Date   

Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

alexis richardson
 

The SIGs can do whatever they like! But the final decision is not for
delegation.

On Thu, Apr 11, 2019 at 4:32 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:

Thanks Alexis.

Deciding which projects join the CNCF is one of the most important decisions the CNCF TOC is responsible for. And as far as I can tell, the only major requirement for joining the CNCF sandbox currently is support of "2 TOC sponsors".

My understanding is that these CNCF SIGs are being formed, at least in part, to help the TOC with that decision making. But from everything I've read, it doesn't seem like these SIGs will have any real ownership of anything.

So I propose that that in order to be inducted in to the CNCF (at any level, including Sandbox), an external project must get a CNCF SIG to sponsor it first? Each SIG would define the process for project consideration, establish criteria for the categories of project to be considered, etc.

This would give these new CNCF SIGs clear long-term ownership of something concrete, and we would ensure that the CNCF decision making process is open, transparent, and inclusive.

Of course, the TOC would still retain the right to veto the SIG decision, but it would do so publicly and provide justification for doing so.

Thoughts?

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:45 PM Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> wrote:

Saad

Unlike K8s TOC & SIGs, the CNCF TOC will own final decisions on
project acceptance.

alexis

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:37 PM via Lists.Cncf.Io
<saadali=google.com@...> wrote:

Thanks Quinton and Alex! This is very helpful.

Based on that, it seems to me like the responsibilities for this SIG are essentially to collect and disseminate storage related information in a consumable manner to 1) the CNCF TOC, 2) CNCF end users, and 3) CNCF projects (at all stages from pre-incubation through to graduation)?

If so, then the concrete work this group will be responsible for is conducting research (surveys, etc.) and the output will be documents summarizing the results of the research for various audiences?

The Storage Whitepaper produced by this group is out. User survey is in progress. What kind of work concretely do you see going forward?

In Kubernetes the TOC tries to avoid making unilateral decisions as much as possible. Instead the Kubernetes TOC empowers the SIGs to make decisions.

Right now the CNCF TOC is considering incubating a new storage project. Is the recommendation for accepting or rejecting that proposal be in the purview of this proposed SIG? If so, will the CNCF TOC sponsors have to get the approval of a SIG for any sponsored projects?

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:01 PM Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...> wrote:

Hi Saad,



Thanks for throwing your hat into the ring ! :-)



(apologies for the long email, but the info will hopefully benefit the rest of the mailing list too)



The CNCF SIGs are being setup to help the TOC as the CNCF continues to scale with the growing list of projects and members.

All the detail for the proposal/formation of the CNCF SIGs is available here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/sigs/cncf-sigs.md



In summary, the general objectives are:

Strengthen the project ecosystem to meet the needs of end users and project contributors.
Identify gaps in the CNCF project portfolio. Find and attract projects to fill these gaps.
Educate and inform users with unbiased, effective, and practically useful information.
Focus attention & resources on helping foster project maturity, systematically across CNCF projects.
Clarify relationship between projects, CNCF project staff, and community volunteers.
Engage more communities and create an on-ramp to effective TOC contribution & recognition.
Reduce some project workload on TOC while retaining executive control & tonal integrity with this elected body.
Avoid creating a platform for politics between vendors.



and the specific responsibilities of the SIG include:



Project Handling:

Understand and document a high level roadmap of projects within this space, including CNCF and non-CNCF projects. Identify gaps in project landscape.
For projects that fall within the CNCF, perform health checks.
Perform discovery of and outreach to candidate projects
Help candidate projects prepare for presentation to the TOC
Every CNCF project will be assigned to one suitable SIG by the TOC.

End User Education (Outbound Communication)

Provide up-to-date, high quality, unbiased and easy-to-consume material to help end users to understand and effectively adopt cloud-native technologies and practises within the SIG’s area, for example:

White papers, presentations, videos, or other forms of training clarifying terminology, comparisons of different approaches, available projects or products, common or recommended practises, trends, illustrative successes and failures, etc.
As far as possible, information should be based on research and fact gathering, rather than pure marketing or speculation.

End User Input Gathering (Inbound Communication)

Gather useful end user input and feedback regarding expectations, pain points, primary use cases etc.
Compile this into easily consumable reports and/or presentations to assist projects with feature design, prioritization, UX etc.

Community Enablement

SIGs are open organizations with meetings, meeting agendas and notes, mailing lists, and other communications in the open
The mailing list, SIG meeting calendar, and other communication documents of the SIG will be openly published and maintained

As Trusted Expert Advisors to the TOC

Perform technical due diligence on new and graduating projects, and advise TOC on findings.
Be involved with, or periodically check in with projects in their area, and advise TOC on health, status and proposed actions (if any) as necessary or on request.

See Example Responsibilities of a CNCF SIG.



The first set of SIGs as per the proposal and the TOC members who will act as liaison with the SIG are:

(from: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BUmTO5PFt7NZ9jVMMR3r1W7k8NANltNNJJqFCZdbS0I/edit#slide=id.g4e24cc378e_1_39)

Matt: Traffic (networking, service discovery, load balancing, service mesh, RPC, pubsub, etc)

Envoy, Linkerd, NATS, gRPC, CoreDNS, CNI

Jeff: Observability (monitoring, logging, tracing, profiling, etc.)

