►
From YouTube: CNCF Telecom User Group Meeting - 2020-03-02
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
We
are
still
planning
to
hold
the
conference,
and
so
under
the
upcoming
events.
There's
a
link
to
this
novel
coronavirus,
update
we're
investing
a
ton
of
resources
to
ensure
that
we're
following
best
practices
as
to
keeping
all
the
10
DS
and
staff
safe
and
ensure
their
well-being.
So
it
is
still
possible
that
this
crisis
is
going
to
and
the
Netherlands
health
authorities
mike
ban
conferences.
It's
a
little
hard
to
predict.
What's
going
to
happen
that
that
has
happened
to
the
france,
it
hasn't
happened
in
the
netherlands.
A
A
A
Phrasing
is
going
to
be
certified
kubernetes,
and
my
belief
is
that
the
test
suite
associated
with
certified
kubernetes
hits
something
like
two
thirds
of
these
requirements
that
are
on
here
and
and
we
could
go
through,
and
maybe
we
should
even
just
recycle
and
try
and
lay
that
out,
but
I'm
particularly
curious
on
the
question
of
what
about
the
requirements
here
that
aren't
covered
by
certified
kubernetes
III
understand
that
right
now
these
are
being
implemented
as
a
spec.
First
and
that's
happening,
live
on
github,
I
sort
of
asked.
A
The
question
is
there
and
for
a
test
suite
associated
with
it.
Who
do
you
see
writing
that
and
and
how?
How
do
you
see
coming
about?
I
am
familiar
with
the
timeline
document,
but
I'd
love
to
see
a
little
more
context
on
that
and
then
related
to
that
and
sort
of
the
question
that
I'm
getting
at
is
that
we're
trying
to
decide
with
the
CNF
conformance?
Does
it
make
sense
for
us
to
also
begin
writing
some
tests
on
the
platform
side,
or
should
we
keep
it
to
essentially
the
CNF
side?
Absolutely
I'm.
C
A
Mean
I
would
say
right
now
is
that
there
were
some
people
who
were
planning
to
connect
via
Milan.
Please
don't
do
that
honest
in
the
Lombardy
region
of
Italy,
which
is
requiring
people
not
to
have
travelled
through
for
the
the
previous
14
days.
So
you're
probably
aware
that
I
mean
US.
Airlines
in
particular
have
been
canceling
a
number
of
flights
to
Asia
Korea,
Japan
China.
You
know
northern
Italy,
but
as
of
now,
there's
not
been
any
impact
on
flights
to
Amsterdam,
so
I
think
all
airlines
are
or
equally
good
that
will
get
you
their
own.
A
D
Sure
ten
Thanks,
so
I
can
share
my
screen
a
little
bit
here.
So
this
is
just
in
the
nose
to
start
so
on
the
scenic
informants
initiative,
there's
just
three
main
areas:
the
highest
level
for
what
are
we
covering
and
that
kind
of
goes
into
it
and
was
talking
about
with
platform
versus
application
level
testing,
and
if
we
break
that
down
we're
going
from
a
high
level
set
that
could
potentially
go
into
slides
and
understanding
where
it
applies
the
categories
and
then
it
goes
down
further
in
depth
from
the
documentation
towards
the
tests
themselves.
D
D
So
here's
the
readme
just
to
start
off
of
the
github
repo,
and
this
ties
in
with
the
categories
which
we've
been
talking
about
for
a
while,
and
these
go
into
cloud
native
principles
that
we
would
look
for
in
CNF
or
cloud
native
network
functions,
compatibility,
statelessness
security
and
what
do
those
mean?
And
then
these
can
go
further.
D
You
can
look
at
this
goes
into
the
actual
categories
and
what
type
of
things
we're
talking
about,
so
compatibility
of
C&I
plugins,
how
it
uses
the
kubernetes
api
and
there's
different
tools
for
looking
at
this
like
api
snuke,
allows
us
to
look
at
an
app
occations
usage
of
the
kubernetes
api
from
alpha
through
gan
points,
and
then
we
break
this
down
on
each
of
these
categories.
