►
From YouTube: zoom 0
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
B
This
is
just
something
I
observed
when
trying
to
join
a
worker
node
with
qadian
on
a
node
that
did
not
have
a
default
route
and
discovered
the
you
know
very
reasonable
and
useful
API
server
bind
address,
verification
that
had
been
added.
However,
it
didn't
seem
applicable
for
the
worker,
node
and
so
I
was
wondering
if
that
made
sense,
to
go
ahead
in
special
case.
The
places
that
needed
to
be
handled
so
that
a
worker
node
could
join
without
a
bind
address.
B
It's
just
a
matter
of
some
nodes
that
are
in
a
physical
system
that
are
only
routed
internally,
like
let's
say
over
InfiniBand
or
something,
and
they
may
have
a
couple
of
other
routes
to
other
things
like
management
nodes,
but
they
don't
have
default
route
out
to
the
internet
or
any
other.
You
know
general
networks,
so.
A
You
can
always
present
this
via
Etsy
host
and
having
an
override,
so
there's
been
like
weird
combinations
that
people
have
had
over
time.
I
think
the
most
amazing
one
that
I
ever
saw
was
an
ipv4
route
over
a
loopback
which
was
created
FPV
for
over
ipv6
loop,
loop
back
address
creation,
and
it
you
can
update
your
Etsy
host
or
have
some
type
of
override
there.
So
you
need
some
address
to
be
able
to
hit
the
API
server.
So
I'm
I'm
curious
what
you,
what
your
so.
B
There
are
routes
for
interfaces
which
will
connect
us
to
the
API
server
or
to
a
proxy,
or
you
know,
load
balancer
for
it.
But
it's
just
not
set
up
as
default,
because
the
workloads
and
things
that
will
be
running
we
don't
want
to
be
able
to
send
traffic
out
and
of
course,
then
there's
Network
policies
and
things
to
deal
with
all
that.
But
the
idea
is
just
that
these
nodes
are
very
particularly
configured.
B
C
A
C
We
have
to
have
to
make
a
number
of
modifications
I,
like
the
second
to
last
post
in
that
tracking
issue.
I
listed
all
the
code
changes
that
we
have
to
do
because,
currently,
due
to
the
change
and
forbids
you
did
with
introducing
the
join
control,
plane
work
for,
we
now
have
coupled
these
routing
checks
deepening
tomorrow,
cold.
A
Again,
I'm,
not
I'm,
not
opposed
to
this
I,
definitely
get.
Let's
consider
this.
This
is
definitely
a
feature
in
it.
It's
not
a
bug
by
design
at
least
currently
and
if
folks
want
to
work
on
it,
I'm
not
opposed
to
working
on
it
for
114
113.
We
are
already
in
lockdown
we're
gonna,
be
nearing
lockdown
for
feature
freeze
next
week,
Friday,
so
there's
pretty
much
no
way
given
their
current
backlog,
which
I'll
talk
about
a
little
bit
later.
B
A
Happily,
get
it
for
114,
pretty
good
I.
Think,
given
our
current
backlog,
which
I'll
go
through
in
just
a
second
at
the
end,
is
that
113
is
very
tight
and
we
still
have
a
ton
of
work
to
do
and
given
the
current
state
and
the
potential
disruption,
this
could
have
on
critical
path.
Flow
of
operation.
I'd
be
I'd,
be
little
remiss
on
making
this
change
unless
it
was
very
minut
sure.
B
A
Next,
up
on
the
agenda
is
for
me
to
hear
he
is
not
so
he
had
a
PR
like
we've
done
a
lot
of
work
with
the
rearrangement
to
promote
for
GA
to
get
the
phases
work
out
of
an
it
now,
I've
seen
most
of
the
phases
work
shuffle
over
to
in
it.
The
question
I
have
and
I
don't
know,
who's
been
synching
with
Fabrizio.
Oh
he's
there
for
me,
you're.
A
A
E
Let
me
okay,
so
no,
we
are
not
planning
to
have
a
phases
for
join
this
cycle,
so
this
is
not
in
scope.
E
A
E
Currently,
there
are
two
phases:
there
are
two
action
under
alpha
that
that
belongs
to
the
unit.
Workflow
one
is
download
and
the
other
is
a
pre-flight
check
so
that
you
so
we
can
keep
and
open
an
issue.
We
can
decide
to
simply
remove
these.
This
action
under
alpha
I,
don't
see
them
as
really
useful
as
a
because
you
can
do
basically
nothing
without
all
the
other
steps
they
can
be.
