 Hi Victor. Good morning. Good day. Happy new year. Happy new year. It's interesting you're not showing up for me Taylor at all on the I hear you but I don't see you. It's interesting. I don't see myself either in the participants list. That's fun. Yeah, that's interesting. It says Vogue. It says Vogue Kopen. Oh, I think I'm logged into our head of account. It's also using those pictures. Yeah, we did a. I need to switch accounts. We did a a software co-op meetup last week. So I think I logged in to turn on recordings. I can't switch accounts while I'm already logged in. That's fine. All right, so we are, this is the, I guess, first meeting of the year. I don't know if we just keep calling us until we decide on something else Oliver the CNF working group or are we, we just. I mean, I know we're you're just kind of kicking things off. I actually think that we should, you know, in our effort, we've been talking since, you know, probably the summer somewhere late last summer. You know, in terms of the new initiative, I think, and I think this has been a kind of a holding place that my suggestion is that we actually start to, you know, we make some efforts to start transitioning. And Randy's coming on now here. So I think, and I think we should take the help of Randy Paul and, you know, we can actually set up a set up a recurring meeting under elephant. I think that would be my suggestion. Otherwise, I think it's a bit confusing that we continue to sort of have a CNF working group meeting working on something different than what it was. Maybe, you know, I mean, there are some, there's some overlaps, but I think we have a shift in focus and I think we should pivot to that. That would be my suggestion. The main reason why we were continuing this as long as we did through the end of the year was there was nothing else set up yet. I'm happy to take an action on that to start it, you know, just so we don't have to we don't have to discuss details on it right now, but I'm happy to this week just to reach out to Kenny and see if we can get some help on getting that, you know, how do we, how do we establish at least the first, you know, a recurring session with under the elephant, where we can be meeting. And continuing to move forward in this, in this new initiative, we will be reporting to, you know, obviously keeping the tack informed of our work. But I think, you know, what, what I gathered from the end of last year was basically we are, we are now tasked to start working on this and we have until one summit to try and show some results. So, I think let's let my suggestions that we start to create that that working space with an elephant and I'm happy to try to get things started there. All right. What about next Monday. That might be a little bit let's let's go for let's let's maintain this one for one more week just that way we can inform everybody on next Monday. Just to make sure we have time ample time to get it set up. Yeah, next Monday is also MLK day if I'm not mistaken. So some people might be out. I'm sorry, Randy, what did you say next Monday was if I'm not mistaken, it's Martin Luther King day. I am mixing it up for Yeah, I think it's it won't get this 15th year right. Well, yeah, and also for at least for us at the LF. It's an official holiday. So if you are expecting Kenny's help or something that might not be the right Monday. Yeah, normally we would cancel on a day like that. Wherever it is during the EU bigger holidays from usually cancel and I think for this one we should as well. At least this meeting. So unless anyone wants to keep it going, let's cancel for next week on this one. I don't know if that gives enough time. We can keep it on the calendar for three weeks or two weeks from now I guess and if it turns out Oliver or any that we do have something set up. We can still join this call and then point everybody to the correct place. How does that sound? Sounds good. Is it going to be called a work stream? Or what are these called? Are there going to be now a working group within LFN? I think this is some of the stuff that we need to sort out. So I, again, I think just sort of saying that we're going to work to get us something set up. I wouldn't know if we need to solve that now. I'm not sure to be honest with you. I think we need some help from Kenny probably to figure out what we can call this at this point in time. All right. I could start by renaming the dock and the meeting to maybe match kind of what we're going to. I'm sure that even on the CNCF side I could Taylor Wagner probably update the name if we want to. Cloud Native, Telcom, working group, work stream, something like that. The dock that we're on, Oliver, if you remember, this was like the second iteration because it has so many nodes. We're in 2024. It wouldn't be bad to just start a new document and reference from the current one or whatever. Or copy this up the current dock content over or to the wiki at this point. Yeah, I think so. I think that's probably makes sense. Move to the wiki. I think so. I mean, move to the wiki and we can attach, you know, we can attach. I assume we can attach documents there so we could, you know, we could have continued to try to run, you know, use it the same way. I don't know if that'll work, but or link to it from