So
what
are
we
talking
about
security
type
test
with
privileged
mode
and
access
to
different
things?
D
So
this
is
to
be
able
to
have
an
idea
of
what
we're
looking
for.
Some
of
these
may
overlap.
Either
the
tools
usage
or
the
test
could
overlap
in
two
different
categories,
with
this
at
least
gives
an
idea
of
the
overall
structure
and
then
the
other
part,
if
I
can
go
back
here
to
readme
implementation
over
B
is
the
trend
to
provide
some
of
the
questions,
our
answers
to
some
of
the
questions
that
we've
been
having
so
we're
leveraging
upstream
tools,
so
mentioning
some
of
that
you
can
get
more
of
these.
D
If
you
look
on
some
documentation
but
like
OPA
gatekeeper,
helm,
the
linting
tool,
prom
tool,
these
different
things
that
we're
using
upstream
for
building
the
test
and
and
then
what
are
that?
What
is
the
actual
framework
that
we're
talking
about?
So
this
goes
in
a
little
bit
about
this.
The
ways
that
the
tests
are
written,
trying
to
make
them
easy
to
read
and
understandable.
So
you
can
go
in
and
and
know
each
one
of
them
is
actually
doing
tying
right
back
to
those
categories.
D
And
then
the
testing
that
we're
doing
right
now
has
primarily
been
using
the
CNF
testbed
tool
chain
and
there's
some
links
in
here
and
how
that
could
be
leveraged.
And
this
creates
kubernetes
cluster
Zahn
packet
using
upstream
kubernetes
and
the
tooling
itself
is
pretty
open
to
supporting
other
providers
if
desired.
So,
if
you're
interested
in
seeing
something
else,
leverage
with
the
scene
a
little
bit
total
chain,
then
please
up
the
PR
for
that.
D
If
you
have
a
Cooper
Nettie's
cluster
and
you
can
get
right
into
the
first
set
of
tests
beyond
that,
we
have
a
usage
document
that
goes
through
testing
specific
pieces,
including
the
entire
categories,
so
we're
trying
to
make
it.
So,
if
you're
focused
on
one
area,
maybe
security
or
compatibility,
you
should
be
able
to
run
all
the
tests
within
there.
D
You
can
also
run
specific
tests
so
continuing
to
update
the
documentation
across
the
board
and,
at
this
point,
I
think
we're
ready
for
more
people
to
get
involved
and
try
to
follow
the
documentation
and
give
feedback
on
repeatability.
So
that's
one
of
the
main
goals
that
we
want,
and
we've
covered
quite
a
bit
here
as
far
as
from
the
highest
level,
all
the
way
down
to
contributing
tests
and
trying
them
out.
D
We
have
I
think
about
ten
tests
right
now
that
are
either
in
completed
and
ready
for
say
they
can
be
run
automatically
or
they're
in
peer
review
QA
before
they
roll
out
and
the
way
that
we're
doing
the
testing.
If
you
go
in
here
on
the
project
board,
there's
two
main
areas:
there's
a
specification.
If
we
have
stuff
that's
we're
not
ready
yet
to
write
tests,
we're
still
trying
to
figure
out
what
tooling
so.
There's
research
on
these,
including
sand
samples
seeing
us
nicolai
Renison
projects,
been
doing
some
research
on
using
products
from
OB
NSC.
D
We
have
other
tests
that
are
about
using
upstream
tooling
and
once
we're
ready
with
something
that
we
want
to
implement
that
goes
over
in
this
project
board.
You
can
see,
there's
quite
a
few
to
do
and
those
will
keep
getting
at
it
as
they
come
out
of
that
IDF
state
and
then
planning
out
what
we
expect
to
see
the
input
and
output
of
each
of
those
tests,
its
development,
and
you
can
see,
there's
a
good
number
in
progress
and
then
going
through
QA
and
peer
review
before
they
get
completed
and
move
over.
