►
From YouTube: Velero Community Meeting - Oct 19, 2021
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).
B
A
Welcome
to
the
valero
community
meeting,
slash
open
discussion,
I'm
coming
to
you
live
from
all
things
open
in
raleigh
north
carolina.
That's
why
I'm
wearing
a
mask,
I'm
still
inside
the
the
event
here
so
yeah.
If
you
have
any
status
updates,
please
add
them
in
there.
If
you
have
any
discussion
topics,
please
add
them
in
the
hacking,
video
as
well
yeah,
so
we'll
get
started
here.
A
I
think
this
will
be
a
shorter
meeting,
because
bridgette
is
out
on
pto
this
week
and
next
week
I
believe
and
yeah
we'll
we'll
just
get
started.
So
first
up
we
got
status
updates
dave.
I
was
cute
yeah
all
all
these
fast
updates.
I
think
bridget.
C
Will
actually
be
back
next
week
so
next
week.
C
Yeah,
so
cubecon
was
good.
You
know
there
are
people
who
attended,
it
was
kind
of
sparse,
but
it
was
good
to
go.
I
had
some
good
discussions
there
on
on
where
we're
going
next
with
things
like
astrolabe,
so
I
think
it
was.
It
was
good
nice
to
actually
see
some
people,
I'm
sure
you're
kind
of
getting
some
of
that
out
there
as
well.
A
Yeah,
it's
fantastic
yeah.
This
is
the
first
conference
I've
been
to
in
two
years,
so
it's
fantastic
just
to
meet
some
people
here
for
sure.
A
I
think
that'll
be
super
interesting
though
I'm
looking
forward
to
go
to
detroit,
I'm
also
looking
forward
to
go
to
valencia
next
year.
A
Yes,
cool,
so
you
got
some
some
good
feedback
on
astrolabe
at
kubecon.
C
Yeah
we
did
talk
to
a
couple
of
the
partners
there
and
we
need
to
do
more
follow-ups
with
other
people
as
well.
A
Fantastic
all
right:
we
got
two
discussion
topics,
so,
let's
dive
into
them.
C
Yeah,
so
just
the
item
snapshotter
api
I've
had
the
pr
sitting
out
for
a
little
bit.
I
should
put
the
number
in,
but
I
haven't
heard
any
comments
back
yet
so
we'll
have
time
during
the
1
8
release
to
make
any
additional
changes,
but
I'm
just
going
I'm
pushing
to
move
forward
with
the
code
review
and
just
get
that
merged.
C
D
Oh
yeah,
so
this
was
brought
up
by
what
was
it
one
kai
who
brought
it
up,
but
he
found
out
that
if
you
had,
if
you
created
a
server
status
request,
I
guess
I
could
bring
up
the
oh
yeah
thanks
thanks
jonas,
so
valero
has
something
called.
Oh
yeah,
that
was
my
fix.
If
you
scroll
down,
there's
fixes
4200
and
4052..
The
one
I'm
talking
about
is
four
zero.
Five,
two,
that's
the
one
yeah,
the
other
one
and
reasoner.
That's
one
kai
right.
D
Daniel
sorry,
daniel
danielle
brought
it
up
and
yeah,
so
you
can
see
that
if
he
created
a
ssr
server
status
request
resource
in
the
cube
system,
the
valero
controller
for
ssr
would
try
to
work
on
it
and
that's
not
what
it
should
do.
D
It
should
only
work
on
things
that
are
in
the
in
its
own
valero
namespace,
because
these
controllers
are
in
variable
namespaces,
and
so
the
reason
is
because
ssr
controller
was
converted
modernized
to
to
fit
the
cube
builder
framework
and
in
that
conversion
process
it
we
didn't
put
a
restriction
on
it,
so
it
worked
on
everything
in
the
cluster.
So
the
fix,
then,
is
a
one
line.
Change
and
thank
you
to
dave
smith
uchida
who
went
ahead
and
approved.
D
It
just
need
one
more
approval
from
anyone
and
it
could
get
merged,
but
I
and
then
I'll.
I've
done
some
testing
with
it.
It
passes
our
e3
tests
laurel
828
tests
and
because
it's
affecting
our
team
rafa
and
rafael-
and
I
will
also
be
doing
further
testing
with
tanzania,
migrator
yeah.
E
Is
there
a
test
or
need
to
retest
or
something
that
will
catch
this?