Prometheus, OpenTracing, Fluentd, Jaeger, Cortex, OpenMetrics,

Liz + Joe: Security/Governance (auth, authorization, auditing, policy enforcement, compliance, GDPR, cost management, etc)

SPIFFE, SPIRE, Open Policy Agent, Notary, TUF, Falco,

Michelle + Alexis: App Dev, Ops & Testing (PaaS, Serverless, Operators, CI/CD, Conformance, Chaos Eng, Scalability and Reliability measurement etc.)

Helm, CloudEvents, Telepresence, Buildpacks, (CNCF CI)

Brendan + Brian: Core and Applied Architectures (orchestration, scheduling, container runtimes, sandboxing technologies, packaging and distribution, specialized architectures thereof (e.g. Edge, IoT, Big Data, AI/ML, etc).

Kubernetes, containerd, rkt, Harbor, Dragonfly, Virtual Kubelet

Xiang: Storage (Block and File Stores, Databases, Key-Value stores etc)

TiKV, etcd, Vitess, Rook



Hope this helps,



Kind Regards,

Alex









From: Saad Ali <saadali@...>
Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 at 21:38
To: Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>, cncf-wg-storage <cncf-wg-storage@...>, "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>, Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...>
Subject: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?



Hi CNCF Storage WG,



Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.



That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?



The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.



My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.



Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?



Thanks,



Saad Ali


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Saad Ali <saadali@...>
 

Thanks Alexis.

Deciding which projects join the CNCF is one of the most important decisions the CNCF TOC is responsible for. And as far as I can tell, the only major requirement for joining the CNCF sandbox currently is support of "2 TOC sponsors".

My understanding is that these CNCF SIGs are being formed, at least in part, to help the TOC with that decision making. But from everything I've read, it doesn't seem like these SIGs will have any real ownership of anything.

So I propose that that in order to be inducted in to the CNCF (at any level, including Sandbox), an external project must get a CNCF SIG to sponsor it first? Each SIG would define the process for project consideration, establish criteria for the categories of project to be considered, etc.

This would give these new CNCF SIGs clear long-term ownership of something concrete, and we would ensure that the CNCF decision making process is open, transparent, and inclusive.

Of course, the TOC would still retain the right to veto the SIG decision, but it would do so publicly and provide justification for doing so.

Thoughts?


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:45 PM Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> wrote:
Saad

Unlike K8s TOC & SIGs, the CNCF TOC will own final decisions on
project acceptance.