D
B
D
B
D
So
right
now,
most
of
the
documentation
for
this
are
going
to
be
either
on
the
readme
in
this
installation
section
or
more
extensive
tests
after
the
after
the
platform
is
that
is
in
the
usage
document
will
probably
be
moving
this
over
into
its
own
installed
oxygen
and
one
of
the
areas.
I
think
that
we
need
to
do
is
have
a
section
for
platform
setup
and
the
pre
req
setup
before
you
deploy
any
application,
a
CNS
that
you
want
to
test.
D
So
if
you
have
a,
we
have
several
sample
CNS
that
we're
going
to
be
using,
but
if
you
have
a
CNS
that
you
want
to
deploy,
there
will
be
a
section.
That's
focused
on
that
and
then
the
actual
cluster
setup.
So
this
installation
area
here
is
would
be
the
platform
setup
and
right
now,
similar
to
what
I
said
on
the
implementation
of
review.
This
is
using
the
CNF
testbed,
so
this
is
kind
of
just
the
overview
setting
up
kubernetes
on
packet,
and
how
do
we
do
that?
We
use
the
the
tool
chain.
D
That's
on
the
CNF
test,
bed
that
actually
I'll
click.
This
link
the
CNF
test
bed.
Documentation
actually
has
information
on
setting
that
up,
so
this
is
reproducing
it
seeing
the
CI
environment
for
seeing
testbed
this
walks
through
actually
bringing
up
a
cluster
on
packet
that
you
can
test
with,
and
it
talks
about
the
different
there's.
Some
differences
on
machine
types
or
if
you
want
to
do
different
things
like
I,
CPU,
isolation,
there's
other
things.
So
this
gets
a
little
bit
more
extensive
on
the
CNF
testbed
side.
D
On
the
conformance
side,
we've
mainly
say
you
can
go
use
those
you
can
use
the
tooling
and
here's
the
commands
to
run
without
getting
extensive,
but
I
think
we'll
end
up
with
a
section
that
goes
more
into
this
and
one
of
the
alternatives.
Besides
packet
with
a
kubernetes
deployed,
the
packet
will
be
using
kind
so
that
you
can
use
Q,
brunetti
and
docker
for
doing
testing.
Does
that
answer
your
question?
Yes,.
A
Spend
a
minute
or
two
talking
about
the
sample
CNF
that
you're,
using
as
you
develop
the
test,
I
think
it's
also
if
we
could
spend
a
couple
minutes,
maybe
chatting
about
our
thoughts
right
now
on
on
scoring
for
bronze
silver
gold
and
giving
some
context
about
what's
involved
in
getting
to
gold.
I
think
it's
gonna
wind
up
being
important
for
this
group.
D
Right
now,
similar
to
the
the
any
type
of
gold
standards
for
certification
or
where
the
points
are
that
still
to
be
determined,
so
the
focus
on
any
samples
are
to
create
ones
that
allow
us
to
cover
the
test
that
we're
working
on
right
now
versus
trying
to
build
one
or
that
will
complete
everything
or
or
validate
extensively
everything
in
production,
so
trying
to
build
up
to
that
and
then
get
feedback
on
each
test.
So
the
idea
which
we're
working
on
here
you'll
see
some
of
these
would
be.
D
These
would
go
into
some
sample
area.
Most
of
them
are
going
to
be
upstream.
So
this
one
here
that
I'm
showing
on
this
particular
branches,
it's
using
core
DNS.
So
this
would
just
be
a
layer
7
example.
If
you
looked
at
the
vcp
use
case,
own
app
and
various
other
projects
implemented,
this
would
be
like
V
DNS.
