►
From YouTube: CNCF Telecom User Group Meeting - 2019-12-02
Description
Join us for Kubernetes Forums 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
B
Okay,
well,
let's
go
ahead
and
and
get
started,
I
think
the
main
piece
is
that
I
wanted
to
apologize
for
not
being
able
to
push
through
and
get
the
white
paper
released
before
cube
con.
That
had
been
my
aspiration,
but
there
are
just
too
many
things
happening
as
the
conference
got
closed,
and
so
I
am
interested
now
in
trying
to
drive
it
toward
consensus
and
getting
the
initial
chapters
published
and
then
coming
up
with
a
plan
on
what
the
next
couple
chapters
we're
going
to
work
on
will
be.
B
B
If
we
have
time
but
I
was
hoping
that
first
Taylor
and
his
team
could
give
us
an
update
on
the
CNF
test
bed
and
what's
changed
recently
on
it,
what
the
plans
are
for
the
next
couple
months
and
then
I
did
want
to
have
a
short
conversation
that
I
believe
I
pasted
into
the
tub
chat
or
the
question
of
Tosca
and
heat
templates
and
I
would
love
to
hear
from
both
the
operators
and
the
vendors
on
the
phone
and
understand,
as
you
were,
planning
with
CNF.
Are
you
planning
to
use
either
Tosca
or
heat?
B
This
is
coming
up,
in
particular
in
the
context
of
C
and
TT
and
I'm,
sorry
to
use
all
the
acronyms,
but
the
Linux
Foundation
networking
project
has
the
PMF,
the
sub-project
and
they're
launching
the
ovp,
which
is
their
verification
process.
They
believe
they've
already
launched
it
for
vnfs
they're,
beginning
to
talk
about
how
to
do
it.
For
CMS
and
I
would
like
to
understand
people's
perspective.
I'll
go
ahead
and
throw
out
there.
It
doesn't
make
a
ton
of
sense
to
me.
B
My
understanding
of
Heaton
and
Tosca
templates
is
that
they're
they're
trying
to
specify
at
the
wrong
level
around
things
like
IP,
addresses
and
and
much
more
fundamental
pieces
of
computing.
But
if
they
don't,
then
it
does
raise
the
question
of
what
kind
of
constraints
are
we
expecting
to
put
on
CNF,
for
example,
in
terms
of
them
being
proper,
helm
templates
or
there
are
other
kinds
of
usage
of
the
platform,
but
before
we
get
to
that,
question
which
I
am
really
interested
in
I
would
love
to
go
ahead
and
hand
it
off
to
Taylor.
C
C
That
was
splitting
the
hardware
provisioning
from
the
workload
or
the
workload
platform
provisioning.
So
that
would
be
setting
up
kubernetes,
adding
any
the
add-ons,
whether
that's
network
service
measure
they
until
different
Intel
device,
plugins
and
and
it's
multi
seni
of
these
pieces
that
you're
going
to
add.
And
then
splitting
that
part
out
and
some
of
the
hardware
provisioning
has
to
do
with
network
provisioning
packet,
we're
able
to
provision
the
the
actual
VLANs
and
other
pieces
so
having
those
as
independent
parts.
C
So
the
hardware
provisioning
piece
is
now
separated
and
where
we've
been
focused
on
breaking
down
the
platform
provisioning.
So
we
have
some
more
examples
and
use
cases
that
have
gone
into
place,
including
the
example
that
we
went
over
for
at
cube
con.
We
had
some
examples
for
using
the
Intel
device
plug-in,
but
on
the
platform
level
and
some
examples
there,
we've
expanded,
there's
a
multi
SRV
example
use
case.
C
That's
now
in
the
testbed
and
continuing
to
build
from
that
with
some
of
the
other
use
cases
where
we
had
one
for
the
benchmarking
that
we've
poured
it
over
and
to
the
new.
The
new
structure
and
using
more
in-band
items
are
using
more
kubernetes
specific
pieces
versus
a
lot
of
the
ansible
code.
So
as
we're
doing,
those
are
able
to
use
the
new
structure
as
components,
examples
that
can
be
used
in
more
complex
use
cases
so
on
the
roadmap.
