ops,
not
specific
marketing
of
stands
for
sandbox
products.
Here
we
are
we'd
like
want
this
to
work.
So
I
guess
when
you
get
to
the
point
where
you
want
marketing
help
and
effort.
I
think
that's
the
point
at
which
yeah.
M
I
mean
it's
really
an
open
trade
since
interest
I,
don't
know
if
this
is
considered
too
much
of
a
sleight
of
hand,
but
I
mean
open.
Tracings
marketing
initiative
would
be
to
make
sure
that
this
is
successful
too
I
mean
so
you
could
think
of
it.
That
way
too.
I
don't
know
that
helps
too
I
mean
you
want
to
make
it
native
thing.
That's
fine,
I!
Guess
it
I
just
wanted
to
express
that
we're
very
comfortable,
not
getting
that
access,
but
I,
don't
understand
the
CEO.