DASH Behavioral Model WG, 4 Aug 2022

Previous Meeting Next Meeting

⏯

youtube image

►

From YouTube: DASH Behavioral Model WG Aug 4 2022

Description

Underlay PR176 Marian - fixes
Mukesh: PR167 Fix SAI object create error in libsai adapter
Vijay Srinivasan: PR163 add vnet table to the pipeline; bring into line w/gNMI wrt VNET_ID and VNET_Table

A

Have some prs they wanted to review this week.

A

Mario and we usually start out this way, I guess.

B

Yeah yeah, I have one just not that big just to fix for underlay.

A

B

So if there's anything, if there isn't anything else, I'll start.

A

Yeah go for it. I just had one little thing to talk about later.

B

Okay, now I got.

B

Can you see my screen.

A

B

Yeah so quick background. We still have some unresolved parts with the underlay. We need to properly build the underlay headers of the packet under the ethernet under the ip.

B

So this fixes one of the things- and I also added some clarifications.

B

So previously we had um source ip after ncop disconnected from the virtual ip that the packet came with, so they could be um theoretically uh programmed different.

B

So I am fixing that by removing the underlay sip from the appliance over here, so this is gone.

B

B

It will be based on the web table lookup. So if we have a hit on the web table, meaning it's one of our virtual eyepiece, we just copy that virtual ip into the metadata underlay source ip for the future encapsulation.

B

So now it is solely based on the web table. um So we have already apis to program that, and now we are just making sure that it will be the same in the end cap yeah and the small comment for the appliance table that this table should be implemented using underlying size. So this is still a pending work. There are still attributes to this table. If you see there is the underly source mac, which corresponds to um to size switch attribute default mac, something like that and also we should probably properly program the neighbor max.

B

So this will be added later for now, I'm just removing the sim because it belongs to the virtual ip table this value. Yes, so there is no api changes. um This table is not generated api, so it doesn't affect anything yeah. So it's just the behavioral model.

C

B

D

Martin, I have kind of a 20 000 foot question. Where is there a way for us to convey like how far we are in terms of pipeline definition?

D

It seems like we're doing things incrementally, and you know we can all appreciate the week by week, changes but like. Where are we on this journey? I don't really have a good sense of that.

B

um I'd say we we are pretty close on vinnie to venus. uh What we are still missing is um one pull request by if I'm not mistaken, vj, which is to add an abstraction for venus, which will be exactly um mapping psi apis and behavioral model to control plane to the gmi apis, and then we are pending some of the clarifications and examples for inbound routing.

B

Maybe it will require some change, and after that I am almost confident. We can declare that v-net to v-net flow um is pretty much finalized apis at least then in the behavioral model. We can still improve on that, but it will be. Just I don't know stuff like maybe ipv6 support somewhere is missing, like connection tracking is not yet fully implemented, so we don't have stateful acl, but just for testing one packet, I think being a tv net is like. I don't know one to two weeks away.

D

Well, that's good um because it would be probably a waste of effort to do any. Let's say comprehensive test cases until some of these things are stable right, because every test would break every time. We do change like this or some would so. We need to pick a point where we say: okay, we think we're you know 95 stable on the on some things. We can always be adding features later that require new test cases, but we don't want to have a lot of churn right.

D

It'd, be really labor intensive to have to redo tests, because we decided to move something right.

B

Yeah exactly and the interface for tests, uh since it's psy we're talking about side. Thrift, as I said, seems to be like uh we have redone acls. This is by mukesh, um looks like that's the how they uh how they should be. uh It supports all of the atomic updates, all that, so I don't expect uh much more changes and it was helpful for to have a reference from sonic design to cd, uh to see the uh control, plane, apis and schema and to be able to cross reference that.

B

So we that way, we found everything that was um still not okay with the behavioral model, and now I am much more confident and can uh say that uh it it almost matches. We are a few comments away.

D

Good, we can maybe somehow, as a team collaborate on defining some, let's say, exemplar test cases that make a nice vertical slice through everything and expose all the assumptions right just to make sure like a sanity check and then once we think, that's good. We can then elaborate on test cases right, yeah,.

B

I think, as a base point, there is a nice kind of test case description in the sonic design. uh We just need to expand on that uh uh by using the conversion to sci apis and but it's an uh base that I probably will start with.

E

So in the same way- and you know I just want to uh oh sorry, chris um yeah- sorry uh so in the same vein, I just wanted to find out as we are. um You know, uploading psi apis in ocp repo, um and I guess I I heard in one of the calls that microsoft is picking up some of those header files and integrating into the sonic. You know for dash use case and then testing them out.

