►
From YouTube: CNCF TOC Meeting 8-2-2022
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
A
A
A
C
A
D
Tag
updates,
yay
new
order,
so
are
we
doing
random
no.
A
We're
not
doing
random
order;
it
is
now
reverse
alphabetical,
because
previously
it's
been
alphabetical
for,
like
you
know
several
years
and
now
we're
going
to
move
it
back
to,
like
you
know,
reverse
alphabetical
but
looks
like
everyone's
got.
Their
slides,
updated
today.
So.
D
Sounds
good
tax
storage.
D
Okay,
did
folks
get
a
chance
to
look
at
the
first
issue.
That's
a
github
issue
in
cncftoc.
D
D
This
was
when
we
didn't
have
the
concept
of
work
groups
or
you
know,
tags,
etc.
So
this
has
been
there
for
a
long
time
and
I
think
it's
time
to
like
stop
doing
it
and
tell
people
to
move
to
tags
and
working
groups.
So
any
questions
here
on
the
background
itself
going
once
good
twice.
Okay.
So
now,
then
the
question
becomes
hey,
let's
clean
that
up,
what
do
we?
What
can
we
do
with
these
folks?
D
How
do
we
engage
these
folks
in
the
activities
of
tags
and
working
groups?
That
would
be
the
next
question.
Any
thoughts,
ideas
from
fellow
toc
members
or
the
community.
A
I
mean
I
think
this
is
long
overdue,
but
I
can
kick
off
discussion
with
that
passing
to
somebody
else.
Yeah.
D
So
I
did
sen,
I
did
go
through
the
list.
I
generated
a
list
of
email
addresses
from
that
contributors.md
and
I
sent
them
all.
You
know
a
heads-up
saying
hey.
This
is
going
to
go
away.
Please,
you
know,
go
look
at
engaging
yourself
in
work,
groups
and
tags.
D
So
one
idea
did
we
did
have
in
that
issue
was
instead
of
toc
contributors.
Can
we
have
tag
and
working
group
contributors
so
that
they?
We
could
also
display
profiles
of
those
folks
working
in
specific
tags
and
working
groups
on
our
website
instead
of
the
toc
contributors,
but
I
think
there
was
at
least
a
few
concerns
there.
Emily
did
you
want
to
talk
about
like
how
it
has
been
difficult
to
keep
a
list
of
active
contributors
in
attack.
B
Yep,
we
can
talk
a
little
bit
about
that,
so
tag.
Security
has
a
very
wide
community
of
individuals
that
have
expressed
interest
over
the
years
that
the
group
has
been
formed,
as
is
the
most
things
in
life
folks
come
in
for
a
season.
Sometimes
they
come
in
for
a
particular
reason,
and
sometimes
they
just
stick
around
for
the
long
haul.
Maintaining
that
list
we've
actually
within
tank
security,
not
found
it
particularly
useful
as
individuals
change
companies
that
needs
to
be
updated.
B
If
they're
no
longer
active
in
the
tag,
then
it
becomes
stagnant
and
that
information
becomes
out
of
date.
They
may
not
be
contacted
by
that
github
handle
or
email
or
even
company
information
any
longer,
so
it
just
becomes
a
maintainership
burden
to
keep
those
listings
up
to
date,
particularly
when
you
reach
over
50
individuals.
B
However,
there
was
concerns
within
tag
security
that
we
want
to
be
able
to
recognize
the
individual
members
that
are
actively
contributing
and
we've
we've
had
an
open
issue
with
the
cncf
about
doing
some
form
of
badging
to
show
work
in
the
group.
However,
attendance
and
just
recording
name
and
attendance
listing
is
a
good
way
of
being
able
to
from
a
public
record
being
able
to
appoint,
to
point
back
to
participation
either
in
a
working
group
in
a
tag
or
in
some
other
form
of
meeting,
not
just
through
the
commits
themselves
to
the
repo.
E
No,
I
think
I
I
mean
I
totally
agree
with
emily
and
and
that's
the
kind
of
participation
that
you
know.
We've
also
seen
in
the
observability
tag.
It's
it's
just
that
very
specific
to
topics
as
well
as
areas
of
projects
that
are
in
and
and
they're
also
end
users
joining
in,
which
is
which
is
great
to
have
discussions
about.
But
there
is,
there
are
just
a
handful
of
folks
who
actually
are
consistently
available
and
participate.
D
Right,
so
there
is
a
couple
of
twists
to
this
thing
too,
like
I'll,
ask
the
question
a
little
bit
later:
richie
katie
did
you
have
anything
to
talk
about
here?
Yeah
richie
go
ahead.
F
I
know
I
said
I
didn't
raise
my
hand,
I
I
agree
with
alolita
most
of
the
time
the
people
who
stick
around
long
term
tend
to
be
the
same
ones,
and
you
tend
to
see
them
again
over
the
years
again
and
again.
I
also
agree
that
a
lot
of
those
tend
to
be
in
this
call.
F
I
I
mean
open
telemetry
is
something
interesting
where
they
basically
count
contributions,
and
this
can
be
code.
This
can
be
prs.
This
can
be.
This
can
be
reviews
on
issues.