C
C
Think
one
of
the
bigger
ones
would
be
for
Mobile
World
Congress
we're
looking
at
putting
together
a
5g
use
case
and
that
also
uses
network
service
when
making
that
available.
So
talking
with
various
folks
to
put
that
together,
I
think
that
kind
of
covers
the
highlights
on
there
and
hopefully
address
some
of
the
questions
I've
seen
on
the
tag
like
regarding
that
Numa
Numa
zone
awareness
and
topology
and
other
stuff,
we
are
planning
on
doing
these
things.
C
D
C
One
of
the
items
that
was
been
discussed
recently
on
the
tag
channel
was
smart,
necks
and
FPGAs,
and
it's
definitely
something
that
we're
open
to
exploring
I.
Think
some
of
the
questions
were
on.
How
do
you?
How
would
you
implement
these
and
still
and
do
it
in
a
cognitive
way
and
I
think
that's
something
that
definitely
needs
to
be
explored.
E
C
That
sounds
great,
so
I
know
that
you've
posted
about
the
TLS
offload.
If,
if
someone
has
a
specific
use
case,
I'd
like
to
see
we'd
start,
there
I
think
probably
going
one
with
that
Geoffrey
would
be
a
speck
and
the
scene
of
test
bed.
We
have
a
project
board,
that's
specifically
for
this
sort
of
thing.
C
B
B
Take
over
again
if
I
could
start
with
the
operators
on
the
call,
particularly
Jeffrey
and
Jeffrey,
if
you
could
add
yourself
to
the
everybody,
if
you
could.
Please
add
yourself
to
the
meeting
notes,
I'd
love
to
hear
your
current
thinking
about
heed
and
Tosca
in
CNF
that
you're
that
you
I
guess
you
have
in
your
trip
of
concept
today
and
I
see
we
also
have
Rob
Fischer
on
the
call
from
Verizon
and
and
a
couple
folks
from
Sprint
and
then
Herbert
from
Deutsche
Telekom
I'd
love
to
get
any
feedback
from
you
on
on
your
thinking.
E
B
Exactly
the
context
for
the
question
is
that
the
elf
networking
is
has
an
OTP
certification
program
that
they're
using
for
vnx
and
they're,
beginning
to
evaluate
how
to
create
a
similar
program
for
CN
FS.
But
as
of
today
as
I
understand
that
program
and-
and
there
might
be
somebody
on
the
call,
such
as
Phil
Rob,
who
I'm
happy
to
see
back
in
the
LF
world,
with
a
different
hat
on.
Who
might
be
able
to
give
a
little
bit
more
context
on
that.
B
E
Yeah,
so
my
opinion
is,
if
you
just
want
to
use
Tosca
as
a
generic
modeling
language
I,
don't
really
care
because
there's
a
million
different
ways
to
convert
Tosca
to
Yambol
and
vice
versa,
and
to
Yang
and
everything
else.
If
you're
talking
about
implementing
a
mono
stack
above
kubernetes,
then
I
would
say
I'm
pretty
against
that.
E
One
of
my
main
motivations
for
looking
into
the
cloud
native
approach
and
kubernetes
pacifically
is
to
break
myself
free
of
in
EFI
O's
and
VN
FM's,
where
I
can
I,
don't
necessarily
you
know,
have
anything
against
them
in
the
vnf
space
there.
You
know
what
all
vendors
support
and
kind
of
like
where
things
are
at,
but
I'm
just
the
whole
concept
of
the
way
that
configuration
is
passed
down
through
the
different.
You
know:
souls
1
through
5,
and
things
like
that.
E
There's
just
lots
of
weird
like
dependencies,
they'll
define
the
api's
which
they
are
getting
better
but
they're,
not
there
all
the
way.
Yet
so,
if
I'm
gonna
take
the
time
to,
you
know,
move
into
the
kubernetes
space
and
do
all
this
in
containers
and
deal
with
all
the
data
plane.
Challenges
I'd
rather
leave
a
lot
of
the
orchestration
baggage
back
in
the
VM
space.