F
A
Do
you
what
it,
what
did
I
do?
No
I
like
getting
your
how
to
take
on
user
workflow.
So
there's
you
know
the
work
to
shuffle
all
the
stuff
to
to
from
initially
alpha
phases
to
move
to
an
it
right.
So
in
it
whatever
all
right,
the
there
are
a
couple
of
things
that
still
remain
in
alpha,
which
are
these
weird
split
things
that
exist
across
both
in
it
and
join
right,
one
of
which
is
pre-flight
checks.
A
A
A
C
E
A
Fine
I
didn't
see
any
work
going
on
with
it.
E
A
Are
so
we
are
getting
close
to
the
deadline
that
it's
totally
fine
with
me
at
this
stage
so
long
as
we
finish
off
any
reducing
the
backlog,
because
it's
not
a
requirement
that
we've
kind
of
made
or
stated
in
it
phases
and
the
detail
out
of
alpha
for
most
of
those
things
is
most
I've
seen
a
lot
of
the
things
going
through
and
they
look
good.
So
I
think
users
will
be
happy.
I'm
happy
with
the
changes,
I
think
as
long
as
we
track
for
next
cycle
for
the
join
workflow.
That
will
also
be
useful.
C
E
E
A
Think
we
should
I
think
we
should
leave
it
experimental
for
the
cycle
until
we
answer
the
search
problem
with
either
your
proposal
or
mine.
I
think
it
should
still
be
experimental.
I
think
we
should
definitely
update
the
instructions
for
the
hae
deployment,
but
I
I
would
be
remiss
on
because
people
ask
about
that
question
all
the
time.
A
E
E
E
A
I
mean
we
could
because
0
if
we
quarantine
the
certs
copying
as
an
option
as
a
separate
step,
it
is
an
opt-in
step,
so
people
can
use
existing
tools,
for
you
know
if
their
ansible
base
that
can
do
their
ssh
copy.
That
way.
If,
then,
then,
we
could
promote
and
update
documentation
and
still
add
the
new
option
in
the
future
too,
and
then
just
call
it
out
in
the
documentation.
E
A
No
I
know
that
I'm
not
I'm
not
recommending
doing
that
change.
When
what
I'm
stating
is
that
we
could
call,
we
could
still
have
at
remote
control
plane,
join
there's
two
options:
one
is
hold
on
promoting
from
experimental.
The
other
is
to
promote
control,
plane
join,
but
just
call
out
right
now
that
you
know
in
the
future
like
open
an
issue
in
the
future
we
already
have.
You
should
open
I
guess
that
this
should
be
a
parameter
as
part
of
control.
Plane
join
I.
A
C
A
A
Way
cos
you're
freezing
that
last
bit,
so
the
docs
currently
are
still
are
the
old
path
urine.
How
would
you
feel
we
could
add
a
sub-element?
We
could
basically
say,
like
you
know,
this
is
the
experimental
road.
F
C
A
So
the
documentation
is
there:
we
should
be
getting
user
feedback
directly.
If
there's
an
issue,
I
I
think
I'm
fine
with
leaving
it
for
the
cycle,
I'm
promoting
it.
Next,
the
docs
are
updated,
they
do
reference,
people
should
be
using
it,
and
then
we
can
answer
the
search
problem
and
whether
or
not
we
want
to
have
a
separate
sub
command
for
it
or
if
it
should,
because
are
we
gonna,
add
flags
around
some
of
the
stuff
or
not.
C
The
problem
with
the
four
axis
of
commands
is
that
when
we
introduce
them
and
we
promote
to
be
the
entry
GA,
we
have
to
apply
a
duplication
cycle
to
them,
so
experimental
control
plane.
If
we
like
release
it,
you
may
DM
with
this
command.
We
have
to
keep
it
until
it's
deprecated
and
removed.
So
my
suggestion
here
was
true:
if
we're
going
to
use
control,
placing
a
control
plane
as
a
flag,
we
can
either
basically
the
description
that
this
experimental
and
not
use
experimental
as
part
of
the
name.
A
Well,
then,
we'd
have
to
update
the
docs
that
the
problem
is
the
consistency
across
the
components
inside
of
kubernetes
kubernetes
has
this
is
already
standard
practice
instead
of
kubernetes.
If
you
look
at
the
couplet,
for
example,
which
has
literally
hundreds
of
flags,
this
is
standard
operating
procedures
to
add
an
experimental
as
an
as
a
command-line
argument.
