|
[Update] CNCF Networking Workgroup
alexis richardson
hi, if you are missing CNCF TOC Net WG calls, please shout out. ---------- Forwarded message --------- From: Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> Date: Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 5:04 PM Subject: [Update] CNCF Networking Workgroup To: <krb@...>, <leecalcote@...>, <jonathan.boulle@...>, <john.gossman@...>, <roagarwa@...>, <alexis@...>, <padalap@...>, <jie@...>, <madhu.venugopal@...>, <cdl@...>, <dbansal@...>, <benh@...>, <kenowens@...> hi all, I notice that many people who want to dial into these calls are not invited! can this be fixed please. eg bryan @weaveworks
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Vitess follow up
Once you're an official CNCF project, most of these benefits are included so it's not an issue :) The next step would be to finalize the TOC sponsor (Brian), potentially sketch out a proposal (you can find examples one here: https://github.com/cncf/toc/tree/master/proposals) and on the next CNCF TOC call, have the TOC discuss whether to formally invite the project for a proposal per request of the TOC sponsor (Brian). I'll respond to your specific points below: - Help with marketing & PR. This is one area we're severely lacking. We take care of this for projects and I think it's one of the most valuable things we provide for CNCF projects (also conference space etc). We list most of the benefits on this page: https://www.cncf.io/projects/ - Advocacy through the ambassador program. Not a problem either: https://www.cncf.io/ - Take over funding (and ownership) of vitess.io, vitess.slack.io, github repository, travis builds, and other CI & CD resources. In terms of financial and neutral ownership, not a problem either. - Help with setting up governance. This we can help with if projects request it. For example, we are currently working with the Prometheus team to finalize their governance and more than willing to help if projects request it.
On Tue, Apr 25, 2017 at 1:30 AM, Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> wrote: That's a great list. --
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Vitess follow up
alexis richardson
That's a great list.
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
Chris, what are your thoughts?
On Tue, 25 Apr 2017, 02:48 Sugu Sougoumarane, <sougou@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Vitess follow up
Sugu Sougoumarane
Hi Alexis, Here are areas where we'd love to get help for Vitess: - Help with marketing & PR. This is one area we're severely lacking. - Advocacy through the ambassador program. - Take over funding (and ownership) of vitess.io, vitess.slack.io, github repository, travis builds, and other CI & CD resources. - Help with setting up governance. I'm still working on the product comparison (distracted by the Percona conference). I'll try to get that done by next week.
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 12:59 PM, Alexis Richardson <alexis@...> wrote: Sugu
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
Solomon Hykes
On Sunday, April 23, 2017, Yaron Haviv <yaronh@...> wrote:
Yes that's exactly right. What Fedora/RHEL did for the early Linux movement, we are hoping to do for the container movement with Moby/Docker. That is exactly what we are encouraging. Moby is designed to support any component that can be containerized, regardless of who is behind it. Moby doesn't "own" the components: it helps assemble them for downstream integration or upstream development. We showed several demos at the Dockercon keynote to illustrate that point: we used Moby to assemble various proof-of-concepts from eg. prometheus, etcd, redis, and kubernetes. The closing demo was a collaboration with Ilya Dmitrichenko from Weave to build a custom "kubernetes for mac" prototype using Moby. I think the audience liked it :) This seems like a valid concern but I don't understand what you mean exactly. Could you give me an example of outcome you'd like to avoid, or encourage?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
Yaron Haviv
Solomon,
Seems like there is interest to learn about Moby beyond the TOC Saw your TheCUBE interview and Moby does make sense, sort of the Linux and RedHat/Fedora model if I got it right
The things that need interpretation are: in the Linux/Fedora model many of the components come from the community and have open governance and not owned by RedHat, they just test and package based on project maturity and customer demand, its unlikely to see successful (non RedHat) Linux projects that don’t make it to of the Fedora and RedHat package Moby seems very focused on Docker Inc components, e.g. would you support a commercial package that take your best parts with say Kubernetes or other CNCF projects.