D
So
it
would
be
one
CNS
an
entirely
use
case,
so
it
seemed
like
a
at
least
one
valid
one,
we're
probably
adding
others
like
we
have
a
serving
gateway
from
ABC
use
case
will
be
adding,
but
the
idea
is
to
take
something
ideally
upstream
and
be
able
to
pull
in
if
we
have
helm
charts
with
this
one,
we
can
reference
an
upstream.
We
have
not
on
this
particular
branch,
but
another
one
would
be
a
a
using
a
CNF
that
has
invalid
helm,
charts
or
maybe
some
other
pieces.
D
D
The
the
packet
gateway
or
serving
gateway
or
Mme
from
a
PC
would
all
be
examples
that
we
could
put
in
here
and
then
the
next
part
is
how
are
they
use,
and
this
is
something
where
the
documentation
is
here.
I
think
it's
actually,
maybe
if
I
go
some
of
it
as
a
point
that
was
here,
but
we
need
to
update
how
do
you?
D
How
do
you
use
a
CNF
if
you
want
to
use
a
CNS
to
actually
test
I
think
this
is
something
that's
partly
over
in
the
usage
documents
and
other
stuff,
but
the
general
idea
would
be
you're
going
to
put
your
CNS
in
the
CNF
directory.
There's
a
a
structure
that
we're
saying
you
need
whatever
your
helm
chart
whatever
other
pieces,
and
there
can
be
some
static
testing
of
that
CNS
and
then
there's
deployment
deployment,
level
runtime
tests
and
it
would
go
through
here
and
do
the
static
test,
deploy
it
and
then.
E
D
Runtime
test
that's
the
simplest
case
and
then
what
we
would
still
be,
and
in
planning
and
trying
to
get
feedback
on
is
how
would
we
test
a
CNF,
that's
maybe
in
a
yeast
case
or
an
example.
So
a
example
of
that
would
be
the
serving
gateway
in
a
PC.
So
we
could
say
we're
testing
the
serving
gateway.
Someone
else
may
have
developed
a
different
vendor.
They
have
developed
in
MMA
or
some
other
component,
but
this
vendor
has
delivered
a
new
serving
gateway.
So
how
do
we
validate
that?
D
There's
probably
going
to
have
a
need
for
deploying
a
few
other
components
to
test
the
the
serving
gateway
itself?
So
that's
something
that
we're
still
working
on,
but
first
part
is:
how
do
you
isolate
and
run
individual
CMAs?
Does
that
answer
the
questions
around
sample,
CNS
and
kind
of
what
we're
thinking
before
looking
at
gold,
silver,
bronze.
E
Yes,
so
I
think
so
everything
is
a
still
ongoing
that,
because,
even
for
the
same
thing
f,
we
have
many
different
implementations,
and
so
maybe
we
need
different
the
test
Suites
for
the
different
implementations
to
check
the
same
feature
in
maybe
the
gold
standards,
something
like
that
so
I
guess
maybe
it
could
be
very
difficult
to
to
achieve
a
unified,
say
just
the
Suites
you
to
finally
achieve
this
certification
program.
Yes,
that's.
D
But
that
is
and
what
I
may
be
hearing
in
addition
to
this,
and
please
let
me
know
if
I
was
hearing
this
there's
potentially
other
test
needs
that
would
be
out
of
scale.
So
I,
don't
think
that
this
test
suite
is
going
to
try
to
validate,
say
an
SE
standard
or
maybe
a
protocol
standard
that
doesn't
have
to
do
with
verifying
how
the
CNS
is
deployed
and
maintaining
the
life
cycle.
D
So
if
we
talk
about
the
functionality
or
implementation
of
a
particular
application,
a
CNF,
then
you
could
get
into
details
where
you
need
some
type
of
integration
standard
that
could
be
out
of
scope.
That's
probably
an
endless
amount.
If
you're,
integrating
with
any
API
for
lots
of
different
services
and
applications,
there
could
be
additional
tests,
so
the
focus
here
is:
does
it
does
they
see
enough
conform
to
cloud
native
principles
and
standards?