If
possible
should.
B
Jeffrey,
that's
super
helpful
and
I
will
remind
you
that
I'm
still
very
hopeful.
You
can
get
some
of
your
internal
documents
cleared.
You
know
the
Charter
specific
stuff
from
it
removed
and
and
published
those
with
the
workgroup,
but
could
you
just
say
a
little
bit
more
on
if
you
do
leave
man?
Oh
behind?
How
are
you
envisioning
that
the
cloud
native
aspects,
CNF
architecture,
parts
of
your
infrastructure
are
going
to
interoperate
with
the
existing
parts
of
it
in
terms
of
provisioning
in
terms
of
managing
our?
Are
you
essentially
yeah,
sir
Kenny?
B
B
E
I
would
just
say
the
big
thing
is
is
on
the
concept
of
how
things
are
abstracted
between,
like
you
know,
individual
limbs
versus
individual
vnf
Sims
versus
individual
n
feo
s
house,
sometimes
they're
packaged,
sometimes
they're
not
do
I
use,
element,
managers
or
don't
I.
The
pack
of
core
wants
something
completely
different
than
what
you
know.
A
virtual
firewall
wants,
as
I
start
looking
at
virtualized
cmts.
How
do
I
run
that
in
the
same
them
as
I?
E
Do
with
my
you
know,
my
ran
things
like
that
and,
like
the
the
Meno
you
know,
thing
is
very
like
pipelined
and
I.
Think
a
lot
of
assumptions
were
made
when
those
block
diagrams
were
originally
made
on,
like
how
configuration
would
be
consumed,
but
like
there's
just
all
these
weird
restrictions
right
like
on
you
know,
what's
defined
in
sole
three
versus
what's
defined
in
Sol
five
like
how
do
I
provision
a
network
in
OpenStack
or
VMware
that
you
know
if
I
talked
to
Nokia
I
talked
to
Cisco
and
I
talked
to
juniper
they're.
E
Like
you,
you
choose
your
CNI,
that's
how
I'm
gonna
do
networking
if
you
want
to
do
some
networking
outside
of
that
was
like
in
SM
or
something
like
that.
You
know
you
bring
your
CRE
s
and
this
and
that
and
you
you
do
your
thing
but
like
I,
just
the
whole,
the
full
lifecycle
of
a
VM
and
the
mono
stack
is
very
cumbersome
and
it
doesn't
leave
a
lot
of
wiggle
room
and
it
also
like
really
forces
a
monolithic
approach
to
how
you
deliver
these
services.
I.
E
B
Would
any
of
the
other
operators
on
the
call
care
to
voice
an
opinion
and-
and
I
will
be
clear
here
that
none
of
this
is
when
you
share
an
opinion.
It's
not
representing
your
organization,
it's
not
saying
the
official,
Sprint
or
Verizon
or
whatever
opinion,
but
if
you
could
share
some
of
your
thinking
and
then
I'd
love
to
move
on
to
the
vendors
as
well
yeah,
so.
F
Regarding
Tosca
and
also
mano
discussion,
I'm,
not
so
expert,
but
if
my
colleagues
for
no
naps
I,
also
not
in
favor
or
so
yeah-
and
we
define
stuff
and
see
more,
that's
a
need,
an
entrant,
orchestration
and
two
decent
api's
for
managing
the
domain
of
the
net
area
of
the
network
functions.
So
target
picture
will
look
differently,
so
it
will
not
be
monastic.
F
B
Iii
agree
that
heat
is
very
tied
to
OpenStack
and
unlikely
and
even
broken
free
I
know
that
there
have
been
efforts
to
look
at
what
a
Tosca
for
kubernetes
would
look
like
particularly
Italian
from
Red.
Hat
has
made
a
couple
presentations
at
previous
ons
to
this
about
the
idea
and
I
think
we
could
all
agree
that
it
is
feasible
to
do
that
for
some
amount
of
work
you
you
could
implement
it,
but
the
key
thing
that
I'm
trying
to
get
at
is
is
their
demand,
for
it
do
folks
feel
like
it's
that
level.
F
B
Love
feedback-
it's
definitely
I
hope
it
was
clear.