alexis

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:37 PM via Lists.Cncf.Io
<saadali=google.com@...> wrote:
>
> Thanks Quinton and Alex! This is very helpful.
>
> Based on that, it seems to me like the responsibilities for this SIG are essentially to collect and disseminate storage related information in a consumable manner to 1) the CNCF TOC, 2) CNCF end users, and 3) CNCF projects (at all stages from pre-incubation through to graduation)?
>
> If so, then the concrete work this group will be responsible for is conducting research (surveys, etc.) and the output will be documents summarizing the results of the research for various audiences?
>
> The Storage Whitepaper produced by this group is out. User survey is in progress. What kind of work concretely do you see going forward?
>
> In Kubernetes the TOC tries to avoid making unilateral decisions as much as possible. Instead the Kubernetes TOC empowers the SIGs to make decisions.
>
> Right now the CNCF TOC is considering incubating a new storage project. Is the recommendation for accepting or rejecting that proposal be in the purview of this proposed SIG? If so, will the CNCF TOC sponsors have to get the approval of a SIG for any sponsored projects?
>
> On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:01 PM Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Saad,
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks for throwing your hat into the ring ! :-)
>>
>>
>>
>> (apologies for the long email, but the info will hopefully benefit the rest of the mailing list too)
>>
>>
>>
>> The CNCF SIGs are being setup to help the TOC as the CNCF continues to scale with the growing list of projects and members.
>>
>> All the detail for the proposal/formation of the CNCF SIGs is available here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/sigs/cncf-sigs.md
>>
>>
>>
>> In summary, the general objectives are:
>>
>> Strengthen the project ecosystem to meet the needs of end users and project contributors.
>> Identify gaps in the CNCF project portfolio. Find and attract projects to fill these gaps.
>> Educate and inform users with unbiased, effective, and practically useful information.
>> Focus attention & resources on helping foster project maturity, systematically across CNCF projects.
>> Clarify relationship between projects, CNCF project staff, and community volunteers.
>> Engage more communities and create an on-ramp to effective TOC contribution & recognition.
>> Reduce some project workload on TOC while retaining executive control & tonal integrity with this elected body.
>> Avoid creating a platform for politics between vendors.
>>
>>
>>
>> and the specific responsibilities of the SIG include:
>>
>>
>>
>> Project Handling:
>>
>> Understand and document a high level roadmap of projects within this space, including CNCF and non-CNCF projects. Identify gaps in project landscape.
>> For projects that fall within the CNCF, perform health checks.
>> Perform discovery of and outreach to candidate projects
>> Help candidate projects prepare for presentation to the TOC
>> Every CNCF project will be assigned to one suitable SIG by the TOC.
>>
>> End User Education (Outbound Communication)
>>
>> Provide up-to-date, high quality, unbiased and easy-to-consume material to help end users to understand and effectively adopt cloud-native technologies and practises within the SIG’s area, for example:
>>
>> White papers, presentations, videos, or other forms of training clarifying terminology, comparisons of different approaches, available projects or products, common or recommended practises, trends, illustrative successes and failures, etc.
>> As far as possible, information should be based on research and fact gathering, rather than pure marketing or speculation.
>>
>> End User Input Gathering (Inbound Communication)
>>
>> Gather useful end user input and feedback regarding expectations, pain points, primary use cases etc.
>> Compile this into easily consumable reports and/or presentations to assist projects with feature design, prioritization, UX etc.
>>
>> Community Enablement
>>
>> SIGs are open organizations with meetings, meeting agendas and notes, mailing lists, and other communications in the open
>> The mailing list, SIG meeting calendar, and other communication documents of the SIG will be openly published and maintained
>>
>> As Trusted Expert Advisors to the TOC
>>
>> Perform technical due diligence on new and graduating projects, and advise TOC on findings.
>> Be involved with, or periodically check in with projects in their area, and advise TOC on health, status and proposed actions (if any) as necessary or on request.
>>
>> See Example Responsibilities of a CNCF SIG.
>>
>>
>>
>> The first set of SIGs as per the proposal and the TOC members who will act as liaison with the SIG are:
>>
>> (from: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BUmTO5PFt7NZ9jVMMR3r1W7k8NANltNNJJqFCZdbS0I/edit#slide=id.g4e24cc378e_1_39)
>>
>> Matt: Traffic (networking, service discovery, load balancing, service mesh, RPC, pubsub, etc)
>>
>> Envoy, Linkerd, NATS, gRPC, CoreDNS, CNI
>>
>> Jeff: Observability (monitoring, logging, tracing, profiling, etc.)
>>
>> Prometheus, OpenTracing, Fluentd, Jaeger, Cortex, OpenMetrics,
>>
>> Liz + Joe: Security/Governance (auth, authorization, auditing, policy enforcement, compliance, GDPR, cost management, etc)
>>
>> SPIFFE, SPIRE, Open Policy Agent, Notary, TUF,  Falco,
>>
>> Michelle + Alexis: App Dev, Ops & Testing (PaaS, Serverless, Operators, CI/CD,  Conformance, Chaos Eng, Scalability and Reliability measurement etc.)
>>
>> Helm, CloudEvents, Telepresence, Buildpacks, (CNCF CI)
>>
>> Brendan + Brian: Core and Applied Architectures (orchestration, scheduling, container runtimes, sandboxing technologies, packaging and distribution, specialized architectures thereof (e.g. Edge, IoT, Big Data, AI/ML, etc).
>>
>> Kubernetes, containerd, rkt, Harbor, Dragonfly, Virtual Kubelet
>>
>> Xiang: Storage (Block and File Stores, Databases, Key-Value stores etc)
>>
>> TiKV, etcd, Vitess, Rook
>>
>>
>>
>> Hope this helps,
>>
>>
>>
>> Kind Regards,
>>
>> Alex
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> From: Saad Ali <saadali@...>
>> Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 at 21:38
>> To: Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>, cncf-wg-storage <cncf-wg-storage@...>, "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>, Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...>
>> Subject: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?
>>
>>
>>
>> Hi CNCF Storage WG,
>>
>>
>>
>> Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.
>>
>>
>>
>> That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?
>>
>>
>>
>> The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.
>>
>>
>>
>> My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?
>>
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>>
>>
>> Saad Ali
>>
>>
>


[RESULT] fluentd moving to graduation

Chris Aniszczyk
 

The fluentd project has graduated from the CNCF incubator:
https://github.com/cncf/toc/pull/69

+1 binding TOC votes (8/9):
Brian: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3104
Brendan: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3109
Liz: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3113
Matt: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3117
Xiang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3123
Joe: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3139
Michelle: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3146
Jeff: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3147

+1 non-binding community votes:
Chris Short: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3095
Justin Cappos: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3096
Alex Chircop: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3097
Niraj Tolia: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3098
Randy Abernethy: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3099
Ihor Dvoretskyi: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3100
Richard Hartmann: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3101
Christian Jantz: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3102
Ayrat Khayretdinov: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3103
Angel Ramirez: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3105
Brandon DuRette: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3106
Sonya Koptyev: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3107
Jean-Christophe Counio: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3108
Jon Mittelhauser: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3111
Justin Garrison: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3112
Ken Owens: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3114
Benjamin: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3115
Iftach Schonbaum: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3116
Zhang Lei: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3119
Nick Chase: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3120
Xing Yang: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3124
郑淮城: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3125
Von Gosling: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3127
Philipe Robin: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3137
Chiradeep Vittal: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3140
Yash Thakkar: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3141
Matt Rausch: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3142
Gilbert Song: https://lists.cncf.io/g/cncf-toc/message/3148

Thanks all for voting, we look forward to cultivating the fluentd community!

--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Deep Debroy <ddebroy@...>
 

+1

Saad’s leadership and guidance across CSI and SIG storage is exemplary!

On Apr 10, 2019, at 7:56 PM, Jie Yu <jie@...> wrote:

+1

It’s a pleasure to work with Saad. Confident that he will drive consensus in a professional way in this WG.


On Apr 10, 2019, at 7:43 PM, Clinton Kitson <clintonskitson@...> wrote:

+1 for Saad, complete confidence he will help build community and consensus around storage that supports cloud native patterns.


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 7:15 PM Xing Yang <xingyang105@...> wrote:

Well said, Erin:).  Saad has done a great job leading Kubernetes SIG-Storage and will be a great tech lead for the CNCF Storage SIG! 


