►
From YouTube: OCI Weekly Discussion - 2021-08-04
Description
Recording of the weekly OCI developer's call from 4 Aug 2021; agenda/notes here: https://hackmd.io/El8Dd2xrTlCaCG59ns5cwg#August-4-2021
B
A
Good
fun
realistically
like
so,
we
have
space
reserved
for
tracking
for,
like
100
or
so,
and
I'm
thinking-
that's
probably
going
to
be
enough
based
on
like
how
many
people
are
here
and
we'll
be
looking
at
september,
30th
at
open
source
summit,
north
america
and
really
my
question
for
this
group
is
as
far
as
structure
and
content
and
things
do
we
want
to
be
able
to
do
a
cfp.
Do
we
want
to
just
kind
of
like
figure
things
out
in
here?
B
Yeah,
I
mean
my
my
perspective,
which
means
obviously,
hopefully
there
are
others.
So
this
is
just
me,
but
you
know
conferences
give
us
plenty
of
chances
for
kind
of
formal
talks
on
various
topics.
So
I'm
assuming
this
group,
you
know,
I
think
a
majority
of
the
time
could
easily
be
reserved.
For
you
know
almost
an
unconference
type,
you
know
spend
the
first
few
minutes.
People
write
ideas,
people
vote.
What
do
they
want
to
talk
about
that?
That's
my
that's
my
thought.
A
C
A
B
Yeah
I
mean,
I
think
this.
The
reason
it's
set
up
this
way
is
because
there's
an
actual
conference
that
is
attempting
to
be
in
person
that
week
so
clearly
that
could
change
or
who
knows
I,
I
don't.
Obviously
I
have
no
no
role,
no
role
in
the
conference
organization,
but
I
guess
what
I'm
saying
is
like.
I
think
nobody
knows
what
the
end
of
september
looks
like.
So
we're
just
forging
ahead.
B
D
A
C
A
B
H
H
B
B
H
The
if
I
can
summarize
the
issue,
I
think
the
latest
status
on
that
issue
was
someone
should
recommend.
The
specs
should
recommend
that
registries
and
clients
enforce
some
maximum
size
on
a
manifest,
because
for
safety,
for
you
know
to
to
reduce
the
ability
to
get
dosed
by
it
that
the
spec
probably
shouldn't
state
a
it,
could
recommend,
but
shouldn't
require
a
value
like
I
think
in
the
issue.
It
was
like.
10
gigs
might
seem
like
a
huge
manifest
today,
but
might
seem
quietly
small
in
10
years.
H
Just
manifest
blobs,
it's
a
separate
issue,
we
might
consider
to
say
there
is
like
registry-
should
enforce
some
maximum
block
size,
but
I
think
the
specific
issue
is.
I
can
already
today
push
a
completely
valid
manifest
that
is
arbitrarily
large
bytes
by
the
question
in
the
in
the
chat
was
size
limit.
How
bytes
are
entries
total
byte
size
of
the
manifest?
So
I
can
push
it.
I
can
push
it
completely
because
annotations
are
like
magic
bag
of
bytes.
H
F
F
Right
so
we
want
so
we
want
to
push
registries
up
as
reasonable
as
possible
and
push
clients
down
to
a
reasonable
place
and
so
yeah
yeah.
It
depends
on
who's
perspective
if
it's
a
minimum
or
a
maximum,
and
I
think
that
we
talked
about
four
megs
as
being
the
current
problem
like
limit
of
docker
distribution
or
distribution
distribution.
The
current
practical
limit
that
we.
H
H
C
H
Yeah,
I
think
that's
a
good
idea
for
for
informing
the
value
that
we
put
into
the
recommendation
in
the
spec.
I
don't
want
the
spec
to
include
a
table
that
falls
out
of
date
quickly,
but
in
the
discussion
of
the
of
the
thing
we
put
into
the
spec,
we
should
include
empirical
data
collected
from
a
survey
of
registries.
H
Is
there
a
way
for
the
client
to
query
the
implementations
max
size
before
attempting
a
push?
There
is
not,
I
think
this
actually
came
up.
Maybe
it
came
up
in
that
issue
in
that
issue,
but
I
don't
think
we
want
to
add
a
new
endpoint
to
the
distribution
spec
to
get
capabilities,
because
that
seems
I
mean.
H
Maybe
we
do
and
if
we
do
there's,
maybe
you
know
a
half
a
dozen
other
things
that
a
registry
could
say
they
support
up
to
this
many
layers
in
an
image
or
up
to
this
many
manifests
in
a
index
or
something,
but
that
that
feels
like
a
bigger
amount
of
work
than
what
we
want.