Another concern is how do we create more collaboration on the open-source/common parts (like Linux) and less fragmentation with overlapping vendor specific projects that don’t have open governance models or common abstractions/interchangeability
Thanks, Yaron
From: cncf-toc-bounces@... [mailto:cncf-toc-bounces@...]
On Behalf Of Solomon Hykes via cncf-toc
Sent: Sunday, April 23, 2017 1:12 AM To: CNCF TOC <cncf-toc@...> Subject: [cncf-toc] Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
Hi all, this week Docker launched an important new project: the Moby project (http://mobyproject.org). Moby will allow Docker to better collaborate with the ecosystem in general, and the CNCF in particular.
Several people from the CNCF community have asked questions about it, and how it relates to CNCF. I thought it might be useful to allocate time on the TOC call to take questions.
What do you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
alexis richardson
Sounds good, let's get this on agenda for May, probably first call on May 3
On Sat, 22 Apr 2017, 23:39 Swarna Podila via cncf-toc, <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
Swarna Podila <swarna@...>
That would be helpful.
On Sat, Apr 22, 2017 at 3:38 PM Duncan Johnston-Watt via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
-- --Swarna.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
Duncan Johnston-Watt <duncan.johnstonwatt@...>
+1 for CNCF community at large. Best -- Duncan Johnston-Watt CEO | Cloudsoft Corporation +44 777 190 2653 | @duncanjw Sent from my iPhone
On 23 Apr 2017, at 01:11, Solomon Hykes via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Q&A on Moby Project & CNCF?
Solomon Hykes
Hi all, this week Docker launched an important new project: the Moby project (http://mobyproject.org). Moby will allow Docker to better collaborate with the ecosystem in general, and the CNCF in particular.
Several people from the CNCF community have asked questions about it, and how it relates to CNCF. I thought it might be useful to allocate time on the TOC call to take questions. What do you think?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Vitess follow up
alexis richardson
Sugu
Thank-you. Those are good reasons! Are there specific places where you'd like help winning or keeping more contributors? Look forward to your view on systems & tradeoffs. Can I humbly ask that you include Cockroach, Rethink & Goshawk? Maybe others. a On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 8:31 PM, Sugu Sougoumarane via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote: Hi Chris, Alexis,
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Vitess follow up
Sugu Sougoumarane
Hi Chris, Alexis, For the license, we already intend to change it to ALv2: https://github.com/youtube/vitess/issues/2694. For the comparison of various systems and trade-offs, we'll try to put something together in the next few days. As for why we're excited about wanting to join CNCF, I think this issue describes it well: https://github.com/youtube/vitess/issues/2670. PS: Thanks for the adopters suggestion on github. I'll work on that, and also see if we can feature them on vitess.io.
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 9:16 AM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Vitess follow up
Also in terms of process, I believe Brian Grant on today's call has expressed interest in sponsoring the project from the TOC. I'd suggest at a following or next TOC meeting to decide whether the TOC desires to formally invite the project. Another thing to bring up is that Vitess is currently under the BSD-3 license (https://github.com/youtube/vitess/blob/master/LICENSE), which isn't a major issue, but we will have to decide what approach to take (move to ALv2 or go for an exception) if they become a project.
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 11:02 AM, Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
--
Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Vitess follow up
alexis richardson
Sugu Thank you again for your pres today. What would *help Vitess the most* from a project advancement & end user POV? How can CNCF help? a
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Gianluca Arbezzano <gianarb92@...>
mmm I need to double check into the thread. Let's keep this out. I will confirm next meeting :) 2017-04-19 16:55 GMT+02:00 Alexis Richardson <alexis@...>:
--
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
alexis richardson
Gianluca, has Camille reviewed this?