Thanks,

Xing


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 8:31 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CADwwA9uO_CkL6tOzd01-TUeG-E%2BzjLbEOtyLyDb1XvKxwtfKUw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CAE-aBCfDwr7BYnWYsenkAJgiryRNeYkxmdH-HgQH9Hyjg3pd%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CC8C3468-1CFA-4366-BB04-5F4287FE7091%40mesosphere.io.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Jie Yu <jie@...>
 

+1

It’s a pleasure to work with Saad. Confident that he will drive consensus in a professional way in this WG.


On Apr 10, 2019, at 7:43 PM, Clinton Kitson <clintonskitson@...> wrote:

+1 for Saad, complete confidence he will help build community and consensus around storage that supports cloud native patterns.


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 7:15 PM Xing Yang <xingyang105@...> wrote:

Well said, Erin:).  Saad has done a great job leading Kubernetes SIG-Storage and will be a great tech lead for the CNCF Storage SIG! 


Thanks,

Xing


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 8:31 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CADwwA9uO_CkL6tOzd01-TUeG-E%2BzjLbEOtyLyDb1XvKxwtfKUw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CAE-aBCfDwr7BYnWYsenkAJgiryRNeYkxmdH-HgQH9Hyjg3pd%2BA%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Clinton Kitson
 

+1 for Saad, complete confidence he will help build community and consensus around storage that supports cloud native patterns.


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 7:15 PM Xing Yang <xingyang105@...> wrote:

Well said, Erin:).  Saad has done a great job leading Kubernetes SIG-Storage and will be a great tech lead for the CNCF Storage SIG! 


Thanks,

Xing


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 8:31 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CADwwA9uO_CkL6tOzd01-TUeG-E%2BzjLbEOtyLyDb1XvKxwtfKUw%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Xing Yang
 

Well said, Erin:).  Saad has done a great job leading Kubernetes SIG-Storage and will be a great tech lead for the CNCF Storage SIG! 


Thanks,

Xing


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 8:31 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Partha Seetala <partha@...>
 

+1 for Saad as TL

Partha
Co-founder, CTO Robin.io

On Apr 10, 2019, at 5:31 PM, Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:

Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Gopal Sharma <gopal@...>
 

absolutely ..... +1 Saad. Not to downplay other SIG's but k8s SIG-Storage da best :-)

thanks,

--gopal

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 6:27 PM Chakri Nelluri <nelcyguy@...> wrote:
+1 for Saad. Can’t agree more..


On Apr 10, 2019, at 9:24 PM, Gou Rao <grao@...> wrote:

+1 to what Erin said. We really enjoy how you moderate the k8s storage sig Saad. 


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:34 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CAPWXLjeECE%3Dd8jHP1m7M0%3DV4NPJyRX0_7VPveNa7LEQGP7o12Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Gou Rao <grao@...>
 

+1 to what Erin said. We really enjoy how you moderate the k8s storage sig Saad. 


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:34 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Chakri Nelluri
 

+1 for Saad. Can’t agree more..


On Apr 10, 2019, at 9:24 PM, Gou Rao <grao@...> wrote:

+1 to what Erin said. We really enjoy how you moderate the k8s storage sig Saad. 


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:34 PM Erin Boyd <eboyd@...> wrote:
Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "cncf-wg-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to cncf-wg-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to cncf-wg-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/cncf-wg-storage/CAPWXLjeECE%3Dd8jHP1m7M0%3DV4NPJyRX0_7VPveNa7LEQGP7o12Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

alexis richardson
 

Saad

Unlike K8s TOC & SIGs, the CNCF TOC will own final decisions on
project acceptance.

alexis

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 5:37 PM via Lists.Cncf.Io
<saadali=google.com@...> wrote:

Thanks Quinton and Alex! This is very helpful.

Based on that, it seems to me like the responsibilities for this SIG are essentially to collect and disseminate storage related information in a consumable manner to 1) the CNCF TOC, 2) CNCF end users, and 3) CNCF projects (at all stages from pre-incubation through to graduation)?

If so, then the concrete work this group will be responsible for is conducting research (surveys, etc.) and the output will be documents summarizing the results of the research for various audiences?

The Storage Whitepaper produced by this group is out. User survey is in progress. What kind of work concretely do you see going forward?

In Kubernetes the TOC tries to avoid making unilateral decisions as much as possible. Instead the Kubernetes TOC empowers the SIGs to make decisions.

Right now the CNCF TOC is considering incubating a new storage project. Is the recommendation for accepting or rejecting that proposal be in the purview of this proposed SIG? If so, will the CNCF TOC sponsors have to get the approval of a SIG for any sponsored projects?

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:01 PM Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...> wrote:

Hi Saad,



Thanks for throwing your hat into the ring ! :-)



(apologies for the long email, but the info will hopefully benefit the rest of the mailing list too)



The CNCF SIGs are being setup to help the TOC as the CNCF continues to scale with the growing list of projects and members.