This
can
also
be
participation
in
calls
and
then
there's
an
automated
system,
or
I
hope
it's
automated
to
to
count
those
contributions
and-
and
if
you
are
above
a
certain
threshold,
you
are
a
member
of
standing
for
x
amount
of
time
yeah.
I
find
this
super
interesting
as
a
concept.
D
So
dev
stats
does
do
that.
For
us
there
is
one
there
is
a
page
for
no,
not
that.
Well,
you
can't
hear
you
research.
F
So,
for
example,
for
meetings
and
such
that's,
something
which
def
doesn't
doesn't
capture.
D
That
thing
some
stuff-
and
it
can't
do
things
that
are
not
there
in
github
for
sure.
E
E
It's
actually
typically,
there
is
a
group
community
group
as
a
community
sig
within
the
project
and
typically
you
know
all
the
participants,
for
example,
in
the
sig
meetings
or
any
of
the
additional
discussions
are
real.
You
typically
noted
on
the
you
know,
just
as
the
toc
noted
on
the
attendee
list
and
those
are
then
partly
manually
compiled
and
partly
obviously
synced
with
the
dev
stats
for
a
final
stats
update.
E
D
Yeah,
so
the
reason
why
this
is
important-
this
problem
is
important
is
a
couple
of
reasons.
Right,
one
is
when
you
have
to
run
an
election
for
something
or
the
other
right
like.
How
do
you
know
who
needs
what
right?
Yes,
so
in
kubernetes?
Also,
there
is
a
threshold
for
voting
for
steering,
for
example,
so
that
in
general
seems
to
be
like
a
good
pattern
to
follow
counting
contributions
across
multiple
stuff
there's,
something
else
that
I
remembered,
but
you
know
it'll
come
back
to
me.
G
I
I
joined
a
few
minutes
late.
I
had
a
meeting
run
over.
Are
we
talking
about
the
effort
around?
You
know
having
having
something
that's
queryable
or
data
driven
around
who's?
Who
and
what's
what
so,
that
landscape
graph
project?
I
don't
know
what
was
already
talked
about,
but
that
is
part
of
the
data
model,
we're
to
firming
up
the
interfaces
by
defining
them
in
graphql
and
the
implementation
of
that
core
schema
is
underway.
G
Now,
there's
a
pictorial
version
of
it
up
in
the
repo,
but
I
hope
this
week
to
have
the
initial
core
graphql
compositional
model,
and
all
of
that
we
have
us.
We
have
a
few
words
on
it
in
the
in
the
tag
observability
slide,
but
this
was
a
concern
we
had
at
the
tag
that
we
thought
we
might
be
able
to
solve
for
us,
as
well
as
the
communities
outside
of
our
tank
with
the
other
tags
and
the
other
working
pages.
D
Absolutely
so
the
other
problem
that
why
this
is
important
is
like:
how
do
we
get
more
contributors
to
come
to
our
project
or
sig
or
tag
or
working
group
right,
and
how
do
we
when
they
are
here?
How
do
we
keep
them
around?
Keep
them
interested
so
that
that
was
the
reason
like
okay,
if
we
tag
them
through
some
mechanism
and
we
show
up
on
the
website.
Maybe
that
gives
them
an
incentive
to
participate.
I
don't
know-
or
at
least
you
know
gives
them
some
visibility.
E
I
think
that's
definitely
a
good
incentive,
because
I
do
think
that
you
know
it
supports
folks
who
are
in
different
companies
to
actually
get
more
time
to
spend
on
the
projects
as
well
as
the
you
know,
just
supporting
different
toc
and
and
cncf
activities,
and-
and
I
think
that
that's
a
good
good
cycle
to
have
there
are
also
you
know.
Other
ways
like
open
telemetry,
you
know,
has
done
blog
posts
to
call
out.
You
know
special
projects
and
contributors
over
time
from
a
project
level.
D
Right
we
do,
we
do
have
some
awards
and
stuff
during
kubecon
in
a
for
for
recognizing
people
for
sure,
but
yeah,
that's
only
like
the
top
cream.
As
so
to
say,
let
me
look
at
the
chat
ricardo.
Did
you
have
any
thing
that
you
wanted
to
add
here.
H
Yeah,
the
one
thing
is
that
I
mean
they're
talking
about
it
in
the
chat,
it's
maybe
having
different
levels
right,
but
that
that's
a
longer
discussion,
I
think,
like
sort
of
batches
and
because
you
know
somebody
mentioned
that
some
people
show
up
like
in
one
meeting
and
they
never
show
up
again.
H
But
at
least
we
have
to
acknowledge
some
of
those
people
too,
but
maybe
at
a
different
level,
and
then
there's
people
who
show
up
every
day
and
that
may
constitute
contributors
or
people
who
do
contributions
on
github
all
the
time
that
also
make
constituted
as
contributors
but
yeah.
In
essence,
I
think
it's
just
you
know
maybe
having
some
sort
of
level,
but
I
think
it's
a
longer
topic.
A
It
sounds
like
everybody
is
interested
in
this
and
wants
to
be
able
to
figure
out
the
details
probably
need
to
be
able
to
have
another
meeting
for
this.
Do
we
want
to
be
able
to
talk
about
like
the
graduation
requirement,
changes.
D
Yeah,
so
what
I
would
say
is,
please
add
your
thoughts
and
ideas
into
into
that
github
issue,
and
we
can,
you
know
we
can
collate
later
and
figure
out
like.