I
was
joking
about
the
answer
in
three
minutes
before
it's
definitely
an
ongoing
topic,
but
it
is
particularly
relevant
as
we
begin
to
look
with
our
partners
at
now
of
networking.
What
CNF
certification
might
look
like
when
what
are
the
things
that
we
would
even
want
to
test
for
in
order
to
demonstrate
some
level
of
conformance
and
interoperability
yeah?
B
F
We
definitely
need
is
the
definition,
how
platform,
and
not
only
kubernetes,
but
maybe
also
the
network
backends
and
some
other
tooling
around,
which
will
be
useful.
Cnf
looks
like
and
that
we
get
there
an
agreement
across
operators.
Otherwise
it
will.
Every
operator
will
have
a
different
platform
again
and
it's
integration.
I
thought
for
the
day:
ñ
offenders
I.
B
Totally
agree
that
that
part
is
essential
and
so
being
able
to
say,
I
mean
if,
if
it's
just
saying
oh,
my
CNF
is
completely
conformant,
but
only
runs
on
this
specific
hardware
and
this
specific
version
of
kubernetes.
Also
from
my
company.
Then
we've
just
taken
a
huge
step
backwards
from
even
from
the
BNF
world,
and
this
is
something
we've
heard
very
clearly
from
from
other
operators
as
well,
that
they
are
not
not
interested
in
taking
that
step
backwards
and.
F
B
Part
of
this
is
trying
to
define
using
things
like
device
plug-in
API
to
say,
okay,
if
it
requires
a
certain
kind
of
smart
neck
or
a
CNI
plug-in
with
a
certain
level
of
functionality.
How
can
those
kinds
of
things
be
specified
in
a
in
a
general
generic
way
so
that
any
CNF
architecture,
CNF
platform
with
sufficient
capabilities
will
be
able
to
signal
that
and
in
meet
those
needs
and.
F
As
in
both
directions,
so
a
CNF
should
not
require
a
specific
hardware,
because
it
cannot
expect
it
to
operate
at
this
rolled
out.
So
if
they
are
comparable,
different
vendors
for
the
same
outfit
type
and
the
abstract,
there
should
be
some
kind
of
abstraction.
So
that
would
be
an
F
and
or
has
not
to
bring
a
specific
driver
for
the
hardware.
F
B
You
know
Herbert,
this
might
be
a
moment
to
just
take
a
quick
detour
for
a
second
I
was
hoping
somebody
on
the
call
could
fill
me
in
on
this
conversation.
That's
happening
on
CMT
T,
about
SR
io
v,
because
my
my
understanding
of
it
is
that
sort
of
the
the
the
natural
way
within
a
CNF
architecture
would
be
to
in
Taylor
feel
favors
to
speak
up
here.
If
you're
up
to
speed
on
it.
Can
you
remind
me
how
we're
doing
sr
I
iove
on
the
CNF
testbed
today.
C
You're,
seeing
on
the
CNF
test
bed
we're
trying
to
I
guess,
keep
things
open,
so
we
are
using
the
Intel's
one
of
the
I
guess
examples
that
were
showing
right
now
uses
the
Intel
device
plugin.
So
that's
a
kubernetes
add-on
for
accessing
and
then
there's
an
it
some
other
tooling
and
packaging
for
using
a
survey.
So
we're
trying
to
keep
that.
Yes,
as
as
much
as
possible,
kubernetes
inning
bin.
There
are
some
pieces
on
packet
where
we
have
to
make
sure
we
have
access
with
the
host
level
money
in.
C
Yeah,
that's
that
was
recently
added
with
we
have
the
device
plug-in
and
then
I
guess
as
far
as
advertising
there's
different
levels
of
that
that
the
the
tooling
and
pieces
provides.
So
we
have
one
example:
that's
a
very
minimal.
What
we're
planning
to
do
is
extend
that
and
show
the
way
that
say.
Network
service
mesh
can
take
the
information
from
the
device
plug
into
other
parts
and
then
make
that
available
as
a
service,
and
then
there
are
other
projects
which
would
do
something
similar
great.