E

Are we getting any feedback in that respect? To see that you know it is going well or are they finding any issues that it's from the mapping perspective? Or it's not really?

E

So I we are testing on our side and, as you mentioned, you know, the pensandro team also helped out in terms of mapping from the schema to the apis.

E

But there is another revenue from which, where we can get any feedback is from microsoft, and I just wanted to see that are we are we receiving anything from their site.

B

Well, I guess that's why we're doing all these changes? That's the field, that's mostly based on feedback uh from microsoft,.

E

No, I I guess my question was marian- is that yes on the feedback, we are doing all these changes but as as they carry out a real, where you know I mean we are testing it at the side, level right and microsoft is integrating it at the sonic level.

E

I just wanted to find out that, are they fine? Are they finding any issues there that they're feeding it back to us and then saying that hey, you know? Well, you know there is this does not match, or has you know there are some other things that we need to really fix or so forth. Right, yes,.

B

I think we're talking about the same thing. If you go to the um there's repo there is, um I will be updating it today by the way, but there is this table fdb to science mapping. This is uh basically both my feedback to sonic and microsoft's feedback to psy.

B

This table, let me show it to you.

B

B

The goal of providing this table: where is it? Oh, it's not at the end ah here it is, you see there is a mapping from the fdb table to psi attributes. This is essentially what the sonic implementation needs to code and all of the blank spaces comments in this pull request.

B

uh Questions in line this is everything that is, that was not yet uh finalized. So all the feedback was contained in this table. You can go to the school request and check check the feedback from both sides.

B

It's called good good fdb to sci mapping yeah. Please review that. It's uh it's very useful to understanding how the sonic design maps to our site apis.

E

Okay, no good! That's good! Thank you. So I think, coming back to this topic of we need to win it use case validation, to say that everything is, you know, ready and it's working. So in one point the community is working towards. You know from the testing point of view.

E

Do we know the timeline by which perhaps you know microsoft plans to do finish, their internal testing and then come back with the feedback that okay, they have also achieved. You know the v-net two-winner thing.

B

Well, let's question to microsoft: I'm not sure if anyone is present from that team.

A

I'm here and prince is here, and this is here: it's just us. So what what's the question again? Honey.

E

So my question is that you know uh some some internal integration happening at microsoft, as we all know right, uh taking all the psy apis from those you know, ocpsi, repo and then integrating with sonic and then validating the we need to minute use case. So I just wanted to understand what is the timeline by which.

A

We're trying to go as fast as we can for sure um you know um prince. Do you have any ideas.

F

Yeah, so uh so this implementation of uh of appdb and and uh invoking the psi apis that we are targeting for end of august and uh and with that we'll try to do as much as testing possible like using the virtual switch and um and the behavioral model like uh or maybe like sciatica, if we haven't finalized on that. But but the implementation completion plan is by end of uh august.

F

A

Will include uh prince the controller part as well.

F

Right so so the controller part is attract separately by by uh like as part of the gnmi integration. So, oh I I heard I I had a conversation with them last week, so it's almost ready and they have given me a um like a not a fully g8 version of the the gnmi docker, but uh like a test docker, so that I can verify all our gnmi apis but yeah, but that time not completely sure of the timeline like. When can we be like production, ready or gi ready, but.

F

Yeah, it's it's uh both are in progress. Actually.

E

Yeah, so I I guess in in that, in that sense the question would be that as uh princess you guys, are doing this integration with sonic.

A

E

How are you, how do you plan to test it, uh in other words like what rachel was asking if there is a controller or any any docker gnmr docker making making jnama calls to sonic and then.

F

Really carrying it out.

E

F

Got it, but typically what we do for these kinds of testing? We don't rely fully on that controller right because we can generate all the um the app db by through, like you, know, json and push that to the sonic device right, the appliance card that is running sonic right. So so we we are not blocked or totally dependent on the controller to come and push the configs right. So so that's uh once it is ready. Of course we can use that, but uh but otherwise we will use uh some json configurations to to push.

F

A

A

Okay, once we're done sure um pj do you have a question.

G

Hey uh yeah marion, uh so you mentioned last time that you had some pa validation, inbound site changes too right for behavioral model. uh Is that something that you're gonna be raising up here?.

B

uh Yeah, but I'm still waiting for examples from michael to make sure that my understanding is right.