Are
there
specific
things
that
we
could
do
specific
tooling
that
we
can
adopt
across
cncf,
and
things
like
that?
Thank
you.
So
next
one
is
oh,
who
can't
talk
about
this?
I
bob
is.
He
are
you
here?
No
bob
is
not
here.
Josh
did
you
have?
Did
you
want
to
introduce
the
top
second
topic?
D
I
Yes,
so
the
basic
idea
here
is
and
honestly
part
of
this
came
because
we
were
discussing
some
projects
like
at
cd,
for
example,
that
we
have
projects
that
get
to
the
graduated
stage
and
although
they
may
have
a
diverse
set
of
contributors
right
now,
their
governance
rules
don't
act.
A
different
set
of
maintainers.
I
Now
the
governance
rules
don't
actually
include
any
sort
of
succession
planning
for
maintainers
and
and
not
even
any
kind
of
a
definite
mechanism
for
how
maintainers
would
get
replaced
over
time
and-
and
we
haven't
specifically
required
that.
So
the
idea
was
to
add
this
to
the
section
that
that
already,
you
know
sort
of
requires
government's
documentation
and
stuff
to
clarify
that
that
when
we
say
governance
documentation,
that
is
something
that's
required
so
that
the
projects
are
thinking
about
it
when
they're
applying
for
graduation.
I
And
so
we
don't
get
in
the
situation
where
you
know
the
the
og
maintainer
leaves,
and
suddenly
we
have
a
problem
with
the
project.
D
Right
yeah
for
sure
thank
you
for
introducing
that.
So
there
has
been.
This
is
a
pr
that
is
in
the
cncftc
repository,
and
you
know
there
was
some
churn
and
comments
from
different
people
on
that
pr
and
it's
ready
to
merge.
So
if
you,
if
you
are
all
okay
with
this,
please
take
a
look
at
it
and
give
us
a
thumbs
up
or
a
thumbs
down,
and
we
can
continue
to
talk
about
it
or
you
know,
merge
it
in
a
couple
of
days.
D
So
any
thoughts
here
other
than
what
what
josh
just
talked
about.
G
Go
for
it
I'll,
try
to
be
brief,
bright
and
gone
I'll
review
the
pr,
but
there's
also
the
concern
of
you-
know
a
singular
vendor
or
company
having
all
of
the
maintainer
ownership
rights
to
a
project
and
over
time
through
incubation,
you
know,
as
vendors
hire
maintainers
there's
a
natural
trend
to
consolidate.
G
You
know
technical
direction
and
ownership.
Potentially
it's
another
one
of
the
things
that
that
we
want
to
look
at
in
terms
of
being
able
to
identify
where
this
is
the
case
and
before
it
becomes
a
serious
issue.
But
but
is
that
part
of
the
thinking
around
around
this
pr?
Is
this
more
focused
specifically
on
on
committer
and
maintainer
life
cycle?
Right
now?
Do
we
get
into
you
know.
D
D
There
are
other
projects
also
that
have
started
doing
cleanups
kubernetes
did
as
well
last
year
and
you
know,
has
codified
some
of
those
things
these
things
on
like
okay,
when
when
do
you
get
off
from
being
a
reviewer
or
an
approver
for
something,
if
you're
not
there
for
a
year,
you
know
you're
gone
right
literally
so
so
this
is
just
to
off-board
people
so
that
we
know
we
can
take
stock
of
who's
around
and
who's
not
around,
so
that
when,
like
we
have
to
raise
flags
right
like
the
problem
with
hdd
was
like,
there
was
a
lot
of
people
on
the
maintainers
list,
but
they
were
not
active.
D
They
were
not
doing
any
work.
So
when
the
two
people
who
were
like
keeping
up
the
keeping
the
lights
on
left,
we
didn't
know
about
it,
like
literally
so
that
we
could
jump
in.
We
could
catch
problems
earlier,
but
then
just
writing
it
down
is
not
good
enough.
We
need
to
periodically
clean
them
up
too.
D
So
that's
another
problem
that
we
need
to
get
to
once
we
get
this
in,
but
at
least
there
should
be
a
mechanism
to
get
people
off
so
that
we
can
add
new
people
and
that
that
that's
the
kind
of
going
on
here
so
just
by
itself,
it's
not
enough.
We
need
to
think
about
the
other
things
as
a
follow-up
too.
D
D
J
Yes,
yes,
yes,
hey!
This
is
a
shinfern
tech
storage,
so
from
textile
decide,
cube
fs
is
an
incubating
project.
Now
and
obbs
is
also
applying
for
incubation.
We
send
out
an
email
in
the
tlc
mailing
list.
We
have
some
concerns
regarding
the
status
because
obvs
has
a
few
storage
engines
each
with
a
different
level
of
maturity.
J
We're
wondering
how
we're
going
to
evaluate
that
during
the
dd
process.
We
got
a
couple
of
responses.
I
believe
the
suggestion
is
that
that
should
not
be
the
reason
that
prevent
it
from
applying
for
innovation.
So
I
think
right
now
we
are
waiting
for
toc
sponsor.
D
I
think
richie
ended
up
talking
to
some
of
the
folks
involved
in
the
effort.
Richie
did
you
want
to
speak
to
the
updates
here
on
open
abs?