B
F
B
F
F
Have
it
so
we
have
a
lot
of
discussions
there,
and
so
the
core
group
of
operators
is
quite
aligned
that
we
want
to
not
probe
it
Silv
as
a
mechanism,
because
you
needed
even
with
smart
annex
and
other
stuff,
but
pass
it
through
to
the
vnfs
so
PCI
password.
We
want
to
probe
it
because
then
it's
not
longer
Claudius
and
you're
really
binding,
Sevilla
Nestor's
machine
and
they
need
to
have
specific
drivers
for
this
hardware.
F
And
if
you
introduce
new
car
new
hardware,
they
have
to
test
with
new
drivers
and
other
stuff
so
that
it's
not
what
we
want
as
iov,
underneath
some
kind
of
abstraction
that
I,
oh
yeah,
good,
Benitez,
I,
don't
know
exactly
which
mechanisms
we
can
use
but
sign
names.
The
infrastructure
is
okay,
it
should
be
not
makes
a
CNF
at
the
dependent.
That
is
our
target
there
and
we
try
to
bring
it
in
into
the
documents
like
this.
F
But
there
are
also
some
some
parties
who
are
pushing
back
and
sides
and
it
there
will
be
no
DNS
or
C&S
which
are
compliant
at
all,
because
we
need
si.
We,
the
discussion,
is
ongoing,
but
we
want
to
bring
it
into
the
directions
that
we
can.
I
have
a
more
cloud
ya,
have
a
cloud
and
not
a
virtualization.
F
E
Is
there
any
specific,
like
technical
deficiencies
within
helm,
charts
and
config
maps
which
is
pushing
for
Tosca?
Is
there
any
technical
merits
for
why
Tosca
was
chosen?
You
know,
as
opposed
to
like
yang
or
something
like.
Are
we
only
choosing
Tusker
because
that's
what
was
in
the
mono
stack
and
that's
what
people
know
or
if
they're,
like
some
limitation
and
service
chaining
within
the
CNF
space
or
some
I'm,
just
kind
of
curious
like
well.
B
That
network
has
not
really
progressed
at
all,
but
their
natural
approach
is
going
to
be
to
use
Tosca
unless
they
go
a
different,
encouraged
to
go
a
different
direction
and
in
terms
of
limitations
on
things
like
helm,
for
service
changing,
and
then
you
know
things
like
Prometheus
for
monitoring
and
such
I
mean
I.
Think
the
biggest
one
by
far
is
just
the
operators
and
legacy
systems
and
so
having
a
story
about
okay.
Obviously,
nobody
is
gonna
switch
overnight
from
a
vnf
architecture
to
a
CNF
one.
B
The
these
two
platforms
are
gonna
need
to
co-exist
for
years
and
years
to
come.
How
can
you
manage
the
CNF
architecture,
keep
senf
platform
and
keep
on
top
of
what
you
have
deployed
there
and
the
progress
and
such
and
have
that
interoperate
with
some
of
your
current
systems?
But
I
would
emphasize
that,
even
though
that's
a
question,
it's
far
from
clear
to
me
that
that
requiring
use
of
Tosca
on
kubernetes
is
actually
going
to
improve
things.
B
H
Hey
dentists,
melon
I,
completely
agree
with
the
statement
which
you
made
right
like
exactly
just
like
the
challenges.
All
the
operators
will
have
for
coming
years
and
there
will
be
like
a
heterogeneous
workload
from
their
environment
and
and
so
that's
where
and
that's
the
reason
why
what
has
been
working
for
them
like
Tosca
is
something
which
they
they
have
adopted
along
with
when
they
were
building
their
NLP
tooling
right.
H
B
B
You
obviously
have
sold
existing
management
systems
in
that
are
working
with
OpenStack
BNF
platforms
today,
as
your
customers
start
to
use
CSF
architectures
CNF
architectures
in
parallel
next
to
it,
what
kind
of
management
links
are
you
gonna
need
or
phrase
differently?
Are
you
gonna
offer?
Are
you're
gonna
sell
in
order
to
allow
up
or
your
step
of
view
of
what's
going
on
in
their
network.
