I feel like "secure" is more along the lines of the end goals, not engineered attributes. I agree it's very important (see chapter 8 of Cloud Native Infrastructure) but many of the ways to make

Wonderful collaboration! I think this is a very strong definition of the essence of CNCF! Great job all!

Great thread and I totally agree what's been discussed and summarized so far here. Do you mind incorporating a notion on security in the definitions? Something like: Secure by design Zero-trust (vs.

+1 (non-binding)

Another go: The mission of the Cloud Native Computing Foundation is to drive the adoption of technologies designed for modern dynamic, distributed environments, such as public clouds and private

Deliberately vague. Yes, it could include the platform, such as Kubernetes. I don't know that we're ready to draw a firm boundary yet. Cloud Native is still somewhat aspirational.

This is much, much better!

+1 (non-binding)

​Not at all. Please do! I shared them​ ​so they could be incorporated​​ I agree. Many things can claim to be "scalable" but every design decision has trade-offs. How you get to scalability

+1 (non-binding)

+1

As much as I'm a strong proponent of declarative configuration and APIs (and declarative APIs :-)), I agree that they are implementation techniques. I think we should provides examples of such

I prefer the engineered attributes: Operable Observable Elastic Resilient AgileOver the end goals: Scalable Durable Continuous Since I think some indication of strategy/technique is needed in order

Great discussion. Thanks! Do you mind if we incorporate some/all of them? ChrisA also pointed out that Schedule A at the bottom of the charter also needs to be similarly updated. My current thinking

+1 non binding

+1 (non-binding) -- Michael Fertik michael@... DISCLAIMER Any private opportunity discussed in this email or its attachments is being presented to you because you have expressed an interest in such

+1 non-binding

+1 non-binding Andrew Randall Tigera

0 non-binding I think the spec is very interesting and necessary but I feel like it, and associated example tooling (SPIRE), may be too early for even inception level -- Justin

+1 binding