What
we
are
thinking
of.
F
Sure
I
mean
the
current
status
is
I
didn't
like
I
tried
to
speak
to
them.
F
I
I
managed
to
half
reach
some
people
and
my
the
update,
which
I
got
was
that
there's
like
or
let
me
start
at
the
beginning
for
for
the
benefit
of
everyone
who
hasn't
read
this
on
on
the
toc
channel
in
on
slack.
F
So
I
didn't
see
a
lot
of
recent
movement
on
open
ebs
and
it
seemed
a
little
bit
stale
on
the
grapevine.
I
heard
that
there
was
a
company
acquisition
and
that
led
to
the
majority
or
all
of
the
contributors
to
basically
be
pulled
away
or
joining
other
companies,
but
in
short,
brain
drain
from
the
project
as
such.
F
Try
to
verify
this
by
reaching
out
to
the
project
that
didn't
go
very
far,
then
through
back
channels,
also
tried
to
reach
people
more
and
got
partial
replies,
which
are
basically
that
people
are
trying
to
onboard
new
people
onto
onto
the
project
but
haven't
seen
any
any
movement
on
those
since
then.
So
it's
been,
I
think
a
month,
maybe
one
and
a
half
months
since
then
yeah,
that's
the
current
status.
It
doesn't
look
great
at
the
moment.
D
Yeah
so
ushing,
essentially
at
this
point
we
have
to
hit
the
pause
button
on
on
this
right
now
and
we'll
take
a
checkpoint,
maybe
in
a
in
a
couple
of
months
to
see
if
they
are
able
to
get
back
on
their
feet
and
worst
case
scenario.
We
have.
We
have
the
archiving
process.
You
know
that
we
can
apply
to
this.
D
F
F
Do
companies
want
to
step
up
and
sponsor
maintainers,
like
all
those
things
would,
I
think,
come
before
we
go
into
the
archiving
pro
process,
but,
as
you
can
tell
from
us,
naturally
talking
about
the
archiving
progress
process,
it
really
doesn't
look
great
at
the
moment
right.
J
Do
you
talk
to
nick
connie
that
he
is
the
one
who
has
been
communicating
with
us.
D
The
discussion
there
would
you
go
back
to
where
you
stopped?
Yes,
yes,.
J
Okay
and
curve
street
system
it's
applied
for
sandbox
they
presented
at
text
30
meetings.
We
recommended
it
to
tlc
for
a
sandbox.
Is
it
waiting
for
a
vote
now,
I'm
not
sure
what
the
status
for
a
curve.
A
Yeah
they
haven't
reapplied,
that's
that's
what
I'm
seeing
from
sandbox.cncfio,
I'm
not
seeing
them
on
the
list,
so
they
should
reapply.
That
would
be
the
next
step.
J
Okay,
maybe
maybe
we
can
let
them
know,
maybe
they
don't
know
about
this.
Yes,.
J
All
right,
thank
you,
and
we
also
have
a
cloney
pg.
They
they
are
applying
for
sandbox
they
presented
at
our
meetings.
So
it's
a
pretty
interesting
project.
We
would
like
to
bring
them
back
for
some
further
discussions
to
understand
more
about
their
operator
and
how
that
interacts,
with
storage
and
also
for
the
whitepapers.
The
cloud
native
disaster
recovered
by
paper
is
now
published
in
our
repo
and
this
other
white
paper
on
performance
and
benchmarking
still
needs
some
final
work
to
wrap
up.
J
J
That
has
done
a
project
update,
so
we
will
have
zhuk
and
longhorn
coming
next.
That's
all.
D
Sounds
good
so
for
the
paper
that
you
already
published
in
the
tag
repository
is
there
something
that
we
need
to
do
to
get
it
out
so
to
say
some
publicity
or
something
like
that?
Oh.
J
This,
I
don't
know,
but
we
had
this
white
paper
on
the
storage
landscape
before
I'm
not
sure
what
is
normally
the
process
for
this.
D
C
Yes,
so
couple
of
three
small
updates
and
one
big
update
for
everyone
who
doesn't
know
me,
I'm
one
of
the
attack
security
tech
leads
joining
on
behalf
of
everybody
else,
so
the
first
update
is:
we've
been
trying
to
make
our
meetings
all
time.
Zone
friendly
and
one
of
the
problems
we
had
was.
We
didn't
have
a
liaison
who
was
in
a
different
time
zone
which
were
non-us
so
now
that
andrew
is
our
chair.
C
C
Second
update
is
we
started
creating
a
draft
on
how
to
apply
the
best
practices
written
down
in
the
supply
chain.
Security
white
paper
have
been
discussing
with
couple
of
projects.
If
any
one
of
you
are
interested
to
see
how
that
can
help
your
project.
C
Please
drop
a
message
in
the
issue
on
the
slides
last
small
update
is
we
have
had
quite
a
bit
of
presentations
lately
about
four
in
the
last
I
think
couple
of
months
or
so
so
we
do
this
occasionally
if
on
in
our
regular
meetings,
if
you
have
a
topic,
we
have
a
issue
template
that
you
can
use
to
request
one
for
yourself.
C
Next
slide,
amy
all
right.
So
this
is
a
big
update,
mainly
because
this
was
a
long
driven
project
for
quite
a
few
months.