I
know
this
isn't
reason
I
ask:
is
this
isn't
the
first
time
we've
had
this
kind
of
problem
in
the
past?
I
know
you
know
at
least
a
year
ago,
maybe
longer
I
remember,
hitting
some
issues
where,
when
I
had
two
valeros
running
at
different
namespaces,
they
were
looking
at
each
other's
and
you
know
put
some
fixes
in
place
at
the
time,
and
now
this
is
kind
of
a
rel.
E
C
So
we
don't,
I
think,
that's
a
good
idea,
so
you
know
frankie.
Could
you
just
put
in
a
an
issue
that
we
should
have
an
edd
test,
that
you
know
it's
kind
of
a
negative
check
to
make
sure
that
we're
not
looking
in
the
wrong
places.
C
E
Yeah,
I
mean
I
mean
the
key
here
and
I
guess
the
problem
with
just
different
controllers
is
that
you
know
when
you
create
a
valero
cr
and
you
know
namespace
one
and
you
have
valero
namespace
two.
You
know
they
don't
interact.
You
know
so
because
the
real
world
use
case
where
this
fails
is,
if
you
have
two
different
valeros
running
in
the
same
cluster,
you
know
serving
different
roles
and
they're
taking
each
of
their
crs.
C
E
And
we're
going
to
start
seeing
this
too,
because
we're
at
the
moment
we're
not
doing
this,
but
on
the
on
the
kind
of
mtc
oedp
side
we're
going
to
probably
get
to
the
point
relatively
soon,
where
we're
going
to
be
having
one
valero
for
migrations
in
the
cluster
and
another
for
backup
and
restore
in
the
same
cluster
so
which
it
sounds
like
it's
kind
of
like
kind
of
what
you're
running
into
as
well.
So
it's
the
same
kind
of
scenario
where
you
really
need
these
two
values
looking
at
their
own
stuff
and
not
elsewhere,.
D
D
And
I
have
a
if
we
have
time.
I
have
a
question
about
the
design
for
issue
number
2488.
I
proposed
something
and
I
wonder
if
I
misunderstood,
I
feel
like
what
I'm
proposing
is
kind
of
awkward
and
my
understanding
is
not
100
clear.
So
maybe
this
is
a
good
place
to
get
clarity
on
this,
but
this
was
brought
up.
I
thought
I
might
pick
it
up
and
what
was
the
problem?
D
C
D
B
D
D
So
fine
well,
instead
of
just
looking
at
the
version
of
valeria
valero
version
by
the
way,
if
you
type
in
blur
version,
that's
what
creates
a
server
status
object,
and
so
now
I
guess,
if
you
want
to
see
the
server
status,
you'll
type
in
valero
version,
to
see
it
and
and
see
this
ready
state
and
it
will
become
ready
when
all
backup
storage
locations
are
available
and
at
least
one
of
them.
One
of
them
is
the
default
and
exists
okay,
great!
C
So
so
so,
this
is
a
good
good
thing
to
write
a
short
design
doc
like
a
one
pager
that
just
explains
what's
going
to
happen
and
lays
out
these
phases
and
we're
going
to
need
to
do
things.
Like
I
mean
version,
probably
shouldn't
be
the
command
that
you
use
to
actually
get
the
status.
We
should
probably
add
a
status
command.
These
things.
C
C
C
F
D
For
this
one
yeah,
this
is
a
good
design
question
current
and
the
current
the
in
the
current
way
services
works.
Is
you
type
laurel
version
to
create
the
object
before
that?
There's
nothing
to
update.
Like
you
know
you
you.
Might
I
like
your
idea.
I,
like
you
what
you
you
and
rafael,
so
you
said
that
it,
the
server
status
should
continuously
be
updated,
but
there
is
no
object
until
you
type
valero
right.
D
Okay,
as
part
of
the
design,
okay,
so
create
a
maybe
the
first
thing
that
happens
when
valero
is
installed.
F
Installation
yeah
do
installation,
create
the
server
object
and
then
you
populate
that
status
of
like
new
right
and
then
yeah
and
after
that.
C
C
Make
another
deployment
right.
I
mean
it's
pretty
easy
to
do.
I
mean
you
can
do
this,
you
know
and
we've
had
people
say
ooh.
Let
me
see
if
I
can
run
multiple
if
I
run
multiple
in
parallel.
If
I
change
the,
if
I
deploy
them
right
and
it's
like
watch
it
go
fast,
just
like
no,
that's
a
really
bad
idea.