B

G

uh Yeah, the other thing is, I I just wanted to discuss the we need table pr, also, uh maybe yeah. uh We can do that later. We can go in sequence. Maybe we can discuss mukesh's pr. First.

A

um Lucas you want to go.

H

H

Are you able to see my screen yeah.

B

H

Yeah, so this pier is to uh fix the libsar error that we get when we try to create a psy object, for example, uh the eni object.

H

So what is happening is that uh for the psi, b4 tables that are actually psi objects we're returning an object id from sky, and this object id is something that's generated by the lib style.

H

So today, in our lip sci uh reference implementation for bnv2, we don't actually push this id into p4 itself, uh so that was the error. So uh so I had raised an issue for this one and basically the fix is to change the api.cpp template to fill in the p4 key by first generating that object and then filling it into the key.

H

uh This does not change any psi apis or anything. It's just a implementation change and the utils have changed a bit to like kind of generate an object without inserting it constantly, but first we need to uh generate the index alone today. The way it's done is along with the table insert the index is also generated, so I've separated out the api.

H

I've also added a test like test cases for the eni, create I've added it in the v net out and the both the side, trips, the pdf and the py test.

H

um So uh one one issue that I I've been facing with this side: thrift is that the there was another table that was added recently is the actual group table and the eni is now having references to that table. So I changed the uh when I, after I rebased to the latest. I change the eni create to include references to the actual group, so this.

B

B

Yeah yeah: it's not a mandatory attribute.

H

It's not managing I'm just trying to uh say that when I tried to do this it there was an issue. Currently I have it empty, but what I'm saying is there is some issue with the dash aqua group create in the thrift alone.

H

The we net out test works, so I was able to create a dash aqua group and then get the group id and fill it into the different stages here for the eni and it's passing, whereas, if I do the same in the thrift, this create dash, active group fails or actually it doesn't even reach the server for some reason so and it returns a null object id and then it fails here. So currently, I've just had coded the group id and the eni create goes through in the thrift as well.

H

So I think chris, we can probably talk about this offline and what is the issue here, but for this pr I think we are good.

D

Yeah, just yeah, we can try to work offline. I just wanted to ask you know, while marion's on the call too, is there any fixed psi api that might be involved in this, as opposed to auto-generated? That comes from the code, because I've had to manually create some fixed apis like switch attributes and things like that. Could we be running into anything there.

H

D

B

Auto generated.

D

Yeah, okay, you can take a look.

H

uh I have one more uh um we are coming in uh I'll be raising. uh This is for that uh the default drop.

H

So there was an issue for improving drop handling, so I'll, be adding code to kind of pass the default drop from the json and then add default drop tags in all the tables right for table miss.

H

So mostly there won't be any changes in the api. I guess, but there might be. I think there will be two instances of tables which will where the drop action will get removed, because you don't want to actually have an option to configure a drop in those tables.

H

B

Sounds good to me.

H

B

I might have a question about how you generate an object id, but I will need to have a closer look offline. uh Okay, because.

H

So I I'm just doing it based on how it was already done, except that uh so it was just generating a unique, uh a global variable with an incrementing id.

B

Yeah yeah there might be an issue from the very beginning. It might.

H

F

B

To your pull request, just thinking out loud because sometimes the object id is used not only for creating up for referencing an object but for other instances uh which might not be relevant yet so yeah not a big deal.

A

Will you be adding a couple of reviewers to this one.

H

A

H

I added uh marion and chris okay.

A

Perfect thanks, it's great work. Thank you.

D

But I'm happy to see other people starting to write tests already.

A

Yeah, okay, yeah. Thank you. So much awesome.

D

I I had a couple questions: okay, but um someone's ahead of me.

A

I don't think so. It's just more caching yeah.

E

It says yeah, oh, oh, okay,.

D

um One question is to prince you mentioned in passing that you might be integrating the sonic vs uh and you also might be integrating against this behavioral model. So, given all the talks, we've had about the current behavioral model structure with the dockers and the workflow, is there enough there that you can integrate to? As is or will you need some kind of changes to make it easy to integrate? Your stack.

F

So I think from my current understanding we have we have everything that is required, um but one thing is: we haven't started on on that uh that integration, yet so, uh maybe once we start, that process is when we realized, probably some missing pieces. So.

D

Yeah, maybe we have a little brainstorming session coming up to that point and talk about it, because I think all the all the pieces you need are there. It just may be a way of using them to suit you.