C
The
gist
of
it
is
tax
security,
has
a
process
to
review
and
assess
projects
that
cncf
projects
and
help
them
make
it
more
secure.
But
there
was
no
process
to
assess
or
review
sub
projects
of
a
graduated
project
like
kubernetes
is
a
graduated
project,
but
it's
a
project
like
cluster
api.
We
weren't
sure
who
would
actually
do
it
so
eventually
we
ended
up
combining
our
powers,
together
with
cncf
tax
security,
kubernetes
security
and
sick
cluster
lifecycle
that
owns
the
sub
project,
and
we
came
together
kind
of
to
start
this
pilot.
C
So
last,
I
think,
couple
of
weeks
back,
we
finally
merged
the
assessment,
which
was
basically
a
self-assessment
driven
by
all
of
the
three
groups.
We
have
about
22
findings
from
using
the
stride
model,
15
tracking
issues,
to
make
sure
that
those
findings
are
addressed
and
as
part
of
this,
we
also
did
our
first
cncf
fuzzing
engagement
for
a
sub
project
in
kubernetes
for,
and
the
report
of
that
is
linked
in
the
slide.
D
Sounds
good
any
questions
for
pushkar.
D
Thanks
thanks
a
lot
thanks
for
the
update
tagline
time,
ricardo.
H
Yeah
every
everyone
we
haven't
had
a
lot
of
meetings
in
the
past
month,
but
we
have
a
few
updates
so
in
the
containers
and
runtime
space,
there's
a
project
called
unicraft
that
addresses
unikernel
development
and
tooling,
so
we
reached
out
to
them,
and
so
they
present
in
our
meeting,
we
did
have
a
presentation
from
schedule
for
this
project
called
bowman
b
that
provides
a
docker,
live
or
docker-like
experience
for
ebps,
and
that
needs
to
be
rescheduled
that
project
applied
for
sandbox.
H
But
I
think
the
feedback
was
to
reapply
later
or
to
look
for
other.
I
think
it
was
to
the
ebpf
foundation
or
the
pvpf
working
area
within
the
linux
foundation,
so
that
was
part
of
the
feedback,
but
we
still
want
to
have
them
presented
our
meeting
if
they
would
like
to
in
terms
of
workloads.
H
We
had
a
meeting
schedule
also
for
ray
and
q
braid,
and
this
project
was
applying
also
for
sandbox.
It
addresses
distributed
computing
and
I
think
there
was
some
feedback
related
to
whether
you
know
you
want
to
include
just
cube
rate
or
just
ray
or
what
was
the
I
mean
for
the
project
to
come
back
and
and
provide
more
clarity
in
that
area,
but
the
presentation
also
got
rescheduled
and
were
we're
looking
to
reschedule
this
armada
is
another
project
that
addresses
batch
workloads.
H
H
It
basically
allows
kubernetes,
reboots
or
safe
reboots,
so
we
reached
out
to
them
and
also
expect
them
to
present.
H
In
terms
of
tag
runtime
activities,
we
continue
to
reach
out
to
existing
cncf
projects.
So
to
so,
we
get
more
involved
involvement
from
them
more
presentations
and
more
updates
in
the
batch
system.
Initiative
working
group
is
actually
working
on
on
a
research
or
or
more
like
a
survey.
H
I
guess
is
it
to
to
identify
some
pain
points
in
a
space
and
in
terms
of
running
this
high
performance
in
large
type
of
workloads
and
finally,
the
kubernetes
iot
working
group
completed
its
migration
to
the
cncf
in
under
the
umbrella
of
the
attack
one
time,
that's
all
the
updates
that
I
have
and
happy
to
take
any
questions.
If
you
have
any.
D
Thanks
ricardo,
so
I
I'll
give
you
a
couple
of
things
that
we
can
probably
take
back
to
the
projects
when
they
talk
to
you
again.
So
the
bumblebee
present
when
we
were
toc
was
looking
at
the
bumble
bee
one.
D
I
think
what
we
were
missing
was:
how
does
it
help
with
applications
that
are
deployed
on
kubernetes,
for
example,
and
I
believe
they
also
talk
to
tag
observability
also
around
you
know,
around
the
same,
how
can
you
use
some
bumblebee
to
develop
something
that
will
help
you
with
your
application
or
workloads
right?
I
think
that
portion
was
missing
from
the
submission
and
it
was
missing
from
the
we
couldn't.
It
didn't
come
up
clearly
when
we
were
looking
through
the
website
and
looking
through
the
documentation
and
stuff
like
that.
D
So
when
you
talk
to
them,
ask
them
also
about
like
bumblebee
as
it
is
presented
using
the
quick
start
and
all
is
more
like
okay,
there's
a
template,
you
just
write
some
code,
then
you
can
deploy
it
as
a
container
in
individuals
or
whatever
right.
So
how
does
it
relate
to
you
know
the
collaborative
stuff
other
than
just
being
a
container
is
basically
what
we
need
to
ask
them,
and
the
ray
and
cube
ray
was
around
hey
ray.
D
Has
its
own
community
separate
and
cube
ray
wanted
to
be
was
actually
in
the
submission,
only
the
cube
day
portion
and
just
for
it
to
be
an
operator.