D
E
Yes,
I
understand
that
of
our
testing
force,
those
are
principles,
but
still
if
we
didn't
have
a
unified
specifications
or
api's,
something
like
that,
we
I
think
it's
very
difficult
to
to
to
find
a
way
to
cover
all
the
scenarios
for
a
single
principle,
I
mean
because
there
are
many
different
implementations
to
to
achieve
one
of
those
principles.
I.
D
Understand
and
that's
add
definitely
something
that
we
were
going
to
look
at
so
there's
say
on
a
specific
category.
If
we're
looking
at
statelessness,
there's
many
different
ways
that
you
could
handle
not
having
States
saved
in
a
CNS.
So
how
do
we
test
for
that?
Without
saying
we're
going
to
test
that
the
user
is
using
one
of
let's
say
a
hundred
different
implementations?
E
D
I
would
love
to
get
you
involved
in
the
conversations
around
those
and
then,
if
we're
looking
at
something
and
potentially
you're
singing
implementation,
that
you
think
should
be
cloud
natives,
but
it
wouldn't
pass
and
that's
probably
something
that
we
need
feedback
to
say.
How
can
we
improve
the
test
or
maybe
add
a
new
test,
so
I'd
love
to
get
you
involved
in
this?
Yes,.
A
A
B
F
Which
I
had
one
more
comment
to
make
on
that?
The
previous
topic
now
I'll
make
it
quick,
so
a
couple,
a
couple
things
that
are
very
low
hanging
fruits
that
we
can
use
the
test.
Almost
any
cloud
native
application
out,
there
is
like
we
can
go
and
we
can
go,
kill
a
pod
and
see
if
it
see
if
it
affects
service
or
we
can
try
performing
an
upgrade
or
downgrade
using
the
common
tooling,
and
so
there
are
some
very
low
hanging
fruits
that
we
can
start
with.
F
G
Maybe
it
was
discussed
before
sorry
for
asking
that
question
question,
because
something
what
I'd
like
to
understand-
and
please
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong-
is
that
we
are
talking
here
about
telecom
services,
so
it
means
that
we
have
to
handle
somehow
existing
protocols
like
we
have
diameter,
civil
or
ss7,
and
actually
this
conformance
what
I've
seen
is
related
to
behavior
of
component
itself.
But
the
question
is
how
to
confront
that
with
using
or
or
doing
what
is
designed.
For
so
I
mean
the
CNF
can
be
tested.
G
D
G
B
But
in
essence,
what
we're
trying
to
do
in
any
entity
trying
to
understand
the
relationship
with
the
CNC
of
conformance
tests
with
ovp
phase
two
and
with
the
other
projects
exist
in
the
industry,
now
see
entity
as
you
can
see
on
the
screen.
If
you
look
at
the
right,
so
the
left
hand
side
of
the
diagram,
we
do
have
the
reference
implementation,
which
we
talked
about.
B
Now.
The
other
part
that
we
were
looking
at
in
see
entity
is
the
reference
certification
or
reference
conformance.
The
name
has
been
changed
lately
and
that
is
really
a
set
of
requirements
that
we
say
as
a
community
that
would
like
to
test
against,
and
that
would
be
a
part
of
the
infrastructure
testing,
but
some
of
it
also
the
workload
testing
and
the
way
we
see
that
is
once
the
infrastructure
or
the
cloud
platform
is
instantiated
in
a
given
lab.
B
Would
like
to
make
sure
that
this
cloud
platform
is
compatible
or
compliant
to
the
C
entity
specification
we
specify
in
our
documentation
and-
and
that
will
mean
we
need
somewhere
in
the
industry
and
an
open
source
project
that
will
be
able
to
create
those
test
cases
for
us
that
we
can
run
against
the
given
cloud
platform
and
determine
if
the
cloud
platform
is
compliant
and
conforming
to
the
C
entity
specification.