D
I
see
why
people
would
do
that
now.
Okay,
that
makes
sense
I'll
keep
that
in
mind
in
the
design
like
in
the
future.
Maybe
this
this
could.
C
D
Oh
before
the
before
so
sorry
before
further
input,
I
just
had
another
question,
so
this
ssr
object
will
be
created
during
valero
install
now
the
way
it
works.
D
D
Oh,
wouldn't
it
start
okay,
when
after
server
I'm
taking
notes
comes
up
okay,
now,
currently,
when
every
single
time
you
say
valero
version,
it
creates
another
ssr
with
a
unique
like
hash
tag
too.
You
know
so
these
will
they
should
I
allow
them
to
still
come
up
or
will
they
just
read
the
cur
the
one
that
we
create
at
the
very
beginning.
G
Yeah,
so
what
is
the
service
status
used
for?
Is
it
informative
or
does
that
affect
the
behavior?
So
the
reason.
D
You
scroll
down
jonas,
just
a
little
bit
just
to
answer
your
first
question.
If
you
type
in
valero
version,
the
output
of
service
status
details
are
shown
here.
So
you
see
where
I
wrote
in
the
command
line:
valero
version,
it
shows
the
valero
client,
the
valero
comm,
the
git
commit
the
server
the
version.
I
was
using
a
compiled
test
and
you
can
see
I
I
added
what
I
proposed.
What
the
new
status
would
look
like
will
be
server
status
partially
ready.
That
was.
D
This
is
kind
of
my
design
dock
in
the
issue,
but.
D
By
based
on
dave,
smith's
cheetahs
as
dave
smith,
feedback
I'll
go
ahead
and
actually
create
a
design,
doc
proposal
thing
pr.
G
Right
so
the
reason
I'm
asking
is
so
powerprotect
doesn't
create
a
bsl
with
the
name
default.
So
then
that
doesn't
mean
that
server
is
partially
ready
right.
There
are
other
bsls
that
can
be
used,
and
that
was
one
thing
and
secondly,
like
when
property
deploys
valera,
there
are
no
bsls.
The
bsls
are.
G
And
then
the
dsl
is
pushed
into
the
cluster
where
the
backup
can
be
written
to
so
both
cases.
I
mean
I
mean
from
the
backup
server
point
of
view.
The
valero
is
ready
right,
it's
as
soon
as
we
push
bsl,
it
can
go
ahead
and
write.
C
F
G
So
I
mean
at
least
default.
The
name
default
should
not
be
considered.
I
don't
know,
maybe
the
first
condition
right
where
it
said
partial
if
default
is
not
available,
it's
partially
ready
right.
D
D
G
Power
protect
disables,
the
bsl
checks,
so
it
puts
a
very
high.
I
forgot
now.
What
is
the
property
in
the
dsl,
but
you
put
a
very
high
number,
so
polaris
doesn't
keep
checking
because
popular
itself
keeps
checking
its
bsl
and
it
will
notify
user.
So
we
it
doesn't.
It
sets
a
dsl
check
period,
whatever
that
was
to
very
high
number
that
it
never
validator
itself
doesn't
do
a
check.
D
Oh
okay,
so
just
to
make
it
more
clear
for
myself
so
you're
saying
that
you
can
create
multiple
bsls.
None
of
them
are
set
as
default,
but
you
could
yourself
choose
the
prior,
which
one
valero
uses.
D
C
Yeah,
I
don't
know
it's
not
required.
I
think
I
mean
the
thing.
Is
that
like
it's?
It's
a
really
handy
thing
for
your
easy
straight
line
install.
So
we
don't
want
to
make
everybody
have
to
like
type
in
minus
minus
backup,
storage
location
every
time
if
they
only
have
one.
So
it
seems
pretty
reasonable
to
have
a
way
to
set
a
default,
but
there's
definitely
other
use
cases
that
are
more
complicated
or
interesting.
But
so
I
think
this
is
a
really
good
conversation.
G
Sure
yeah,
so
we
are
when
powerpoint
is
using
bsl
in
different
ways.
So
yeah
we
want
to
make
sure
all
cases
are
covered
as
we
design
this
yeah.
C
Because
I
think
this
would
be
very
useful
to
have
the
status,
so
everybody
who's
using
valero
can
automatically
check.
Eventually,
this
will
roll
back
like
the
end-to-end
tests
and
even
the
installer
right.
