►
From YouTube: Network Policy API Meeting for 20230523
Description
Network Policy API Meeting for 20230523
A
Hello,
everyone
today
is
Tuesday
May,
23rd
2023.
This
is
a
meeting
of
the
Sig
Network
policy,
API
subgroup
to
Sig
Network.
This
is
a
cncf
sponsored
meeting,
so
please
be
nice
to
each
other
and
use
good
language.
Let's
try
and
have
a
good
meeting
today,
so
not
too
much
on
the
agenda
today,
just
kind
of
want
to
go
back
over
some
of
the
stuff
we
got
done
since
last
time.
A
One
big
good
note
is
that
our
website
got
updated.
So
now
we
aren't
just
pointing
folks
towards
the
admin
Network
policy
resources
were
kind
of
an
all-encompassing
Network
policy,
API
working
group
working
on
some
active
apis
and
future
apis.
This
was
kind
of
a
big
website,
refactor
I'm
sure
I
missed
stuff.
A
The
other
big
thing
that
went
in
was
some
of
the
conformance
test-based
infrastructure
and,
like
actual
setup,
plus
some
tests
as
well
for
amp
and
BMP.
That
stereo
had
worked
hard
on,
so
super
excited
to
see
those
get
rolling,
still
a
lot
of
work
to
do,
but
is
there
anything
you
know
any
issues
that
you
might
need
help
with
there
Surya
that
folks
can
pick
up
or
is
there
any
interest
in
in
helping
Surya
with
that
from
anyone
else?
Here.
B
Api
is
because
we
want
to
adopt
conformance
profiles
really
in
the
end,
the
crd,
the
Gateway
API
folks
have
so
that
we
have
a
way
of
reporting
back
the
conformance
of
an
API
per
implementation
example:
obn
K
Andrea,
they
all
adopt
these
Upstream
tests,
use
the
cre
and
report
back
that
result.
And
then
we
tell
on
our
website
that
ABC
plugins
are
conformed
with
A
and
P
or
ABC.
Plugins
are
confirmed
with
PA
and
P
and
so
on.
B
Right
and
like
Andrew
mentioned,
we
have
gotten
the
framework
in
and
I
think
I've
gotten
the
basic
tests
for
admin,
Network
policy,
both
Ingress
and
egress
separately,
but
in
the
pipeline
there's
also
tests
coming
for
a
mix
of
Ingress
and
egress,
as
well
as
the
priority
Fields
this
in
the
spec
that
we
have
for
A
and
P
like
if
you
have
multiple
NPS
with
different
priorities,
ensuring
that
the
priority
takes
distance
right.
So
those
kinds
of
tests
are
in
the
pipeline
and
I'll
do
the
same
for
Baseline
adminator
policy.
B
One
thing
that
also
got
merged
is
the
integration
tests
between
adminator
policy,
Baseline,
adminator
policy
and
network
policy.
It
was
a
basic
test,
but
I
think
it's
good
enough
right,
like
really
the
goal
was
to
check
if
pass
action
works
or
not
right
like
if
you
pass
from
enp,
you
have
to
ensure
that
the
NP
is
the
one
you
match
on
and
so
on.
So
I
think
we've
made
good
progress
there,
but
there's
still
lots
to
do
so.
The
ones
that
I'm
already
going
to
do
I'm,
not
opening
your
shoes.
C
B
You
go
through
the
issues,
part
of
our
Reaper,
and
you
can
see
a
lot
of
these
new
issues
that
I
have
created
with
the
tag
conformance.
Basically,
all
these
are
things.
I
need
help
with
right,
so
I
don't
I'm,
not
sure.
If
so,
this
won't
be
a
priority
to
me
until
I
finish
my
Downstream
implementation.
C
Sounds
good
sounds
good,
I'll.
First,
take
a
look
at
the
existing
couple
of
tests
that
you
have
already
written
and
and
see
to
be
honest,
I,
don't
think
Kendra,
it's
still
a
work
in
progress,
so
I
don't
think
I.
We
have
anything
to
test
against
it
yet,
but
it
will
be
very
soon
so
for
the
basic
functionalities.
I.
Think
like
like
pass,
for
example,
I
think
we
should
be
able
to
test
that
with
entry
shortly.
B
B
Is
they
have
these
tests
and
then
the
downstream
implementations
import,
the
Gateway
API
in
their
Downstream
implementations
and
just
refer
to
the
same
test
and
run
it
and
Report
the
test
results
back
so
I'm
trying
to
see
if
I
can
do
the
same
for
OB
and
K
with
the
existing
tests.
We
have
and
focus
on
that
part
really.
The
integration
before
adding
anything
newer,
but
yeah
I
do
want
to
finish
the
Baseline
admin
Network
policy
Basics
as
well
before
I
move
on
to
that.
A
Awesome
yeah,
good
work,
I
think
like
Yang.
It's
super
critical
that,
while
we're
developing
these
tests
that,
like
we're
at
least
getting
some
signal
as
to
they're
working
for
entry
to
set
up
as
well
right
like
if
we,
if
we
just
design
it
for
a
specific
cni
like
we
would
just
want
to
make
sure
that
things
aren't
getting
tightly
coupled
anywhere
by
accident
or
anything.