We
still
have
to
kind
of
like
write
up
a
policy
on
like
do
we
allow
projects
that
are
only
operators
and
they
don't
have
anything
else
right.
So
some
of
the
storage
ones,
for
example-
hey
there
is
an
operator,
but
operator
is
not
the
only
thing
in
the
project.
There
is
several
other
things
around
it
yeah,
so
we
need
to
kind
of
like.
D
D
Thank
you
any
other
questions.
Nikita
you
had
your
hand
up.
E
Yeah
so
hi,
I'm
nikita
regarded.
This
was
me
who
reached
out
to
you
this
morning
that
I
want
to.
E
On
tagline
time,
so
you
mentioned
that
the
three,
if
I
recall
correctly
so
the
three
working
groups
and
tag
runtimes,
is
that
another
working
group
other
than
the
psi
and
the
iot
working
groups-
and
my
second
question
was
about.
Are
there
any
big
ticket
items
planned
or
just
like
what?
What
initiatives
are
planned
for
the
iot
working
with
going
forward.
H
Yeah,
so
we
have
three
chairs
in
that
working
group,
so
we'll
probably
reach
out.
We
can
reach
out
to
them
to
to
find
out
more
details
about
plants
if
you
want
to
get
involved
and
want
to
tackle
some
of
the
issues
that
they
have
outstanding.
H
The
other
working
group
that
we
have
in
the
tag
is
the
container
orchestrated
device
working
group
so
they're
working
on
how
to
define
standards
for
devices
in
containers
or
device
like
mappings
and
yeah,
and
how
do
you
you
talk
from
a
container
to
like
a
network
device
or
some
sort
of
cpu
or
or
other
types
of
hardware,
so
yeah
happy
to
provide
any
info
just
reach
out,
and
I
can
connect
it
to
the
working
groups
and
and
happy
also
to
have
you
contribute
to
the
tag.
J
Oh
yeah,
okay,
so
so
here
what
you
mean
by
migration
to
of
the
iot
work
group
to
csf
doesn't
mean
that
it's
not
you
know,
part
of
the
attack
runtime
exactly.
H
Yes,
yeah,
that's
correct
yeah,
so
so
the
so
the
iot
working
group
was
under
kubernetes,
the
kubernetes
community
and
basically
they
wanted
to
expand
their
scope
to
not
just
kubernetes
but
other
things
that,
like
are
edge,
related
and
iot
related.
H
H
D
Okay
next
slide:
please
observability
who's
around
today,
hi.
G
And
we've
just
got
one
slide,
so
I'll
try
to
be
again
brief.
So
over
the
last
really
two
months
there
has
been
a
number
of
meetings.
I
want
to
say
seven,
six
or
seven
every
few
weeks
about
adding
profiling
as
a
new
signal
type
to
open
telemetry
to
join
logs,
metrics
and
traces.
G
I
put
some
links
for
those
interested
there's,
a
slack
channel
and
a
number
of
documents
that
are,
I
wouldn't
say,
primordial,
but
you
know,
are
definitely
still
in
work
in
progress,
although
consensus
is
beginning
to
to
be
consolidated
and
coalesce
the
sort
of
next
steps
for
that
effort
after
basically,
a
good,
a
good
amount
of
discussion
from
a
broad
range
of
people
sort
of
inside
the
cncf
bubble
and
inside
the
hotel
bubble
is,
is
to
to
generate
a
sort
of
a
vision
document,
an
otep
kind
of
like
a
kep,
an
open,
telemetry
enhancement
proposal
that
that
doesn't
get
too
prescriptive
about
design
or
implementation,
but
just
kind
of
gives
everyone
something
that
we
all
agree
on.
G
You
know
around
main
goals
and
vision
and
like
the
top
level
scenarios,
and
then
we
want
to
garner
feedback,
not
just
from
you
know
the
communities
that
are
already
already
there
and
represented,
but
but
from
some
of
the
other
folks.
That
probably
don't
know
the
effort
is
happening
both
in
sort
of
the
edge
hardware
space
where
profiling,
continuous
profiling
can
be
an
important
signal.
We've
reached
out
to
tag
security,
our
s-tag,
I'm
not
sure
the
right
way
to
say
now.
G
As
you
know,
continuous
profiling,
that's
pervasive
and
and
systemic
can
form
a
really
interesting,
useful
signal
for
anomaly
detection
and
for
intrusion,
detection
and
building
building
models.
All
manner
of
things
of
what
normal
looks
like
to
identify
when
things
are
not
normal
or
or
or
many
other
use
cases
outside
of
just
application
operator
type
scenarios
where
somebody
wants
to
see
how
their
stuff
is
doing.
But
this
affects
cluster
operators,
network
operators,
you
know
all
manner
of
personas,
and
so
we
want
to
reach
out
to
those.
G
Next
we
we've
started.
We've
talked
about
it
in
months
past,
but
we've
actually
started
an
observability
speaker
series.
Our
first
speaker
will
be
on
august
6
on
august
16th
and
it's
liz
fong
jones
from
honeycomb
that
just
released
she's
one
of
the
authors,
they're
one
of
the
authors
of
a
new
observability
book
from
o'reilly-
that's
been
well
received
in
the
domain,
the
graph
project
that
we've
kind
of
mentioned
in
passing
in
meetings
past,
it
has
been
gaining
steam.