So.
E
A
A
A
We
should
probably
try
I've
been
for
several
cycles.
I've
been
wanting
to
address
that
issue
and
I
think
until
we
get
an
actual
I
think
another
gating
feature
to
for
height
for
control
plane
join
to
be
promoted
is
we
should
have
a
full
set
of
tests
in
place
that
actually
deploys
an
H
a
cluster.
So
now,
with
that
in
mind,
I
think
that's
probably
totally
prudent
for
us
to
not
promote
at
this
time,
and
then
that
makes
sense
so
going
through
113
lists.
I've
I've
gone
through
like
Lib
Amir
and
myself
went
last
week.
A
We
kind
of
divvied
up
a
set
of
clean
up
work
to
do,
and
one
of
the
cleanup
things
that
I
had
done
was
to
go
through
the
entire
113
milestone
list
and
try
to
quick
pass
triage
I've
done
that
everything
has
been
labeled.
Almost
things
are
assigned,
I,
don't
know.
If
anyone
has
any
questions
come
as
complaints.
What
I'm
going
to
do,
probably
at
the
end
of
this
week,
is
anything
that
is
purely
a
feature
that
we
know
cannot
be
accomplished
by
the
end
of
next
week.
A
I
will
probably
punt
depending
upon
whether
or
not
some
some
things
are
like
feature
bugs.
They
really
are
like
there's
actually
a
bug
in
the
code.
But
in
order
for
to
fix
that
bug,
you
really
need
to
modify
or
add
a
feature,
but
from
what
I
see.
Currently,
the
current
list
is
about
55
open
items.
It's
pretty
high
for
this
stage
of
the
game.
I,
don't
know
if
other
folks
have
had
a
chance
to
look
through
it.
Some
of
them
are
tracking
issues
where
it's
basically
like.
A
We
need
to
work
with
other
SIG's
to
get
these
other
things
done
have
if
folks
could
have
a
chance
to
look
through
this
list
before
the
next
meeting.
That
would
be
super
helpful
and,
if
you
feel
like
you
want
to
boot,
things
out
of
this
milestone
feel
free
to
talk
about
it,
anything
that's
kind
of
a
bug.
We
can
potentially
boot
as
long
as
it's
not
a
higher
priority
bug
if
it
affects
a
lot
less
users
and
it's
kind
of
a
niche
case.
A
I
know
that
Ruben
and
I
went
through
kind
of
a
very
niche
case
that
exists.
There
there's
definitely
a
bug
in
command
line.
Override
options
for
certain
scenarios
on
like
couplet
join,
for
example,
Google
join,
will
will
prefer
the
the
config
that
it
download
versus
some
of
the
command
line
overrides,
but
that's
kind
of
a
weird
scenario
that
that
they
encountered
so
because
it's
an
affect,
as
many
people
are
happy
to
punt
those
things
out
of
the
113
cyclop.
A
A
We
we
technically
have
because
this
work
is,
is
this
weird
type
of
it's
not
net
new
things?
It's
more
of
a
shuffle
or
cleanup.
We
can
probably
be
legit
in
spanning
into
past
code,
flush
right,
so
I'm,
okay,
with
that
we're
kind
of
stretching
the
limits
of
of
that
statement
of
what
code
slush
is
but
I'm.
Okay,
with
that
yeah.
A
Do
a
full
audit
one
of
these
days
to
hopefully
once
we
have
most
of
the
work
done,
so
I
will
probably
set
up
time
and
a
walkthrough
with
Ruben
and
if
other
folks
want
to
join
to
you,
like
literally,
go
through
and
and
audit
the
commands
to
make
sure
that
we
are.
Everything
is
kosher
and
ask
all
those
thorny
questions
of
what
happens
when
you
actually
combine
option
a
and
option
B
for
the
new
sub
command
as
they've
switched
and
floated
arranged.
E
Yeah,
there
is
only
one
topic
that
was
a
Rises
the
yesterday,
when
I
reviewing
one
of
the
PR
and
Q.
Is
that
probably
we
need
to
decide
how
to
end
our
Flags
four
phases
and
because
the
current
approach
is
really
simple.
So
all
the
phases
are
getting
all
the
flags
that
the
Cuban
mean
in
it
L
as,
but
we
are
finding
to
took
to
possible
change
to
this
logic.
One
is
that
some
phases
need
flag,
which
is
the
Cooper
Frog
Cooper
config
flag,
that
it
is
not
needed
by
the
init
workflow.