So
it's
definitely
going
to
be
important
that
we
work
together
on
this,
especially
right
now,
because
it's
all
manual
right,
like
none
of
it's
automated,
so.
A
B
B
Is
that
I,
just
stuck
to
yamas
like
plain
yeah,
most
the
describing
pnba
and
being
the
tests
very
similar
to
how
the
Gateway
class
and
Gateway
API
folks
have
done?
I
did
not
use
any
helper
functions
or
anything
like
that
right.
There's,
basically,
no
framework
is
what
I'm
trying
to
say
and
we
can
always
improve
those
bits
in.
But
let's
start
somewhere.
A
A
A
What
else
do
we
have
I?
Had
one
small
issue
open
for
updating
our
owners?
I
already
did
it
internally,
so
Yang
and
I
are
now.
This
is
the
only
maintainers
and
I'm
also
updated
the
big
Network
policy,
API
org
members,
removing
Ricardo
and
adding
Yang
I
got
a
plus
one
from
Ricardo,
but
Shane
I
see
you're
on
it,
I'm
sure,
as
I
maintained
as
a
chair.
If
you
could
give
a
plus
one
here,
that
would
also
be
awesome.
A
A
Cool
I'll
keep
talking
just
for
a
little
bit
so
now
that
we're
kind
of
like
to
our
view
on
Alpha,
One
official
release
right
important
things
are,
you
know,
continuing
continuing
to
actually
finalize
and
finish
up
the
first
draft
implementations
and
then
push
forward
to
Beta
or
even
a
V1
Alpha
2.
If
we
need
to
I,
have
this
project
I
need
to
update
it.
A
B
Yeah
sounds
good
I.
That
was
actually
one
thing
that
I
forgot
to
bring
up,
which
is
in
the
conformance
tests.
We
are
splitting
the
features
into
core
and
extended
and
there's
a
lot
of
extended
I
think
we
already
agreed
that
same
labels
and
not
same
labels
will
be
in
the
extended
suit
and
I'm,
not
in
the
near
future,
going
to
add
any
tests
for
that,
but
the
named
ports
right
I,
just
took
the
liberty
of
48
and
under
extended,
but
I
did
want
to
check.
B
E
B
E
B
B
A
So
I
think
one
of
the
main
things
we
should
get
done
before
like
pushing
forward
on
on
any
new
features
and
stuff
is
going
to
be
that
issue
you
made
sturia
for
yeah
outlining
the
workflow
workflow
process,
I
see
you're
assigned.
Do
you
need
help
like
I
know,
you
have
a
lot
of
stuff
on
your
plate
with
all
the
performance
testing
stuff
I
I
feel
like
this
is
blocking
us
from
moving
forward
in
like
an
organized
fashion.
B
D
A
A
B
A
B
Yeah,
that's
my
thinking,
yeah,
so
that
I
think
keeping
the
use
cases
as
the
primary
thing
is
good
to
get
some
discussion
going
and
if
we
feel
it's
valid,
then
the
real
Signet
and
Peppa
whatever
like
that,
should
not
take
so
much
time
like
it
will
take
time
in
the
sense
that
it'll
be
the
actual
API
bits
that
we
want
right
like
okay,
I'm
gonna.
Do
this
change
this
back?
This
change
the
status
and
then
there'll
be
discussion
around
it.
C
B
A
So,
just
as
we
like,
as
we
move
forward,
adding
new
use
cases
like
Siri
is
already
opened
here.
Doing
it
in
like
more
of
a
standardized
way,
I
think
will
help
a
lot
now:
I
I,
don't
sorry
I,
don't
want
to
end
up
I
hear
what
you're
saying
like
you
can
merge
stuff.
You
know
use
cases
and
readme
format
too.
A
Yeah
I'm
saying
the
npap
process,
or
whatever
basically
embodies
what
you
already
did
here,
plus
some
syntactical
sugar
on
top
of
it
right
like
like
I,
don't
think
and
perhaps
or
whatever
we
want
to
call.
It
has
to
be
like
a
super
formal
process
like
you
can
open
a
new
mpep
describing
some
user
Stories
We
can
agree
on
those
user
stories
and
then
merge
it.
D
D
E
A
Yeah,
totally
and
and
like
I
said,
like
feel
free
to
take
from
what
gave
API
has
done,
but
also
like
if
we
need
to
make
it
more
flexible
one
way
or
the
other
like
we
have
the
power
to
do
that
right.
So
I
think,
in
my
opinion,
like
as
long
as
we
make
sure
it's
really
highly
iterative,
rather
than
really
highly
like
you
have
to
have
everything
done
at
the
same
time,
at
one
point
before
it
gets
merged,
we'll
be
good.
A
A
A
Sweet
well
we're
gonna
have
a
short
meeting
today
and
get
a
bunch
of
time
back
so
keep
an
eye
out
for
that
release.
I'll
ping,
our
Channel,
once
it's
done
too
and
yeah
we'll
just
keep
soldiering
on
ahead.
So
thanks
so
much
for
all
your
help,
and
we
will
talk
to
you.
Oh
in
two
weeks,
I
am
actually
not
gonna,
be
here.
So
can
someone
raise
their
hand
to
run
the
meeting
in
two
weeks.