At
least
I
think
so.
I'm
curious
what
other
people
think
as
far
as
if
you
operate
a
registry
and
are
fine
with
having
a
capabilities.
Endpoint.
F
H
God,
oh
so
so
then
this
would
be
a
yeah.
This
is
a
distribution
spec
issue,
not
an
image
spec
issue:
it's
not
about
the
validity
of
a
10
gig
image
index,
manifest
it's
about
the
ability
to
push
or
pull
those
which
is
distributions
by
gotcha
yeah,
and
we
should
we
should
say
when
it's
over
that
size,
you
should
respond
with
419
or
whatever
too
big.
H
H
I
think
that's
an
issue
and
as
far
as
sort
of
trying
to
feel
out
the
size
limits
on
things,
I'm
probably
not
going
to
go
much
further
than
4meg,
because
I
really
don't
want
to
page
someone
the
other
issue.
The
other
item
in
the
agenda
is,
I
wrote
a
little
tool
to
test
whether
registries
accept
the
data
field.
H
H
F
H
H
In
on
the
topic
of
the
data
thing
of
the
data
field,
as
proposed
in
image,
spec
number
826
most,
I
have
yet
to
find
a
registry
implementation
that
doesn't
accept
the
data
field,
as
described
in
that
proposal.
If
you
know
of
one
or
can
think
of
one
or
want
to
test
it
against
one
and
see
if
it
works
or
doesn't
work,
that
would
be
useful
information.
H
H
Yeah
yeah
yeah,
exactly
I
mean
they,
the
spec
says
this
should
work.
We
think
it
works.
I
have
now
data
that
it
proves
that
it
works,
but
if
we
find
someone
that
doesn't
maybe
that's
enough
to
hang
up
the
data
proposal
but
the
ones
that
I've
tried
account
for
all
of
the
ones
I
could
think
of
and
some
I
couldn't
think
of
that
other
people
tried.
So
I
think
we
are
good
on
the
data
field
being
safe
to
use
for
clients
and
servers.
H
H
I
think
that
john
would
say
that
they
have
all
the
safeguards
in
place
that
it
won't
actually
page
you
no
matter
what,
but
it
will
return
the
correct
response
and
not
actually
cause
problems.
I
can't
say
the
same
for
every
posse,
yeah
exactly
push
to
ghcr
and
you
won't
be
a
problem
or
push
to
you
know
and.
F
D
But
if
the
limit
is
just
for
manifest,
I
don't
really
I
mean
I
cannot.
I
don't
have
the
imagination
to
think
like
where,
in
the
manifest
can
people
add
metadata
about
the
s-bombs
and
what
kind
of
metadata
would
they
add
like?
I
don't
I
don't
have
I
mean
yeah.
I
cannot
think
about
anything
like
that,
but
I
have
seen
the
community
just
put
all
kinds
of
fields
that
to
cover
all
different
kinds
of
use,
cases
that
I've
never
thought
about.
D
G
G
D
D
H
G
H
G
F
H
I
don't
think,
there's
a
reason
not
to
try
it
out
before
it's
approved.
I
don't
know
how
long
it
will
take
to
get
approved.
It's
taken
a
while
to
get
it's
been
proposed
for
a
while
already,
so
I
assume
it's
not
going
to
get
approved
in
the
next
by
the
end
of
this
sentence,
but
you
know
I
don't.
I
don't
actually
remember
what
the
remaining
hang-ups
were
on
it.
H
I
think
it
was
in
general,
like
registry
support
and
the
size
limits
and
registry
support
check,
as
far
as
I
know
and
size
limits
tbd,
but
also
it's
it's
unrelated,
because
you
can
already
push
without
data.
You
can
push
a
four
and
a
half
megabyte
manifest,
so
we
should
have
that
limit
regardless
of
data.
E
H
A
B
B
I
think
you
pointed
out,
you
know
it'd
be
nice
to
see
the
outcome
of
you
know
those
none
of
them
were,
you
know,
life-changing
updates,
but
there
were
there
were
kind
of
good
clarifications,
so
I
don't
know
if
steve
is
going
to
like
re-spin
that
before
merge
it'd
be
nice.
I
think
that
would
be
the
right
thing.
I
mean
we
have
the
lgtms,
but
if
he
can
provide
the
updates,
then
I
think
yeah.
I
think
we're
ready
for
that
version
to
so
I
think.
A
F
D
C
C
We
are
like
the
rulers,
and
these
are
the
rules
you
must
follow
and
like
and
we're
watching
you
and
we're
going
to
dismantle
your
working
group
if
you
mess
up
so
like.