A
If
it,
the
problem
is
like
we
have
many
phases
and
it's
it's
a
if
it
applies
to
like
80%.
So
this
is
where
this
is
kind
of
the
I
knew
this
was
coming.
This
is
why
I
said
like
next
week:
I
want
to
do
it
on
it,
because,
because
I've
already
come
across
this
use
case,
a
couple
of
times
in
the
past
and
I
know
that,
with
this
work
as
we
percolated
the
sub
commands,
when
we
first
had
that
conversation,
I
knew
that
this
was
coming.
C
A
E
A
C
E
E
A
E
Have
one
thing
that
I'd
like
so
that
there
are
some
new
contributors
that
are
helping
us
and
doing
the
phases
and
other
factor
that
we
are
doing.
I
would
like
to
thank
that
to
thank
them
and
ask
them
to
to
speak
at
this
meeting,
because
it
is
important
to
impress
impression
and
I
have
a
other
opinion.
F
A
C
D
C
A
Just
with
regards
to
new
folks
kind
of
joining,
if
you
are
interested
I,
if
you
haven't
signed
up
already,
there
is
a
contributor
summit,
but
there's
currently
a
waitlist
I'm
sure
there
will
probably
be
folks
who
want
to
attend,
but
for
coop
con
on
North
America,
which
is
gonna,
be
in
Seattle
in
a
month
a
little
over
a
month.
There
are.
A
There
is
a
contributor
summit
before
the
actual
conference.
They
should
have
probably
done
a
PSA
about
this
little
earlier,
because
you'd
have
to
be
added
to
the
wait
list
that
you
can
get
on
that
waitlist
just
try
and
be
there
and
we
should
have.
We
will
have
separate
sessions
at
group
con
too
as
well.
Where
are
we
happy
to
sit
down
and
chat
with
new
folks,
too
and
sort
of
get
some
face-to-face
time
and
discuss
issues
that
are
there
kind
of
roadmap
items.
C
Something
else
I
wanted
to
ask
from
folks
is
that
I'm,
one
of
the
few
people
who
like
front
whine,
the
cube,
ADM
issue
tracker
and
we
daily
get
some
reports
from
users
like
having
issues
with
setting
up
a
poster
using
comedian.
So
I
wanted
to
ask
this
group
if,
if
you
have
free
time
like
check
the
tracker
from
time
to
time
and
respond
to
users,
if
they
have
any
problems,
that's
what
I
do
every
day,
but
I
definitely
need
help
with
this.
Okay.
C
A
You
what
might
be
beneficial
I'm,
a
big
fan
of
it.
You
know
we're
kind
of
getting
off
of
the
1:13
train,
which
is
fine,
I
was
kind
of
done,
and
I
figured
we'll
talk
about
it
later.
An
ounce
of
prevention
is
worth
a
pound
of
cure,
and
what
I
often
find
is
that
I
keep
repeating
myself
and
like
over
the
course
of
X
years
that
I've
worked
on
this
stuff,
say:
I,
repeat
myself,
maybe
like
a
thousand
times
so
I'm,
not
I.
A
Don't
really
have
a
good
solution
for
this
yet
and
I
haven't
really
thought
of
a
good
solution,
but
having
sort
of
like
a
set
of
webcasts
that
basically
walked
through
literally
walk
through
the
documentation
in
full
gory
detail.
It
helps
a
lot
because
it
gives
folks
a
a
point
where
they
can
actually
like.
A
In
fact,
a
lot
of
times
they
don't
even
know
it's
there,
so
that
has
always
been
a
problem,
so
they
just
kind
of
yellow
I
got
a
tool
just
heard
about
it
and
just
go
so
the
if
folks
have
like
a
sort
of
onboarding
thing
or
maybe
wanted
to
even
have
like
a
web
session
that
gets
recorded.
That's
basically
like
here's,
your
on
board,
cube,
ATM
and
just
kind
of
I
can
even
talk
with
George
about
setting
up
like
a
community
session
about
it
where
folks
can
just
walk
through
it.
A
I
think
that
would
be
helpful
to
folks
who
want
to
get
more
involved
in
the
community.
I'll
you
know,
doesn't
have
to
be
me
and
I.
Don't
want
it
to
be
me
too
busy,
and
it
would
also
help
to
sort
of
answer
a
bunch
of
the
common
questions
that
kind
of
just
get
repeated
over
and
over
and
over
and
nauseum.
Oh.