All the detail for the proposal/formation of the CNCF SIGs is available here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/sigs/cncf-sigs.md



In summary, the general objectives are:

Strengthen the project ecosystem to meet the needs of end users and project contributors.
Identify gaps in the CNCF project portfolio. Find and attract projects to fill these gaps.
Educate and inform users with unbiased, effective, and practically useful information.
Focus attention & resources on helping foster project maturity, systematically across CNCF projects.
Clarify relationship between projects, CNCF project staff, and community volunteers.
Engage more communities and create an on-ramp to effective TOC contribution & recognition.
Reduce some project workload on TOC while retaining executive control & tonal integrity with this elected body.
Avoid creating a platform for politics between vendors.



and the specific responsibilities of the SIG include:



Project Handling:

Understand and document a high level roadmap of projects within this space, including CNCF and non-CNCF projects. Identify gaps in project landscape.
For projects that fall within the CNCF, perform health checks.
Perform discovery of and outreach to candidate projects
Help candidate projects prepare for presentation to the TOC
Every CNCF project will be assigned to one suitable SIG by the TOC.

End User Education (Outbound Communication)

Provide up-to-date, high quality, unbiased and easy-to-consume material to help end users to understand and effectively adopt cloud-native technologies and practises within the SIG’s area, for example:

White papers, presentations, videos, or other forms of training clarifying terminology, comparisons of different approaches, available projects or products, common or recommended practises, trends, illustrative successes and failures, etc.
As far as possible, information should be based on research and fact gathering, rather than pure marketing or speculation.

End User Input Gathering (Inbound Communication)

Gather useful end user input and feedback regarding expectations, pain points, primary use cases etc.
Compile this into easily consumable reports and/or presentations to assist projects with feature design, prioritization, UX etc.

Community Enablement

SIGs are open organizations with meetings, meeting agendas and notes, mailing lists, and other communications in the open
The mailing list, SIG meeting calendar, and other communication documents of the SIG will be openly published and maintained

As Trusted Expert Advisors to the TOC

Perform technical due diligence on new and graduating projects, and advise TOC on findings.
Be involved with, or periodically check in with projects in their area, and advise TOC on health, status and proposed actions (if any) as necessary or on request.

See Example Responsibilities of a CNCF SIG.



The first set of SIGs as per the proposal and the TOC members who will act as liaison with the SIG are:

(from: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BUmTO5PFt7NZ9jVMMR3r1W7k8NANltNNJJqFCZdbS0I/edit#slide=id.g4e24cc378e_1_39)

Matt: Traffic (networking, service discovery, load balancing, service mesh, RPC, pubsub, etc)

Envoy, Linkerd, NATS, gRPC, CoreDNS, CNI

Jeff: Observability (monitoring, logging, tracing, profiling, etc.)

Prometheus, OpenTracing, Fluentd, Jaeger, Cortex, OpenMetrics,

Liz + Joe: Security/Governance (auth, authorization, auditing, policy enforcement, compliance, GDPR, cost management, etc)

SPIFFE, SPIRE, Open Policy Agent, Notary, TUF, Falco,

Michelle + Alexis: App Dev, Ops & Testing (PaaS, Serverless, Operators, CI/CD, Conformance, Chaos Eng, Scalability and Reliability measurement etc.)

Helm, CloudEvents, Telepresence, Buildpacks, (CNCF CI)

Brendan + Brian: Core and Applied Architectures (orchestration, scheduling, container runtimes, sandboxing technologies, packaging and distribution, specialized architectures thereof (e.g. Edge, IoT, Big Data, AI/ML, etc).

Kubernetes, containerd, rkt, Harbor, Dragonfly, Virtual Kubelet

Xiang: Storage (Block and File Stores, Databases, Key-Value stores etc)

TiKV, etcd, Vitess, Rook



Hope this helps,



Kind Regards,

Alex









From: Saad Ali <saadali@...>
Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 at 21:38
To: Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>, cncf-wg-storage <cncf-wg-storage@...>, "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>, Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...>
Subject: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?



Hi CNCF Storage WG,



Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.



That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?



The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.



My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.



Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?



Thanks,



Saad Ali


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Saad Ali <saadali@...>
 

Thanks Quinton and Alex! This is very helpful.

Based on that, it seems to me like the responsibilities for this SIG are essentially to collect and disseminate storage related information in a consumable manner to 1) the CNCF TOC, 2) CNCF end users, and 3) CNCF projects (at all stages from pre-incubation through to graduation)?

If so, then the concrete work this group will be responsible for is conducting research (surveys, etc.) and the output will be documents summarizing the results of the research for various audiences?

The Storage Whitepaper produced by this group is out. User survey is in progress. What kind of work concretely do you see going forward?

In Kubernetes the TOC tries to avoid making unilateral decisions as much as possible. Instead the Kubernetes TOC empowers the SIGs to make decisions.

Right now the CNCF TOC is considering incubating a new storage project. Is the recommendation for accepting or rejecting that proposal be in the purview of this proposed SIG? If so, will the CNCF TOC sponsors have to get the approval of a SIG for any sponsored projects?

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 2:01 PM Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...> wrote:

Hi Saad,

 

Thanks for throwing your hat into the ring ! :-)

 

(apologies for the long email, but the info will hopefully benefit the rest of the mailing list too)

 

The CNCF SIGs are being setup to help the TOC as the CNCF continues to scale with the growing list of projects and members.

All the detail for the proposal/formation of the CNCF SIGs is available here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/sigs/cncf-sigs.md

 

In summary, the general objectives are:

  • Strengthen the project ecosystem to meet the needs of end users and project contributors.
  • Identify gaps in the CNCF project portfolio. Find and attract projects to fill these gaps.
  • Educate and inform users with unbiased, effective, and practically useful information.
  • Focus attention & resources on helping foster project maturity, systematically across CNCF projects.
  • Clarify relationship between projects, CNCF project staff, and community volunteers.
  • Engage more communities and create an on-ramp to effective TOC contribution & recognition.
  • Reduce some project workload on TOC while retaining executive control & tonal integrity with this elected body.
  • Avoid creating a platform for politics between vendors.