I
wanted
to
kind
of
make
sure
that
that
that
the
feel
of
the
document
didn't
go
in
like
that
direction
and
it's
not
to
say
anything
about
oci
but
like
there
tends
to
be
a
lot
of
like
I
don't
know.
I
thought.
B
You
know
join
with
some
other
folks
with
similar
interests
and
do
that
so
that
the
t.o.b
at
least
the
current
to
be
hopefully
would
be.
You
know
nothing
like
what
vanessa
was
just
talking
about.
I
mean
we,
we
all
have
enough
work
in
our
own
plate
to
be
micromanaging,
a
bunch
of
groups
and
trying
to
tell
them
what
to
do
or
when
to
start
or
stop
like
the.
The
whole
idea
was
to
provide
enough
of
a
framework
that
people
with
common
interests
that
revolve
around
the
oci
specs
can
just
go.
B
So
you
know,
I
think,
like
john
is
saying,
maybe
including
me:
maybe
I've
been
too
hung
up
on,
like
you
know
getting
this
done,
and
then
you
know
having
people
propose
some
groups.
You
know
you
know
we
can.
We
can
say
now's
the
time
like
propose
some
group.
So,
let's
you
know
get
things
rolling
so
and
back
to
the
pr
itself,
like
I
think,
there's
just
like.
B
If
I
scroll
back
through
there's
a
bunch
of
kind
of
knit
like
things
that
maybe
we
can
just
summarize
for
steve
and
then
there's
a
few
kind
of
open
questions
like
I,
I
think,
if
we
just
summarize
that
maybe
that
helps
get
it,
you
know
kind
of
here's,
the
last
one,
two
three
things
and
and
that
kind
of
resolves
current
feedback.
Yeah,
that's
gonna,.
B
D
So
phil
you're
suggesting
that
somebody
could
like
currently
suggest
a
working
group
and
ask
if
they
could.
I
mean
I
guess,
as
you
said,
you
don't
want
this
to
block
spinning
off
a
working
group
so
like,
for
example,
if
I
want
to
say
like
hey,
I
want
to
start
a
working
group
on
container
supply
chain.
Transparency
short
for
s-bomb.
I
suppose,
then,
is
that
it.
What
do
I
have
to
do.
B
Where
is
it
so
so
when
we
first
started
this
discussion,
you
know
steve
who
couldn't
be
here
today,
wanted
to
propose
one
around
reference
types
and
so
issue
96
and
the
tob
repo
has
you
know
I,
I
think,
a
rough
format
that
probably
is
worthwhile
for
others
who
want
to
propose
so
open
an
issue.
Here's
our
objectives,
here's
what
we're
trying
to
accomplish!
Here's
the
people
involved
and
yeah,
so
you
I'll
paste
that
in
the
chat,
so
other
people
can
see
what
I'm
talking
about
so
yeah.
B
I
think
that
step
one
is
just
you
know,
it
does
not
need
to
be
extremely
detailed,
but
kind
of
this
format
is
helpful
because
it
lets
everyone
else,
know
kind
of
what
what
you're
trying
to
do,
and
it
may
be
a
good
place
to
rally
others
who
are
interested
in
the
same
topic
to
say.
Oh
yeah,
I'd
like
to
be
involved.
B
B
There's
there's
some
defined
scope
and
some
goals,
and
we
all
say:
okay,
yep,
sounds
good
and
then
from
there
I
think
there's
a
lot
of
hopefully
lightweight
process.
We
just
need
to
figure
out.
You
know.
How
often
do
you
want
to
come
back
to
this
call
and
say
here's
our
update
or
where
are
you
going
to
keep
status
and
kind
of
some
working
docs
on
what
you're
up
to
but
that's
effectively?
I
think
all
that's
needed
to
get
going.
B
B
B
I
mean
I
think
that
comes
back
to
do
the
scope
and
goals
of
the
of
the
current
proposal,
fit
with
what
you
and
and
others
are
trying
to
accomplish,
and
if
not,
then
maybe
it
becomes
a
discussion
about
whether
there
needs
to
be
a
different
proposal.
But
I
think
that's
why
each
working
group
needs
to
have
kind
of
a
clear
scope
and
set
of
goals
so
that
you
can
decide.
D
C
Yeah,
I
feel
like
a
broken
record,
but
I
I
still
haven't
figured
out
what
could
be
the
next
step
to
deploying
the
rfc
jekyll
template
for
the
oci
docs.
I
did
ping
vincent,
but
I
think
he's
busy
because
he
hasn't
responded
yet.
So
I
I
think
just
someone
in
a
position
of
power
to
like
create
repos
and
stuff
probably
needs
to
help
me
out.