F

That's right, yeah, like.

D

You might want to compile against libsci and and not use scithrift right have your own sync. That would be a great integration.

D

So, okay, good. Let's uh have that chat when the right the time is right. The other thing I wanted to just ask the team at large there's been a lingering issue with which port we're sending packets out in the behavioral model. It's always sending them out port one just because no one's ever bothered to look at that piece of code, but can someone along the way, just change to egress spec, to equal, the ingress port or something because all the packets are coming out part one right, we're not really no one's ever really pay attention.

D

To that much I mean, can we just do it along the way in another pr or do we need a separate pr to do that? It's just one line of code.

D

Maureen, do you have any thoughts on that we've talked about it.

B

I'll do I'll do it separately, yeah, okay, this.

D

Will want to start writing test cases to show the you know packet coming out of each port and doing the right thing right. Thank you.

G

There's one thing.

H

I noticed, while doing the pr was that uh the recent make it takes a while to complete. I know it was very fast before yes,.

D

The scytheriff server compile is large. Now, if you want to, depending on what you're doing- and I wanted to spend a little time trying to document typical workflows for developer, like you're just compiling the p4 code, you want to see if the code works just type make p4, you don't have to wait for everything.

D

Do a make all when you want to run a thrift test, but you can do make p4 make psi, but if you do the make by thrift server, yes, it's large and that's beyond my it's as fast as I can given the structure right. It's doing.

H

It but I'm not sure if the dependency is all uh like the fastest, that it can be, because sometimes we see that the meta thai meta is getting built uh multiple times, maybe at least more than one second vijay also probably noticed this yeah.

D

Yeah five minutes being done to create libside and then it's also being called to do the scithrift server. But it's like a whole separate process. um I'm sure there's room for optimization and I welcome people to to get under the hood and start doing that.

D

It's a lot of work right to really fine-tune it and uh help is welcome. um Yeah, look.

A

At that look at it as well, um you look at it as well.

D

Yeah yeah, but just try to do the minimum, make steps when you're like in a development cycle and do the make all when you need it. That's that's the best advice I can give for now. Okay,.

G

Yeah yeah, I think, like especially when you're incrementally making changes to the scythe rift uh tests like the python test. Then, if you want to test something and do make all uh yeah, it gives an error at the end of a long make run and then you go fix it and then run it again, so that yeah those iterations are kind of longer. Now that's the thing.

D

Because it's breaking every time well, if you're doing iterative, pi test changes like you're, just writing scripts and you don't need to change libs, psi or p4 code. Then you don't need to make all at all. You can keep the switch and the server running the whole time and just edit the ptf test in real time. I don't know if people caught me demonstrating that last week, but I actually showed how I was inside the side.

D

Thrift client container in a bash session running tests and then at the code said hello, dash, peeps run it again.

D

It's like you know, 30 seconds cycle, there's no need to make all when just writing ptf tests, and so if people have questions on that and need a refresher first of all, maybe check out the video where I show that- um and you know you can always just contact me but make all is like only when you really need to it's pretty slow, but we've got a big system now and and and if there's questions about the best way to do certain workflows, I'd like to capture some of that in a quick.

D

You know quick start for developers, you know just like bullet list of the best workflows and then you can always deep dive. If you need to learn more just it's it's hard to capture it's hard to perceive all the questions. People will have when you're doing this stuff, but once people start using it, it becomes clear what the pain points are so be vocal.

D

Squeak like the wheel, the squeaky wheel, gets the grease and let's make this really convenient.

A

Sounds good thanks chris vijay did you have something.

G

uh Yeah, so I think I just wanted uh to share my pr.

G

Yeah, uh can you guys see the appear yeah? I think uh uh yeah. I think just the p4 changes we went over it last time. I think I did most of the changes actually all of the changes that were there in the comments that marion had.

G

But I think there is one when I was trying to modify the test. There is a eni to vna table which is removed now, so I cleaned up the v-net out test and also the scift v-net test, but there is I'm not able to add the outbound v-net entry because we don't have that object id uh fixed yet which is coming from mukesh's pr. So for now I've cleaned up all the references to eni to vienna entry, and uh uh I have not yet added the outbound v-net uh table entry create.

G

So is this: uh should we like merge it as is, and then add the v-net entry uh create in a separate pr or do you uh want me to wait for locations pr to go in and then make changes to this? On top of.

B

I think I don't see anything that needs to be changed with cash's request, so let's merge this one and then fix uh your venus pull request.