 

and the specific responsibilities of the SIG include:

 

Project Handling:

  • Understand and document a high level roadmap of projects within this space, including CNCF and non-CNCF projects. Identify gaps in project landscape.
  • For projects that fall within the CNCF, perform health checks.
  • Perform discovery of and outreach to candidate projects
  • Help candidate projects prepare for presentation to the TOC
  • Every CNCF project will be assigned to one suitable SIG by the TOC.

End User Education (Outbound Communication)

  • Provide up-to-date, high quality, unbiased and easy-to-consume material to help end users to understand and effectively adopt cloud-native technologies and practises within the SIG’s area, for example:
    • White papers, presentations, videos, or other forms of training clarifying terminology, comparisons of different approaches, available projects or products, common or recommended practises, trends, illustrative successes and failures, etc.
    • As far as possible, information should be based on research and fact gathering, rather than pure marketing or speculation.

End User Input Gathering (Inbound Communication)

  • Gather useful end user input and feedback regarding expectations, pain points, primary use cases etc.
  • Compile this into easily consumable reports and/or presentations to assist projects with feature design, prioritization, UX etc.

Community Enablement

  • SIGs are open organizations with meetings, meeting agendas and notes, mailing lists, and other communications in the open
  • The mailing list, SIG meeting calendar, and other communication documents of the SIG will be openly published and maintained

As Trusted Expert Advisors to the TOC

  • Perform technical due diligence on new and graduating projects, and advise TOC on findings.
  • Be involved with, or periodically check in with projects in their area, and advise TOC on health, status and proposed actions (if any) as necessary or on request.

See Example Responsibilities of a CNCF SIG.

 

The first set of SIGs as per the proposal and the TOC members who will act as liaison with the SIG are:

(from: https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1BUmTO5PFt7NZ9jVMMR3r1W7k8NANltNNJJqFCZdbS0I/edit#slide=id.g4e24cc378e_1_39)

  • Matt: Traffic (networking, service discovery, load balancing, service mesh, RPC, pubsub, etc)
    • Envoy, Linkerd, NATS, gRPC, CoreDNS, CNI
  • Jeff: Observability (monitoring, logging, tracing, profiling, etc.)
    • Prometheus, OpenTracing, Fluentd, Jaeger, Cortex, OpenMetrics,
  • Liz + Joe: Security/Governance (auth, authorization, auditing, policy enforcement, compliance, GDPR, cost management, etc)
    • SPIFFE, SPIRE, Open Policy Agent, Notary, TUF,  Falco,
  • Michelle + Alexis: App Dev, Ops & Testing (PaaS, Serverless, Operators, CI/CD,  Conformance, Chaos Eng, Scalability and Reliability measurement etc.)
    • Helm, CloudEvents, Telepresence, Buildpacks, (CNCF CI)
  • Brendan + Brian: Core and Applied Architectures (orchestration, scheduling, container runtimes, sandboxing technologies, packaging and distribution, specialized architectures thereof (e.g. Edge, IoT, Big Data, AI/ML, etc).
    • Kubernetes, containerd, rkt, Harbor, Dragonfly, Virtual Kubelet
  • Xiang: Storage (Block and File Stores, Databases, Key-Value stores etc)
    • TiKV, etcd, Vitess, Rook

 

Hope this helps,

 

Kind Regards,

Alex

 

 

 

 

From: Saad Ali <saadali@...>
Date: Wednesday, 10 April 2019 at 21:38
To: Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>, cncf-wg-storage <cncf-wg-storage@...>, "cncf-toc@..." <cncf-toc@...>, Alex Chircop <alex.chircop@...>
Subject: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

 

Hi CNCF Storage WG,

 

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

 

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

 

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

 

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

 

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

 

Thanks,

 

Saad Ali

 


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Erin Boyd
 

Love that you are volunteering, Saad. You've done a wonderful job with the Kube Storage-SIG and I can speak from person experience that we have a healthy, professional, productive group.

:)
Erin


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:01 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...


Re: Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Saad Ali <saadali@...>
 

I understand that any project can choose to apply or not apply to be part of the CNCF Sandbox.

And while I realize the intent may not be to attempt to promote one project above another, per the CNCF Sandbox Guidelines the purpose of the CNCF Sandbox is to 1) "Encourage public visibility", 2) "Facilitate alignment with existing projects", 3) "Nurture projects", and 4) "Remove possible legal and governance obstacles to adoption and contribution".

As far as I can tell, the only major requirement for joining the sandbox, is support of "2 TOC sponsors" (which is also a little concerning to me).

So for projects that do apply to be part of the CNCF Sandbox, which projects will TOC members choose to sponsor? Specifically, will TOC members continue to sponsor any new block/file storage system that applies to be part of the CNCF? If so, why? What benefit does bringing in more block/file storage systems in to the CNCF bring to users of the CNCF ecosystem? If not, what criteria will we use to discern which ones we accept and which ones we don't accept?

On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:58 PM Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox@...> wrote:
How does this relate to the established precedent of having multiple implementations of container runtimes be under the umbrella? (containerd, rkt, cri-o)

Kubernetes had a very tight dependency on the container runtime. Like the Rook decision, it made sense at the time.