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 3:53 PM Gianluca Arbezzano via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Gianluca Arbezzano <gianarb92@...>
I am happy to share something about this proposal: I shared it via wg-ci some week ago, in practice, we didn't move that much. But I am happy to hear something from you if I can. 2017-04-19 16:42 GMT+02:00 Bryan Cantrill via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...>:
--
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Bryan Cantrill <bryan@...>
With my apologies for the late notice, I'm unable to make the call this morning due to a meeting that I can't move; talk to you in two weeks. - Bryan
On Apr 18, 2017 7:22 PM, "Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc" <cncf-toc@...> wrote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
Doug Davis <dug@...>
The doc hasn't really been touched in a while so we might have all the reviews/comments we're going to get. I did a little bit of clean-up around the "What should a CNCF WG do in this space?" section so I think getting some eyes on that would be good. Whether we discuss it this week or next time is fine with me. thanks Mark! can you be sure to remind me & chris to get this discussed in the next TOC in 2-3 weeks? feel free to add reminder to today's TOC deck On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM Mark Peek <markpeek@...> wrote:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1L9n9tkGuGtj7Ap9dVRes9RVscSoXeKsF3k-d2hJcDlg/edit Mark
On 4/19/17, 7:21 AM, "cncf-toc-bounces@... on behalf of Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc" <cncf-toc-bounces@... on behalf of cncf-toc@...> wrote: thanks Chris ** urgent ** if anyone has any adds for today please shout out. eg: do we want to have a recap on next steps for Serverless discussion, or wait till after Dockercon? On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:21 AM, Chris Aniszczyk via cncf-toc <cncf-toc@...> wrote: > Here's the draft agenda deck for tomorrow: https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__goo.gl_1PJscF&d=DwICAg&c=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ&r=guabfC-f8fFYbN_-NG4ozDvopr9AE_oGI5dhoTYxMKY&m=itR0uKc7LSf8HjMGncQKaNQDz1QZp-qkRZF2Avp-GD8&s=wdDFgb-amate1HlWvgho2Uebw0vPiG2H7XcjbgsFivA&e= > > The main topics are: > - Networking WG Update / Recommendations > - Community presentation from Vitess (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_youtube_vitess&d=DwICAg&c=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ&r=guabfC-f8fFYbN_-NG4ozDvopr9AE_oGI5dhoTYxMKY&m=itR0uKc7LSf8HjMGncQKaNQDz1QZp-qkRZF2Avp-GD8&s=jmCPxpwzC7uFLPhYdSCia0X0sQRIJcAPKWiavbfSNlE&e= ) > > I look forward to seeing everyone tomorrow on the call! > > -- > Chris Aniszczyk (@cra) | +1-512-961-6719 > > _______________________________________________ > cncf-toc mailing list > cncf-toc@... > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.cncf.io_mailman_listinfo_cncf-2Dtoc&d=DwICAg&c=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ&r=guabfC-f8fFYbN_-NG4ozDvopr9AE_oGI5dhoTYxMKY&m=itR0uKc7LSf8HjMGncQKaNQDz1QZp-qkRZF2Avp-GD8&s=TBGFv9eCIgt-xBMh774DLwkfa5YyWuHrIKx0DSnhIQw&e= > _______________________________________________ cncf-toc mailing list cncf-toc@... https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.cncf.io_mailman_listinfo_cncf-2Dtoc&d=DwICAg&c=uilaK90D4TOVoH58JNXRgQ&r=guabfC-f8fFYbN_-NG4ozDvopr9AE_oGI5dhoTYxMKY&m=itR0uKc7LSf8HjMGncQKaNQDz1QZp-qkRZF2Avp-GD8&s=TBGFv9eCIgt-xBMh774DLwkfa5YyWuHrIKx0DSnhIQw&e= _______________________________________________ cncf-toc mailing list cncf-toc@... https://lists.cncf.io/mailman/listinfo/cncf-toc
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Re: Agenda for TOC 4/19/17 Meeting
alexis richardson
thanks Mark! can you be sure to remind me & chris to get this discussed in the next TOC in 2-3 weeks? feel free to add reminder to today's TOC deck
On Wed, Apr 19, 2017 at 1:38 PM Mark Peek <markpeek@...> wrote: Given dockercon might take away availability and attention I’d be fine with moving further serverless discussion out to the next meeting. Perhaps a reminder to review/comment on the notes document:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Alexis Richardson via cncf-toc ---04/19/2017 07:43:39 AM---thanks Mark! can you be sure to remind me & chris to get this discussed in the next TOC in 2-3 week