A
First
of
all,
I
think
this
question
goes
deeper
than
just
what
the
management
system
is
or
what
management
systems
we
would
like
to
serve
because
I
guess
fundamentally
has
been
the
salaah
management
system
that
the
operators
would
want
to
buy.
I
think
this
goes
deeper
in
terms
of
what
is
the
way
of
working
that
the
operator
is
willing
to
accept
it
cloud
native
is
the
you
know.
Is
it
okay
to
deliver
individual
services
via
CIC
the
pipeline?
A
You
know
that
starts
with
Murray
development
organization
and
with
the
customer
that's
one
extreme,
and
that
model
would
probably
not
benefit
from
Tosca,
most
certainly
wouldn't
benefit
from
from
heat
or
or
any
other.
You
know,
abstract,
descriptor,
that
that
way
of
working
would
probably
benefit
from
the
most
cloud
native
pieces
of
technology
like
using
the
kubernetes
api,
so
maybe
having
hands
of
their
and
and
I
think
that's
where
many
operators
are
in
the
City
office,
but
that
might
not
be
there.
A
Many
operators
are
when
it
comes
to
reality
and
operations
and
operation
and
think
around
that.
So
I
think
why
this
garbage
question
comes
up
again
and
again
is
because
the
operators
have
something
they
have
invested
into
something,
and
they
would
like
to
see
return
of
investment
on
that.
So
if,
if
there's
something
weak
bias
or
use
these
Tosca
as
of
today,
then
it's
quite
likely
that
we
would
have
to
support
that
with
bit
CNS.
And
then
you
know
I
think
we
discussed
heat
so
I.
A
A
The
operators
would
like
one
to
have
with
mid
cloud
native
and
I
know
that,
from
my
perspective,
if
I
would
go
to
every
customer
like
hey
here's,
my
product
and
by
the
way
you
have
to
change
your
complete
operation
model
in
order
to
be
able
to
use
it,
I
might
not
be
the
chosen
and
or
for
that
use
case.
So
long
story,
short
I
think
we
need
both
models
and
then
the
challenge
is
to
figure
out.
B
G
Our
customers,
just
experiment,
starting
to
experiment
with
seeing
ups
I,
think
the
way
that
we're
seeing
it
kind
of
in
the
future
is
kind
of
a
line
with
the
way
you
see
it
down
where
communities
is
kind
of
like
the
underlying,
let's
say
Orchestrator,
and
that
orchestrates
both
beams
and
containers,
and
so
basically
providing
one
platform
to
manage
both
legacy.
Vms
and
CMS
together.
Oh.
G
So
I
think
we're
investing
into
like
Qbert
so
running
VMs
in
a
pod,
so
that
you
can
do
that.
So
the
way
that
we're
looking
at
it
right
now
is
kind
of
like
two
different
ways.
So
one
is
running
VMs
orchestrated
by
communities
through
like
Qbert,
as
kind
of
like
independent
me
enough,
and
then
the
other
thing
that
we're
doing
is
basically
using
kubernetes
and
Qbert
just
set
up
basically
a
bunch
of
games
and
then
creating
another
communities
cluster
out
of
that
so
kind
of
two
from
ways
or
do
not.
B
Slack
Channel,
that
about
evolving
from
vnfs
to
CNF,
s--
and
I
remain
a
fan
of
Qbert
as
being
a
potentially
important
transitionary
technology
and
I
mean
I
think
we
should
be
clear
that
transitions
are
likely
to
be
around,
for
you
know
a
decade
or
so.
So
this
is
not
a
sort
of
overnight
kind
of
thing.
Given
that
this
sprawling
nature
of
many
telecom
operators
could
we
have.
G
I
I
Embarrassed,
oh
yeah,
hi,
so
there's
actually
a
very
interesting
question
trying
to
apply
tadka
for
everything,
so
maybe
I'm
looking
at
this
carefully
in
OLAP,
especially
and
also
entering
in
VMI
elbows
for
last
couple
of
years.
So
the
learning
so
start
applying
tasks
offered.
Everything
is
not
the
right
approach.