G
G
You
know
a
super
graph
of
a
bunch
of
subgraphs,
so
that
domain
experts,
for
example,
folks
from
the
security
tag
or
folks
from
app
deployment.
If
we,
if
we
go
to
measuring
deployments
or
the
toc
itself
on
how
we're
modeling,
you
know
working
groups
and
and
various
tags
and
and
roles
that
that
humans
have
in
projects
and
groups
within
the
tlc
within
the
cncf,
you
know,
all
of
these
things
are
are
are
different.
G
Subgraphs,
where
we
we've
wanted
to
spend
some
time,
putting
together
a
compositional
mechanism
so
that
that
can
horizontally
scale.
So
we
don't
have
a
monolithic
schema
and
then
we
can
test
independently
and
let
domain
experts
really
inform
the
designs
and
the
models
that
we
eventually
compose
into
a
cohesive,
comprehensive
graph.
G
So
there's
that
and
then
lastly,
our
kubecon
maintainer
track
for
kucon,
north
america
and
detroit
has
been
formally
accepted,
and
so
in
the
coming
weeks
to
a
month,
a
lolita
and
I
and
some
tag
members
whoever's
interested,
really
will
start
in
the
open,
constructing
sort
of
what
we'll
talk
about
and
how.
How
we'll
do
that.
E
Yeah
and
and
just
to
that
matt.
Thank
you
just
wanted
to
say
that
we'd
like
to
see
more,
you
know
buff
sessions,
perhaps
from
the
tags,
especially
for
observability,
given
it's
such
a
large
community
with
you
know
a
lot
of
different
projects
and
and
participants
showing
up
at
kubecon
so
again
we'll
follow
up
with
amy
and
probably
the
cncf
team,
to
figure
out.
You
know
how
we
can
actually
do
that
in
a
more
organized
way.
D
D
Everybody
show
up
here
take
a
picture
of
the
place
where
you
have
to
meet
or
something
been
there
done
that
for
sure,
so,
yeah
richie
liz,
fong
jones,
how
like
who's
the
audience
and
how
are
you
inviting
people
from
the
community
for
this.
E
So
the
typically
dance,
what
we
do
is
we'll
kind
of
just
post
an
you
know,
announcement
on
the
different
observability
groups,
such
as
the
project
groups
and
on
slack,
and
that
typically
does
you
know,
pull
in
a
pretty
good
audience,
as
well
as
obviously
social
media
and
word
of
mouth
from
the
speakers
themselves,
and
that's
what
we've
typically
done.
E
That's
very
good
point
I
mean
again,
I
think
that
we
don't
leverage
the
cncf
blog
as
much
as
we
could,
but
I
think
that's
also
a
very
great
good
channel
for
being
able
to
get
more
folks
involved.
Okay,.
D
Yeah
thanks
a
little
bit
next
one
please.
K
Tag
network-
hey
guys,
hey
it's
lee
here!
Well,
the
service
mesh
working
group.
It's
the
most
active
working
group
that
the
tag
has
the
latest
set
of
work
or
the
newest
set
of
work
has
been
a
continuation
of
service
mesh
patterns
which
have
been
a
call
for
participation
in
defining
a
collection
of
well
deployment
models.
K
Best
practices
like
different
patterns
by
the
way
in
which
you
know
people
are
using
various
features
of
service
meshes
and
and
those
are
being
codified,
there's
a
collection
of
them
that
are
starting
to
emerge
in
mesherie's
catalog,
which
is
linked
there.
K
So
whether
you're
interested
in
helping
create
new
patterns
or
define
what
those
look
like.
What's
the
best
way
to
configure
the
sensitivity
level
of
your
circuit
breaker
or
how
many
retries
should
you
have
between
two
services
or
what,
like
those
are
kind
of
examples
of
things
that
these
patterns
try
to
address
and
the
catalog
that's
there
is
nascent,
but
the
hope
is
that
those
will
be
shared
with
community.
That
was
part
of
the
initial
effort
of
defining
what
those
patterns
are
and
then
beginning
to
codify
their
orchestration.
K
So
there's
a
call
for
participation.
There
last
time
we
met,
there
hasn't
been
progress
on
this,
but
we
said
like
hey
that
there's
there's
a
need
for
a
sub
survey,
one
that
gets
really
specific
about
deployment
patterns
of
surface
meshes,
how
they're
being
used
and
where
and
there's
kind
of,
there's
a
litany
of
questions
that
different
contributors
within
the
tag
have
and
and
that
just
aren't
quite
covered
with
some
of
the
other
surveys.
K
If
that
topic
is
of
interest
I'll
skip
over
to
the
right
hand,
side
and
say,
I
think
I
believe
that
the
the
upcoming
presentation
that
we
have
would
be
from
network
service
mesh
and
at
the
nsm
project,
they'll
present
on
another
generic
term
application
service
mesh,
which
is
nsm
acting
as
a
mesh
for
other
meshes
or
a
mesh
to
help
facilitate
interconnectivity
between
kubernetes
deployments
operating
at
a
lower
network
level
and
then
facilitating
deployments
of
application
level
service
measures.
K
K
There's
a
the
recording
and
the
slide
deck
is
is
in
the
meeting
minutes
and
the
most
recent
adoption
into
tag
network
was
the
iraqi
mesh
which,
if
you
recall,
has
a
focus
on
on
filtering
specific
network
protocols
or
specific
application
level
protocols
that
that
used
that
are
used.