As Kubernetes becomes more extensible we have to be be more thoughtful and intentional about the value of the projects we bring in to the CNCF ecosystem for our users.


On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 3:25 PM Quinton Hoole <quinton.hoole@...> wrote:
Hi Saad

Thanks for your questions.   Answers inline below.


From: cncf-toc@... [cncf-toc@...] on behalf of via Lists.Cncf.Io [saadali=google.com@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 2:34 PM
To: cncf-wg-storage; cncf-toc@...; kubernetes-sig-storage
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: [cncf-toc] Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Based on recent presentation and discussions in the CNCF Storage WG meeting, I understand that we are considering adopting OpenEBS as a new CNCF sandbox or incubator project? Is that correct?

Quinton> Yes, sandbox.

If so, I'd like to understand the motivations for doing so? What will the benefit of doing so be for users of the CNCF ecosystem?

Quinton> Here is the motivation behind sandbox: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/sandbox.md  .  I think that answers most of your questions in more detail than I do here, but I'll add a few minor comments below.

As far as I understand, OpenEBS is a software defined storage system exposing block and file storage that is comprised of micro-services that run on top of Kubernetes.

There are many other projects that are doing similar things: including Portworx, Rook (already a CNCF incubator project), StorageOS, Robin Systems, and others. Kubernetes (with CSI) already allows workloads to consume any block or file storage system (including these ones) in a portable manner.

Quinton> Yes any open source project may decide to apply to donate their project to the CNCF.  If accepted by the TOC, they get a neutral home within which to collaborate, governance and other help from the CNCF, and the users of and contributors to the project get a level of assurance that the project will continue to operate as per the principles set out by the CNCF, its TOC, board etc.  Some projects choose to do that, and others do not.  Either way is fine. 

At the time when Rook was incubated in to the CNCF, Kubernetes wasn't the de facto container orchestration system, and so it made sense to promote projects that encouraged new types of workloads to run on top of Kubernetes.

That is no longer a concern, and given the diversity of projects in this space I don't see the benefit of promoting specific block and file storage implementations within the CNCF ecosystem.

Quinton> See above. Note that this is not an attempt to promote one project above another.  Any project may apply.  To my knowledge, none of the examples you gave have (yet) chosen to do so.

I want to stress that the team behind OpenEBS (at MayaData) is wonderful, and have been strong supports of the CNCF and Kubernetes. But at the same time I want to make sure we act intentionally within the CNCF for the clear benefit of users. And, at the very least, we should establish a clear strategy for adopting new projects in this space.

Quinton> I think that strategy is fairly clearly laid out above, and in other supporting CNCF docs. I'd be happy to hop on a call with you and anyone else who's interested to discuss further if there's a desire to do so.  Or we could just add it to the agenda for the next working group meeting in 2 weeks time.

Regards,

Saad Ali

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "kubernetes-sig-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kubernetes-sig-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-sig-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kubernetes-sig-storage/87D581F5165B024FB769D69D474DD224132CAC0C%40sjceml521-mbs.china.huawei.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Fox, Kevin M <Kevin.Fox@...>
 

How does this relate to the established precedent of having multiple implementations of container runtimes be under the umbrella? (containerd, rkt, cri-o)

Thanks,
Kevin


From: 'Saad Ali' via kubernetes-sig-storage [kubernetes-sig-storage@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 2:34 PM
To: cncf-wg-storage; cncf-toc@...; kubernetes-sig-storage
Subject: Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Based on recent presentation and discussions in the CNCF Storage WG meeting, I understand that we are considering adopting OpenEBS as a new CNCF sandbox or incubator project? Is that correct?

If so, I'd like to understand the motivations for doing so? What will the benefit of doing so be for users of the CNCF ecosystem?

As far as I understand, OpenEBS is a software defined storage system exposing block and file storage that is comprised of micro-services that run on top of Kubernetes.

There are many other projects that are doing similar things: including Portworx, Rook (already a CNCF incubator project), StorageOS, Robin Systems, and others. Kubernetes (with CSI) already allows workloads to consume any block or file storage system (including these ones) in a portable manner.

At the time when Rook was incubated in to the CNCF, Kubernetes wasn't the de facto container orchestration system, and so it made sense to promote projects that encouraged new types of workloads to run on top of Kubernetes.

That is no longer a concern, and given the diversity of projects in this space I don't see the benefit of promoting specific block and file storage implementations within the CNCF ecosystem.

I want to stress that the team behind OpenEBS (at MayaData) is wonderful, and have been strong supports of the CNCF and Kubernetes. But at the same time I want to make sure we act intentionally within the CNCF for the clear benefit of users. And, at the very least, we should establish a clear strategy for adopting new projects in this space.

Regards,

Saad Ali

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "kubernetes-sig-storage" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to kubernetes-sig-storage+unsubscribe@....
To post to this group, send email to kubernetes-sig-storage@....
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/kubernetes-sig-storage/CABBBJP0uWABFO7qBsKDjnVmdH1ueHEOHZmWwr_ro6EWg9rgm1Q%40mail.gmail.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.


Re: Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Quinton Hoole
 

Hi Saad

Thanks for your questions.   Answers inline below.


From: cncf-toc@... [cncf-toc@...] on behalf of via Lists.Cncf.Io [saadali=google.com@...]
Sent: Wednesday, April 10, 2019 2:34 PM
To: cncf-wg-storage; cncf-toc@...; kubernetes-sig-storage
Cc: cncf-toc@...
Subject: [cncf-toc] Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Based on recent presentation and discussions in the CNCF Storage WG meeting, I understand that we are considering adopting OpenEBS as a new CNCF sandbox or incubator project? Is that correct?