I
mean
tasker's.
Right
is
probably
rightfully
the
right
modeling
language,
especially
for
network
services,
where
you
want
to
be
declarative,
for
example,
in
expressing
SLO
such
as
pay
latency
right.
I
I
So,
for
example,
when
you're
doing
the
5
g
transition
I
mean
essentially
the
service
based
architectures,
no
leveraging
HTTP
2.2.
You
want
to
really
make
sure
that
they
can
leverage
capabilities.
The
service
mesh,
especially
for
the
control
plane
network
functions
right
as
an
example
5g
udm
right.
So
so
now,
if
you're
trying
to
model
all
this
through
tasks,
I
don't
know
where
we're
going
with
this
I
mean
basically
it's
going
to
be
a
while,
while
while
to
get
all
these
things
done,
we're
actually
probably
taking
a
step
backward.
Is
you
know
my
feeling.
I
E
E
I
would
prefer
that
the
the
sole
interfaces
be
a
little
more
flexible,
so
I
wouldn't
have
to
write
custom
plugins
southbound
from
my
VN
FM,
but
I
don't
understand
this
concept
of
like
you
have
to
do
everything
in
Tusker
versus
you
have
a
small
field
in
your.
You
know,
Manto
architecture,
that,
if
it's
going
to
have
to
do
something
in
containers
via
kubernetes,
you
know
part
of
its
service
chain
is
it
makes
an
API
call
to
kubernetes.
But
all
of
those
you
know
all
that
standalone
configuration
the
charts.
E
Everything
is
still
maintaining
that
infrastructure
and
kubernetes
services.
You
know
the
VN
FM
the
same
way
that
it
would
service
anything
else
right,
I'm!
So
we
have
a
couple
of
they're,
not
data
plane
intensive,
but
we
have
deployed
in
production
a
couple
of
CNF
for
like
control,
plane
ii
type
stuff
that
actually
work
directly
with
things
in
vm's,
and
this
is
kind
of
how
we've
approached
it
is
in
our
upper
layer
models.
That's
provisioning,
all
of
our
virtual
infrastructure.
E
We
also
write
in
some
hooks
that
then
make
requests
to
kubernetes,
and
you
know
put
a
route
where
you
need
a
route
on
an
interface
and
your
service
chain
is
there
and
your
containers
and
your
VM
stock
to
each
other.
So
I,
don't
know
why
we
would
need
to
try
to
look
like
granularly,
define
every
single
aspect
in
a
single
you
know,
or
a
suite
of
Tusker
models.
Yeah.
E
Yeah
so
I
mean
we
am
I
gotta
talk
in
generic
terms.
Here
we.
B
Had
let
me
just
echo
someone
earlier
mentioned,
CI
CD,
which
I
really
do
think,
is
a
key
concept
that,
if
you're
not
constantly
redeploying
and
in
particular,
able
to
constantly
redeploy
your
entire
architecture,
meaning
both
the
the
kubernetes
platform
itself
and
then
all
of
the
CNF
running.
On
top
of
it,
then
you,
you
really
don't
have
I
would
say
a
cloud
native
architecture,
and
so
if
the
Tosca
definitions
are
locking
you
into
a
brittle
enough
infrastructure
that
they're
preventing
that-
and
you
just
have
a
huge
mismatch
right
there
right.
E
So
if
a
manifest
needs
to
change,
if
they
need
an
updated
version
like
our
ability
to
communicate
and
share,
resources
is
substantially
easier
in
this
model
versus
you.
You
know
we
have
like
a
few
really
sharp
guys
on
the
ops
side
that
can
really
dive
into
Tosca.
So
you
know,
as
far
as
your
earlier
question,
what
we're
using
kubernetes
for
us,
mostly
a
lot
of
the
standard
stuff,
as
far
as
like
you
know,
API
abstraction
for
a
lot
of
our
end
services.