We
set
the
actual
test
requirements.
B
This
is
still
discussion
with
C
entity
to
create
that
working
stream
within
C
entity,
but
again
that
will
expect
it
to
give
a
requirement
to
the
different,
tooling
and
testing
projects
within
the
community
to
create
those
tests
on
it
against
a
cloud
platform,
and
this
is
all
from
the
infrastructure
point
of
view.
I'm
not
talking
about
workloads
or
CNF
sat
the
CNF
when
we
have
actual
cloud
native
function.
That
would
like
to
test
I
think
there
are
different
areas
where
the
testing
is
needed.
B
One
of
them
is,
we
need
to
test
the
location
aspect
and
the
manual
aspect
of
this
cloud
native
function
and
then
includes
say,
for
example,
has
it
been
packaged
in
the
right
way
as
the
packaging
is
compliant
to
its
system,
or
does
the
package
complain
to
the
Tosca
or
heat
or
help
chart
or
whatever
packaging
technology
that
need
to
be
supported?
And
that's?
This
thing
is
not
our
quality
of
line
testing,
because
you
need
to
run
the
actual
CNF
to
know
if
that's
enough
actually
is
conformant
or
not
and
just
to
clarify.
B
This
is
not
what
we
want
talking
about
here
in
this
diagram,
so
that
this
thing
will
be
covered
by
other
projects.
In
my
view,
for
example,
I
know
on
AB
in
the
11
they're
doing
some
testing
around
containers
and
what
it
is
against
is
is
the
compliance
of
the
packaging
against
the
definition
that
ona
expect
to
be
imported
into
own
that,
but
the
other
kind
of
testing
is
the
cloud
native
principles.
B
Now
there
are
other
aspects
of
that
that
see
entity
in
my
view,
will
be
impacting,
and
this
is
around
resources
and
hardware
consumption.
Now,
if
the,
if
the
container
and
cloud
native
function
is
been
designed
to
take
advantage
of,
let's
say
acceleration
to
abilities
from
the
infrastructure
and
that
acceleration
capabilities
was
not
specified
in
see
entity
as
prohibited
acceleration
to
be
consumed.
B
Just
an
example,
I'm
not
saying
we
prohibiting
I'm
just
saying
if
we
have
any
restriction
and
see
entity
to
in
the
way
that
a
given
acceleration
resource
is
consumed
or
or
how
it
should
be
consumed.
This
is
where
I
feel
the
sienar
conformance
test
and
that
this
thing
that
they
do
specifically
around
hardware
resources
and
scheduling
will
be
impacted,
is
to
kind
of
support
those
test
cases.
So,
in
my
view,
ciencia
of
conformance
test
has
two
important
point.
B
One
of
them
is
very
generic
to
any
cloud
infrastructure
and
the
other
one
is
maybe
some
requirements
coming
from
see
entity
to
specify.
We
have
this
own
specific
requirement
from
the
infrastructure
and
would
like
you
please
to
test
against
those,
so
that
would
be
a
subset
of
test
cases
that
just
to
covered
the
requirement
for
sea
entity
now.
This
is,
in
my
view,
still
work
Lord
this
thing
now,
the
other
testing
that
I
feel
is
still
need
to
be
covered,
which
is
I
want
mentioning
here
in
the
diagram.
B
Let
me
see
if
I
can
use
the
marker,
I
don't
know
if
I
can
use
that,
but
this
box
here
that
says
community
to
a
scientist
for
Siena.
In
my
view,
this
is
where
also
another
area
where
I
don't
know
exactly
who's
going
to
do
this
testing,
but
going
back
to
Greg
point
from
over
that,
sometimes
when
we
talk
about
performance,
testing
will
not
talk
about
runtime
testing,
how
the
actual
CNF
is
consuming.