The
end
result
of
the
installer
should
be.
It
waits
for
the
server
to
come
up
and
be
healthy,
or
you
know,
time
out
and
say
it's
not
coming
healthy
within
this
time
and
here's
the
status
that
you're
at.
G
Okay
yeah,
so
there
are
other
things.
Maybe
I
don't
know
if
it's
a
background,
but
we
we
see
this
message
periodically,
actually
quite
often
where
it
says
default,
bsl
not
present,
but
nothing.
G
It
doesn't
seem
to
affect
the
functionality
per
se,
but
so
that
was
something
we
were
thinking
of,
making
a
change
to
not
print
that
message.
C
C
C
Just
do
like
being
able
like
when
people
come
to
us
with
with
questions,
and
we
look
at
the
log
files
like
well,
because
you
didn't
write.
D
A
All
right,
I
think
that
was
all
the
discussion
topics
that
we
had
today.
I
do
not
have
the
contributor
shout
outs
today,
so
I'll
make
sure
to
update
those
for
next
time.
Thank
you.
Everyone
for
joining.
G
About
those
vulnerabilities
right
in
valero,
so
par,
protect
includes
valero
as
part
of
the
solution
and
customers
now
like
most
popular
customers,
are
enterprise
customers,
so
every
all
of
those
go
through
scanning
and
we
are
getting
git
up
saying:
okay,
what
is
your
plan?
When
will
you
address
this?
So
dell
security
office
is
asking
us?
Okay?
When
will
be
the
next
release,
where
you
will
have
this
thing
dissolved
so
so.
C
So
so
looked
into
it,
he
root
caused
the
problem
and
he
believes
the
fix
is
relatively
easy.
There
is
a
update
needed
to.
We
need
to
pick
up
a
later
version
of
restic
and
a
later
version
of
the
azure
sdk
for
the
azure
plug-in,
and
then
the
question
for
us
is:
do
we
go
ahead
and
push
forward
with
like
a
171
release
like
within
you
know
by
the
end
of
the
month,
or
do
we
just
let
it
go
for
a
little
bit
so
weigh
in
with
eleanor?
C
I
know
you
have
a
date
to
get
back
and
the
question
is,
you
know:
do
we
need
to
do
a
release?
We
started
talking
internally
about
having
a
maybe
a
monthly
security
release.
Potentially
I
think
we've
we've
reduced
a
lot
by
going
to
the
distal
as
containers,
but
you
know
these
things
are
going
to
keep
popping
up
because
you
know
they're
not
they're,
not
there
when
you
release
and
then
suddenly
they
appear.
G
Right
yeah,
I
think
that's
fine.
As
long
as
we
have
some
date
too,
we
can
give
saying:
okay,
this
is
the
date.
We
are
planning
the
next
release
or
we'll
get
the
next
build
with
these
fixes.
So
so
this
azure
plug-in.
So
there
are,
as
I
remember
there
were
two
critical
and
three
high
right,
so
they
all
will
be
addressed
by
this.
C
G
C
Yeah,
so
those
are
the
the
jwt
related
ones,
the
go
jwt
and
yeah.
Please
go
ahead
and
let
eleanor
know
what
you
need
and
we're
just
going
to
make
a
decision
in
the
next
couple
days.
It's
really
I
mean
making
a
release.
Is
its
own
amount
of
friction
right?
So
it's
like
do
we
do?
We
need
to
do
it
or
do
we
not
need
to
do
it
and
your
input's
very
valuable?
So
if.
G
Yeah
yeah,
so
so,
once
these
images
are,
these
fixes
are
in,
we
can
do
another
scan
on
hour
and
as
well.
Yes,.
C
B
Yeah
also
related
to
that
is
the
open
ship
oadp
would
also
be
have
to.
We
will
be
sync
with
this
right,
because
when
you,
when
we
release
seven
1.7.1
with
this
fix,
then
probably
oadp
we're
also
picking
up
this,
and
then
we
have
a
release
because
we
have
product
on
both
open,
chipset
and
understand
the
valero
inside.
So
we
we
will
need
that
fix
for
both
of
them.
E
Yeah,
so
so,
once
once
valero
releases
171,
I
imagine
on
the
otp
side
the
next
released
and
would
we'd
upgrade
that
as
well.
C
Yeah,
no
eleanor
is
coordinating
whether
or
not
we
do
another
release.
Okay,
yeah
we're
rolling
forward
on
those
perfect,
perfect.