E
You
know
some
basic,
like
routing
functionality
from
like
a
control,
plane
aspect
sitting
in
containers
behind
these
API
gateways
and
some
stuff
around,
like
you
know,
IP
mapping
things
like
that,
like
I,
can't
go
into
really
deep
detail
on
this,
because
it's
all
Charter
proprietary
stuff,
but
the
long
and
short
is,
though
there's
certain
things
that
just
don't
work
well
in
a
container
right
now,
even
with
a
lot
of
the
cool
software-defined
storage
options
out
there,
like
certain
databases,
are
super
finicky,
anything
that
wants
state-
and
so
you
know
we
we
have
a
manual
stack-
will
have
a
mono
stack
like
you
said,
for
at
least
another
I
mean
we're
cable,
so
we'll
have
it
for
at
least
another
30
years.
E
E
And
and-
and
we
rely
on
him
right
but
I
mean
I,
just
I,
don't
like
this
idea
of
you
exclusivity,
even
in
my
brownfield
environments,
I
am
deploying
things
in
containers
and
finding
ways
to
weave
it
in
and
I
like
to
burn
Eddie's
do
what
kubernetes
just
good
at
and
I,
let
you
know
both
VMware
and
OpenStack.
Do
what
they're
good
at
you
know
and
that's
how
I
rock
and
roll
great
anyone.
B
B
B
B
Would
anyone
else
like
to
dive
in
on
this
this
conversation
of,
because
I
think
it's
sort
of
a
good
topic
for
next
time
would
be?
If
the
answer
is
not
going
to
be,
he
didn't
ask
what
would
CNCs
sorry,
CNF
certification,
look
like
I
think
folks
are
familiar
with
CNCs
certified
kubernetes
program
that
I
manage
and
we've
been
pretty
pretty
thrilled
with
how
that's
come
together.
It's
actually
kind
of
exceeded
all
of
our
our
aspirations
for
it.
B
We
just
announced
at
cube
Con
last
week
that
we'll
have
that
we
now
have
a
hundred
over
a
hundred
certified
kubernetes
implementations,
I
just
pasted
in
a
link
to
it.
That's
that
provides
some
useful
context,
but,
interestingly,
on
the
will
call
it
sort
of
enterprise
or
cloud
side,
we've
never
done
the
other
side
of
that
certification.
So
if
you
think
of
us,
like
Android,
we're
certifying
that
the
phones
are
compliant,
but
we've
never
said
of
certified
that
the
individual
apps
are
compliant.
B
B
And
then
you
could
validate
that
all
of
those
API
calls
are
say
in
the
stable
or
the
beta
api's
and
and
of
what
version
kubernetes
you're,
depending
on
not
an
alpha
and
not
any
kind
of
private
call,
and
that
would
be
a
way
of
showing
that
you
were
that
your
CNF
is
conforming
to
a
specific
version
of
the
the
kubernetes
api.
So
I
want
to
bring
this
up
and
I'm
gonna,
be
you
know,
writing
it
up
much
more,
but
I
I'm
these
are
very
early
days.
B
F
I've
just
thought
that
we
might
have
a
misunderstanding
here
regarding
ovp
program
and
where
this
Tosca
and
heat
is
coming
from.
That
was,
that
was
a
question
to
operators
which
of
these
has
to
be
sorted
from
on
that
point
of
view,
so
that
owner
has
to
work
waste
heat
or
can
work
with
Tosca
and
say
the
operator
said
it
has
to
be
supported
post.
B
Yeah
there
might
be
a
mismatch
here,
but
I
have
spoken
to
our
ped
and
to
her
Heather
Kirksey,
who
run
the
ovp
program
and
when
I
asked
them
okay.
Well,
how
is
how
is
OBP
gonna
work
for
CNF?
Their
answer
was
well.
We
haven't
really
figured
it
out
yet,
but
it's
likely
to
be
similar
to
the
PMF
program.
B
B
F
B
Yeah
engage
on
the
table
slack
channel
if
you
want
to
provide
some
additional
context
or
links
I
I'm,
just
beginning
to
try
to
come
up
to
speed
on
this
certification
question,
and
that
was
really.
The
purpose
of
the
call
today
was
was
to
talk
about
some
of
those
things,
inaudible,
okay.
Well,
we
stopped
one
time
thanks.
Everybody
for
the
call
today
and
I
will.