B
There
is
the
hardware:
does
it
use
the
API
that
we
allow
it
to
use,
or
does
it
use
what
kind
of
it
working
does
it
expect
and
how
does
it
consume?
Then
it's
working
from
the
infrastructure
point
of
view
and
addition
to
that.
How
does
it
perform
and
to
know?
How
does
this
unit
perform?
We
need
to
understand
and
have
but
understanding
of
the
category
of
dusty
enough.
What
functionality
does
it
perform?
Does
it
do
in
order
for
us
to
understand?
How
do
we
test
that
enough?
B
So
for
me
this
is
a
much
bigger
question
and
this
is
the
hardest
one.
This
in
my
view,
because
it's
a
lot
of
information.
We
need
to
know
from
the
CNF
itself
what
functionality
performs
before
we
can
actually
do
this
testing,
but
other
aspect
of
this
testing
is
still
possible
because
if
the
self
is
consuming,
miss
Esther
is
using
a
specific
API
and
that
API
is
not
being
determined
as
specified
in
NC
entity.
Then
we
should
be
able
to
test
against
the
API
or
the
interface
again.
B
A
A
So
you're
envisioning,
the
first
the
RI
too,
would
be
finalized.
And
then
are
you
envisioning
that
there
will
be
software
test
for
it
or
is
it
that
a
like
a
certification
provider,
a
company,
would
go
through
each
thing
at
a
time
and
just
manually
confirm
that
you
can
create
storage,
that
you
can
do
networking
with
that
sort
of
thing.
So
the.
B
Expectation
is
the
RC
you
work
will
start
as
soon
as
possible
and
identity
once
the
X
term
is
established,
and
that
will
be
list
of
this
case
is
that
we
need
to
see
implemented
to
test
against
see
entity
specifications.
Now
some
of
those
testing,
as
I
mentioned,
we
would
like
ideally
to
understand
how
that
relates
to
the
CNC
have
conformist
is
that
you
guys
are
doing
and
potentially
dimension
that
discussion.
D
It
it
sounds
like
there's
so
the
two
main
areas
that
I'm
hearing
a
platform
and
then
application,
and
then,
if
you
look
at
each
of
those
for
the
platform,
there's
probably
a
lot
that
could
be
generalized
similar
to
the
current
principles,
CNF
application
tests
that
are
happening
in
the
conformance
and
those.
D
Ideally,
we
could
look
at
what's
missing
from
stuff
like
the
sana
boy,
there's
a
Nettie's
conformance
that
wouldn't
cover
it.
What
other
things
that
we
want
to
look
at
so
these
are
general
tests,
and
then
you
have
the
specific
tests
that
you're
caring
about
for
what?
Whatever
different
reasons,
so
one
of
them
would
be
does
is
an
ABC.
Does
it
have
the
implement
in
a
way
that
conforms
to
standards
for
integrating?
D
So
if
you're
saying
you
want
to
support
FIP
or
some
other
interface
or
something
does
set
of
tests,
if
we
can
say
these
can
be
grouped
and
and
what
are
they
trying
to
accomplish,
then
I
think
it
may
be
easier
to
determine
if
that
should
be
its
own
separate
test
suite
or
if
it
should
be
a
subset.
If
we
have
those
split
out,
yeah.
B
B
D
That's
something
that
we
want
to
look
at.
What
is
what
are
we
wanting
to
test
platform
wise,
so
that
could
be
trying
to
figure
out
if
we
say
what
was
desired
for
the
rc2.
What
are
what
are
you
looking
at
for
a
telecom
platform
and
then
trying
to
split
that
between
peers,
things
that
are
protocol
or
integration
specific
to
their
and
implementation?
So
you
may
get
rid
of
the
Mme
and
have
something
there
could
be.
An
APC
could
be
implemented
completely
different
and
not
have
any
of
the
current
components
at
some
point
in
the
future.
D
So
it's
really.
What
do
we
want
right
now,
though?