B

If, if no one else has any comments for the object id fixed fix, I can merge it.

B

I don't believe there was. There were any comments.

G

Yeah yeah sounds good yeah, so I liked a few more uh tests here to create the vena table entry and then update the peer.

A

Sounds good thanks.

A

I was wondering if we could go over a few items in the project sheet. You guys.

A

Sorry have to learn how to filter here, so um how about, if we filter on waiting for resource, um so it looks like at some point we'll need to write apis for state machine testing. We were supposed to check back today on connection tracking and compiler, which is dependent on the simulator how's this one going.

A

We have enough.

B

um Yeah, it's not really dependent on the simulator, but yeah we have all of the patches. I will be adding this.

A

B

Yeah yeah, it's in progress right.

A

In progress got it okay,.

H

Great hey uh marion uh regarding this uh connection, tracking, we'll be looking at the p4 side of the strength from amd pencendor. um Can we sync up with you on what changes is going into the bmv.

B

H

B

Sure sure you want to have another meeting.

H

B

Okay, so let's do it next week because the engineer that's doing that is coming back from vacation. I would want to invite him as well.

D

Mark martin on that topic, at what point will we make the bmv ii enhanced version part of this repo? If at all or part of some, let's say public shared project.

B

So there is still some work to be done, um specifically uh the compiler generates for for each apply of the table. It generates another instance of the table and when the table is self-learning, we need to maintain all of them simultaneously like update all of them at one time when there is a add-on miss.

B

uh So this is not yet complete um so that this engineer when he will actually uh have that working as well, we can upload that to behavioral model, and then we will have the add-on miss available and we can do stateful acls.

D

Oh we'll be actually part of the p4 lang, behavioral model repo.

B

No, it won't be. I don't think we have any plan to push it there at the moment it will be a separate fork.

D

Okay, so it'll live, it will live in the dash repo.

B

Yeah, at least for now, let's see if it's really working. If it's working, we don't have any other issues, then we can raise the question if we want to contribute it back to behavioral model.

D

Okay, so putting that aside for the moment, you're thinking you want to just get it stabilized a little bit, um get the big problems out of the way and then somehow transfer that to the stash repo and we'll build build. Yeah yeah probably build a docker file out of it like we're doing and then just integrate into this workflow.

B

D

B

Because, right now we can only do packet based testing. We can. We cannot do connection based testing, which is very desirable as well.

D

Yeah with that, then just completely replace the current bmv 2 that we're just getting from people lang, build our own docker file and and run our own behavioral model with all the source code present.

B

I'm not sure what you mean by completely replaced because it's just a patched bmv2 but different repo link, basically yeah.

D

Well, we're gonna.

B

D

Well, no, what I mean is right now, the behavioral model running in the dash repo is not built in place. We're not compiling anymore. It's part is pulled from people laying docker hub.

B

Oh yeah yeah we'll need to change that.

D

We'll need to go back and build it from source and build a local or maybe publish the docker file. Okay.

D

So when we start getting close to that point, we probably need to put our heads together and figure out the mechanics of that right how to transition to that, because where, where the dash repo started a few months ago before I started tinkering with it was all the artifacts were in one giant docker file, and you built everything in one place and it was all from scratch, and now I've kind of disaggregated and reused public docker images to the extent possible, so we'll have to figure out how to like transition from what you've got going on in your fork to what we have in the dash rebound right.

D

It won't just be uh or clipped it over. We'll have to do some yeah massaging.

E

So does this uh so does this bm b2 that we are using right now? Does this match the current pna spec.

A

Right we needed.

B

A

Add extensions right, marion.

B

Yeah, just one from the pna.

D

Yeah the current bmv2 in the dash repo, that's running all the tests in the ci pipeline. It's just vanilla, bmv2 from p4 lane.

E

And then, and then what was the? What was the response on this in terms of the extensions pna extension.

D

Are we planning to that's what people have been working on kind of in a fork? It's not really visible to everybody, but there's been this ongoing development championed by nvidia with other people helping now that's going to be the properly modified behavioral model that has the pna foot connection. Oriented enhancement we'll need to. You know basically build bmv 2 from source because it's modified turn it into a docker image that we can then run in the dash repo to replace the vanilla one.

D

So that's work in progress.

A

That's this one: I'm displaying right here right, uh aligning with dna, yeah, yeah.

D

I guess that's it yeah, that's the grand effort. That's been going on kind of in the back room for a while. We want to promote it to the front rooms as soon as we can.