You
know
in
communication
between
microservices,
so.
K
They're
I'll
say
it
like
this
they're
eager
to
be
formal.
You
know
to
be
through
due
diligence
or
or
their
they'd
like
to
be
updated
on
status
or
you
know
which,
which
is
a
great
thing
so
yeah
they.
They
had
a
great
presentation,
just
very
well
done
presentation
that
they
had
given
tons
of
yeah.
Just
I
mean
you
know
just
tons
of
statistics
that
were
accounted
for
various
considerations
around
roadmap
and
integrations
with
related
projects
or
projects
that
are
within
the
cncf.
D
Thanks
lee,
yes,
next
fight,
please
tech,
contributor,
sir,
is
that
you
josh
today.
I
Yes,
it
is
so
real
quickly
the
design
for
contribute
that
scenes
after
I
o
is
going
to
be
changing
the
linux
foundation.
Design
folks
are
making
consistent
with
the
rest
of
the
cncf
sites
and,
honestly
just
much
better
looking
in
general,
so
we're
looking
forward
to
that.
I
I
were:
we've
drafted
an
email
template
to
go
to
projects
after
they
have
their
annual
review,
which
is
often
a
time
when
they
need
to
be
thinking
about
working
on
one
of
the
things
with
the
project
that
tag
contributor
strategy
can
help
them
with
the
we've
already
gone
over
the
the
lead,
the
maintainer
committee
life
cycle
issue
there.
The
one
thing
here
is
the
mentoring
working
group
vote
has
been
open
for
like
a
month
and
I
think
we're
still
missing
one
vote
to
pass
it.
I
The
mentoring
people
are
doing
all
kinds
of
things
and
they're
really
eager
to
actually
be
official,
officially
a
working
group.
So
if
we
could,
please
have
that
additional
vote
from
from
whatever
toc
member
needs
to
give
it.
It
would
be
nice,
among
other
things,
maybe
doing
a
mentoring
survey
soon.
I
they
have
a
bunch
of
folks
in
new
zealand
and
so
they're
going
to
be
going
to
new
zealand
career
fair,
so
they'd
like
to
be
officially
a
working
group
of
the
cncf.
If
that
can
get
voted
in,
please.
D
Yeah
thanks
a
lot
for
that
call
out
josh
any
of
the
doc
members
here.
If
you
haven't
voted,
please
go
vote
and
let's
unblock
this
working
group.
Please
thanks!
Josh
next
slide,
please
yeah!
We
we
we've
reached
the
a
series
who's
on
for
today
for
app
delivery.
L
L
I
will
give
a
quick
update
on
the
tag,
so
first
of
all,
captain
has
been
approved
for
incubation
and,
and
another
project
has
been
applied
for
sandbox,
but
was
recommended
to
propose
to
the
ted
meetings.
One
of
them
is
xsi
works
from
alibaba.
I
also
see
the
cognitive
pg
has
been
proposed
to
the
the
stack
storage.
L
Another
thing
is
that
kubecon
north
america
is
coming.
We
submit
a
test
section
for
one
of
our
ten
lead.
George
also
submitted
a
session
on
kubernetes
api
resource
model
as
a
universal
management
api.
L
For
the
past,
a
couple
of
tech
meetings
like
we
think
on
the
multi-tenancy
white
paper.
It's
almost
done.
We,
we
will
publish
it
probably
soon.
We
also
sing
on
the
operator,
while
people
are
trying
to
draft
some
ideas
and
get
it
more
ready,
and
we
also
discussed,
like
writing
an
article
about
cooperative
delivery
and
how
it
fits
into
existing
model
and
and
like
involves
multiple
projects
like
backstage
those
and
and
cross
plane.
Those
are
cncf
projects
yeah.
That's
our
update.
Thanks.
D
Once
twice
yeah
thanks
a
lot
next
slide,
please,
okay,.
A
A
Coming
back
to
that,
one
shirt
manager
actually
yeah
all
of
the
things
that
are
currently
out
there
with
sponsors
like
no
one
is
here
today,
so
we
will
no
wait.
Spiffy
spire,
but
emily
has
already
gone
as
well.
So
I
guess
people
leave
that
here.
D
Okay,
I
think
that's
that's
a
good
way
to
end
today,
right
anything
else.
Amy.
G
A
very
brief
one:
what's
the
best
way
for
tag
code
chairs
to
interface
with
the
toc
around
sandbox
stuff,
just
in
terms
of
communication,
I
kind
of
this
topic
for
a
future
future
dams,
I'm
sure,
but
but
as
an
example
like
we
just
saw,
fonio
was
added
in
a
quick
look
and
he's
like.
Oh
that's,
gps
sure
that
was
already
covered
and
talked
about,
but
like
yeah
would
have
been.
D
Possible
the
simplest
discussion,
well
the
simplest
way
to
use
the
slack
threads
in
hashtoc
or
start
a
email
thread
in
the
toc
mailing
list.
Those
two
should
be
fine,
let's,
let's
just
use
what
we
already
have
and
you
know
like
keep
it
light
and
not
make
it
into
a
thing:
okay,
okay,
thanks
a
lot.
Everyone.