So
right
now,
you
do
need
integrations
because
those
are
out
there
and
you
have
these
parts
that
you
expect.
The
platform
should
work
with
existing.
So
if
we
can
figure
out
what
that
is
at
a
container
platform
level,
the
difference
between
a
specific
thing
like
supporting
an
APC
and
then
what's
not
specific.
So
as.
D
B
Shot
and
long
term,
if
we
say
there's
two
kind
of
testing
right,
wait
load
this
thing
and
there
is
platform
testing
now
in
the
wet
load
testing.
They
also
agree.
I
think
you
already
covered
the
cloud
nativeness
of
that
workload,
that
none
is
release
entity
specific,
but
there
might
be-
and
there
will
be
some
requirement
coming
from
sea
entity
that
we
expect
the
workload
to
comply
to
and
that's
around
resource
consumption,
for
example,
and
around
interface
and
api's
towards
the
infrastructure.
B
So
if
you,
how
do
you
consume
that
infrastructure
and
those
are
where
I
see
more
requirements
coming
from
sea
entity
towards
the
the
workload?
Did
this
thing
now?
The
other
aspect
is
the
platform
listing
now
how
that
platform
is
really
being
implemented.
What
kind
of
plugins
its
users
were
kind
of
protocol
supports
and
so
on?
B
That's
also
some
of
that
requirements
would
come
from
sea
entity
and,
if
I
hear
you
correctly,
why
you
saying
is
we
need
to
look
at
the
RC
to
when
it's
being
created
and
see
which
ones
will
fit
into
workload
and
what
this
mortis
gets
me
to
implement,
to
support
them
and
what
goes
into
the
platform
testing
and
what
word
Lord?
What
sorry?
What
this
case
is?
We
need
to
create
for
those
platform,
specific
requirements.
D
Yes,
the
for
the
workload
I
think
we're
covered
on
what
we're
doing
for
cloud
native
workload,
testing
and,
of
course,
there
can
be
any
number
of
workload
testing
beyond
cloud
native
or
that
we
need
to
do
the
same
thing
for
the
platform.
So
what
parts
of
the
platform
testing
should
be
about
cloud
native,
conformance
versus
which
ones
are
I,
don't
want
to
say
vendor,
but
whatever
you
would
call
the
other
parts
that
are
non
there
non-generic.
These
are
things
that
must
be
met
to
fit
existing
standards.
Okay,
then,
then,
what
are
those?
D
So
if
we
can
split
that
up
and
come
up
with
a
set
of
tests
that
we
want
to
look
at
for
the
platform,
then
we
can
then
look
at
existing
tests
like
okay.
This
is
CNI
conformance
and
kubernetes
certification.
Do
those
cover
those?
If
they
don't,
can
we
contribute
and
get
those
updated
or
do
we
need
something?
In
addition,
maybe
the
scene
s
conformance
that
we
add
a
set
of
platform
tests.
D
B
B
D
May
say
it's
better
to
contribute
to
the
sauna
boy
test
for
kubernetes,
maybe
extend
and
have
sex
with
seeing
the
scene.
I
can
conformance
testing
for
the
spec,
the
scene,
I
spec.
We
we
need
to
determine
what's
needed
on
where
that
new
box
is
that
you
created
and
then
decide
on
where
the
testing
should
be
I
do
think
that
there
should
be
a
separation
between
is
this
cloud
native
on
the
platform
and
is
this
cloud
native
on
the
workload
versus
does
okay?
It
is
cloud
native
if
you've
developed
a
CNS
in
a
cloud
native
way.
D
D
Think
CNC
T
is
going
to
care
about
that.
An
aggregation
of
tests
from
that
are
covering
many
specific
areas
when
you're
looking
at
what
is
going
to
work
for
a
telecom
you're
going
to
care
that
it
covers
many
different
tests
and
if
we're
focused
in
each
of
those
categories
and
I,
think
we'll
have
more
confidence
in
the
results
of
each
yeah.