Quinton> Yes, sandbox.

If so, I'd like to understand the motivations for doing so? What will the benefit of doing so be for users of the CNCF ecosystem?

Quinton> Here is the motivation behind sandbox: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/sandbox.md  .  I think that answers most of your questions in more detail than I do here, but I'll add a few minor comments below.

As far as I understand, OpenEBS is a software defined storage system exposing block and file storage that is comprised of micro-services that run on top of Kubernetes.

There are many other projects that are doing similar things: including Portworx, Rook (already a CNCF incubator project), StorageOS, Robin Systems, and others. Kubernetes (with CSI) already allows workloads to consume any block or file storage system (including these ones) in a portable manner.

Quinton> Yes any open source project may decide to apply to donate their project to the CNCF.  If accepted by the TOC, they get a neutral home within which to collaborate, governance and other help from the CNCF, and the users of and contributors to the project get a level of assurance that the project will continue to operate as per the principles set out by the CNCF, its TOC, board etc.  Some projects choose to do that, and others do not.  Either way is fine. 

At the time when Rook was incubated in to the CNCF, Kubernetes wasn't the de facto container orchestration system, and so it made sense to promote projects that encouraged new types of workloads to run on top of Kubernetes.

That is no longer a concern, and given the diversity of projects in this space I don't see the benefit of promoting specific block and file storage implementations within the CNCF ecosystem.

Quinton> See above. Note that this is not an attempt to promote one project above another.  Any project may apply.  To my knowledge, none of the examples you gave have (yet) chosen to do so.

I want to stress that the team behind OpenEBS (at MayaData) is wonderful, and have been strong supports of the CNCF and Kubernetes. But at the same time I want to make sure we act intentionally within the CNCF for the clear benefit of users. And, at the very least, we should establish a clear strategy for adopting new projects in this space.

Quinton> I think that strategy is fairly clearly laid out above, and in other supporting CNCF docs. I'd be happy to hop on a call with you and anyone else who's interested to discuss further if there's a desire to do so.  Or we could just add it to the agenda for the next working group meeting in 2 weeks time.

Regards,

Saad Ali


Incubation of OpenEBS in to CNCF?

Saad Ali <saadali@...>
 

Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Based on recent presentation and discussions in the CNCF Storage WG meeting, I understand that we are considering adopting OpenEBS as a new CNCF sandbox or incubator project? Is that correct?

If so, I'd like to understand the motivations for doing so? What will the benefit of doing so be for users of the CNCF ecosystem?

As far as I understand, OpenEBS is a software defined storage system exposing block and file storage that is comprised of micro-services that run on top of Kubernetes.

There are many other projects that are doing similar things: including Portworx, Rook (already a CNCF incubator project), StorageOS, Robin Systems, and others. Kubernetes (with CSI) already allows workloads to consume any block or file storage system (including these ones) in a portable manner.

At the time when Rook was incubated in to the CNCF, Kubernetes wasn't the de facto container orchestration system, and so it made sense to promote projects that encouraged new types of workloads to run on top of Kubernetes.

That is no longer a concern, and given the diversity of projects in this space I don't see the benefit of promoting specific block and file storage implementations within the CNCF ecosystem.

I want to stress that the team behind OpenEBS (at MayaData) is wonderful, and have been strong supports of the CNCF and Kubernetes. But at the same time I want to make sure we act intentionally within the CNCF for the clear benefit of users. And, at the very least, we should establish a clear strategy for adopting new projects in this space.

Regards,

Saad Ali


Re: CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Quinton Hoole <quinton@...>
 

Hi Saad

Speaking personally, it would be great to have you as a TL on the CNCF Storage SIG. 

Regarding your other questions around SIG scope, have you read this yet?


That spells out in broad strokes what the responsibilities of CNCF SIGs are in general.  What I have undertaken to do is write up a draft charter of what exactly this means for the CNCF Storage SIG.  We can then review and  finalize this draft with the TOC.  It would be great to have your input.

Q



On Wed, Apr 10, 2019 at 1:38 PM Saad Ali <saadali@...> wrote:
Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali



--
Quinton Hoole
quinton@...


CNCF Storage SIG - Mission/Purpose/Ownership?

Saad Ali <saadali@...>
 

Hi CNCF Storage WG,

Following up on the CNCF Storage WG meeting this morning: I'm considering throwing my hat in to the ring as a possible TL for the proposed CNCF Storage SIG. I'm currently Co-chair/TL of SIG Storage.

That said, I'd first like to understand what this new CNCF SIG will own?

The Kubernetes Storage SIG, for example, has clear ownership of the Kubernetes volume sub-system. This, CNCF storage workgroup, so far has produced whitepapers on the storage landscape, surveyed users, and hosted presentations from 3rd party storage projects. While all valuable, these are short term tasks.

My goal here is to make sure we act intentionally with a clear mission and purpose. A group without something to own will, at best, waste time, and, at worst, cause unnecessary conflict. To that end, I want to make sure the SIG has an obvious, long-term ownership of something concrete.

Thoughts? What do we think will be the long term sustainability strategy for this new SIG? What will it own?

Thanks,

Saad Ali

4381 - 4400 of 7561