A

Yeah- and it said we were gonna sync with- is it roop? That's on vacation, marion.

B

A

Yeah, should we check back on this next week, yeah? Okay, let's do that. Thank you and then um vijay. Did you see this one? We had assigned it to you, yeah, okay, cool.

G

Yeah, I think this is just removing uh the ena id from the key. The change itself is simple, uh but since marion had uh uh mentioned that he had more changes coming in in that pa validation area, so we're just holding off on this.

B

Okay, yeah, that's right thing to do: no need to to go over twice. Yeah.

A

So we're not yeah, so we're just gonna pause on that. Okay and then did anyone want this egress port should equal ingress port, or is this a thing on the p4 box.

B

You can assign it to me I'll. Do that yeah! Sorry! I have issues with myself.

A

I'm sorry, okay, um I have to turn it into an issue I'll. Do that later. um Okay, I'll do that brian and then the other one was did we want to look at anything that was blocked.

A

F

A

Bj and mukesh that compare the open contrail to patandomati blah blah blah. This is the whole connection tracking thing that mario baldi handed over yeah. So do you need some background or context on this at all.

H

Yeah definitely so I think this this is where, like we would like to discuss with marian about the what is coming into bmv 2, so that we can figure out how to go about this.

A

So the history of this was, um we were trying to decide on connection tracking and they dug up a piece of existing open contrail. I believe it was. We decided we should probably use that, and so the decision was made and then mario baldy was going to actually do the coding. Do I have that right guys um and then we kind of got stuck yeah.

C

No, that's yeah, that's correct. I think the the question here was more. The the control model is only taking care of connect of connection addition and removal to the connection table. It's not really doing connection tracking.

C

So so we were wondering uh and honestly unfortunately, I don't remember if, in the past discussions we ever discussed is whether there is an interest also in having actual connection and tracking.

A

I believe gerald had wanted connection tracking and then we could actually test for whether um the connections were being tracked through the model as well remind me, you guys, can you help me remember yeah, but.

B

Mario, what do you mean exactly by actual connection tracking, like.

H

C

Number acknowledgement numbers the contrail model. The control code is not doing. That is just dealing with adding connection to the connection table and removing them handling the timers, which is already a lot. We have discussed a lot about it, but there's no actual tracking of the connection. While it is open.

H

I think gerald mainly wanted the tcp state machine transition plan which may be covered by the controller.

C

Exactly that's covered by the contract, but that's not uh connection tracking per se. Right I mean, or you can call it whatever you want, but there is more to connection tracking, which is to keep track of the sequence.

B

Yeah yeah right uh right, you, uh mario, what we are talking about mainly is connection learning for stateful acl. It's not really connection tracking, with uh sequence numbers with window validation and so on. I don't believe there is such a thing required.

C

Yeah but, but I don't know, it could be interesting to consider because, uh especially in the context of uh of firewalling and security, if, uh if we keep track of the connections but then allow packets that are not conformant with with tcp could be a security threat and and the possible denial of service attack.

C

So I know I mean I just wanted to to raise the point because, as we were discussing internally on what was there to implement, um we we got to this point, and I couldn't remember if this was ever discussed and I guess it was not. um But it may be worth discussing.

A

We set that up for the next call, then you guys, you know, because it's 10 49 now and um we could talk about this specifically in the next call. If you like, or I can do a separate meeting with us and gerald yeah.

C

I guess we can do it in the next call.

A

Okay, would that work for everyone else.

A

Yeah yeah, okay, because this is a huge topic and I think we we've spent an hour on this just before.

A

Okay and I'll, try and I'll try and hit you guys up in email as well I'll talk to gerald and try and get more information thanks. Mario for the context, I didn't expect you to be on the call today.

C

A

Awesome. Okay, so that's pretty much what I have here and like the project, I'm going to call this the project view. So does anyone else have anything.

A

And look in the chat window here.

H

So chris, how do we sync up on the.

A

In the chat window, he said you can contact him at chris.summers, keysight.com.

D

Yeah, if you wanted to send me an email or we can do a teams meet or whatever I try to find you on this team, but I didn't seem to find it with the chat, but we can do it. We can do a video meeting walk through it. I'm available right after this meeting.

A

Marion, do you want us to focus on anything specifically this next week or just just keep doing pr's.

B

Yeah, as long as we have still have pull requests, I think that's the most important thing to review.

A

Okay, well, thanks very much guys hope you have a good day.