there. And start with a fresh, like you say, because it's, I don't know how many pages it says at this point, but I'd be a good point to a lot. It's a lot. Yeah, exactly. So do we have, can we create a section? Do you have that capability right now on the wiki for meeting notes, like the other meetings that are occurring, and it can be renamed and reorganized. I don't know what's happened for some of the others, but. We could do that now. Yeah, I need to remind myself where it is. So bear with me. All right. I think the link for the. The area that we have right now is at the bottom. Would you like me to share my screen? Yeah, sure. So. Right now, everything's linked to the stock, but we could always just point people out right here in the notes that we're switching to the wiki and then, you know, in the main top area. That way, if anyone lands here, they know where to go from here. So we have this main section right now. It's just the assets and challenges. I don't know what this. Alternative talk about this just kind of points if you. Don't know where to go. But what we don't have is. Like. I guess the meeting that so. We create a. I don't know if these are folders or whatever for meeting notes. And then start. Yeah, I think they just up pages or whatever, right? I'm looking here. See if we can create a sub page underneath. I need to log in. Right. I think I was just sitting there creating and it looks like there's already something called meeting notes. So you beat me to it. I was just trying to see if I knew how to do it. Yeah, I think you got it. Oh, someone else already did it. Well, actually I'm getting the same thing. So I got the same message as you, but I think that there's a, I don't know why it's treating it like a. You know, it's saying in the space, there's already something called meeting. Meeting notes or meeting minutes or whatever you named it there. Yeah, I mine is. I didn't get done. So. Yeah, I know less to publish it or let me do it like this. Meeting nets. TBD. Yeah, just something and then. See if. If that falls underneath as a sub. Yeah, it does. Okay. That's interesting. I don't know why I won't do it. Because I see it repeated for lots of them. Yeah. All right. Someone else can figure that out. Yep. All right. And then the general format is. Let's see. Trying to make sure we copy it. Elephant infrastructure working group. Yeah. I don't know. Yeah, I'm not really sure that there's any good. Examples here to copy. I think everything in the minutes. Yeah. Have a top level. Acronym yet because it's still going along. I'll just, I don't know if I put just minutes of that's going to work though. Let's try it. Hey, look, we got it. Does that look right? I don't know if you, how do you do this? I'm just making it up. Is there a reason? I mean, I'm just thinking about what you're doing Taylor. Is there a reason why we wouldn't want to just use that wiki page. To point to the. A similar Google doc. Can't we do that? That way we just continue to do it the same way, rather than having to cut a new version. Like what you see across, you know, I'm just doing that like, you know, there's always a new, like a each, each time there's another. It's a date specific rather than having a rolling document. I mean, could we not just put the link in here and then just, you know, that way we kind of continue. The similar style. I think this is very useful because you have all the meeting notes in one place. And you can kind of easily scroll between, you know, last meeting with that I missed the meeting before. I mean, are you suggesting to continue using a Google doc or, or. Yeah, that's what I'm wondering why not, why not do that, but just link it and put the link to the document here on a meeting notes wiki page. Right. So people know where to find that. But then we just. I'm fine with that. I don't, you know, I don't know what. I didn't know what to do as far as for elephant. That's all. Yeah. I mean, I'm not, I may not be the expert on that one either, but I think it's okay. We can run it by, you know. Oh, there's Renny. Do you see any reason why we can't do that? No, no, it's up to the community to decide there are no strict rules. Okay. So yeah, let's, let's point to this document and we can always rename it later and, you know, have it cut a new version of it that's not like cut the old stuff in it. Sorry, I just kind of realized that Taylor that we were going, I'm like, maybe we can, we can do it. We can limit the change that we have to do. Yeah. So this one, this document is. I think it's owned by Taylor Wagner. I don't see the details. Anyway, so we may want it like a new document under an elephant account, but that would probably be the only thing. There are got details. Location. Interesting. It's just floating. Yeah. I also think that Taylor would just change ownership other than it might not be possible to change outside of an org. If it's an org creative doc, but that'd be the only thing. Anyways, normally what we've done in the past Oliver is we'll eventually copy the notes over to another document and then keep the same document, but just it only has the new notes. So say everything below this 2024, we'd move over somewhere else and we do that because eventually it just starts loading slow and we'll link to the old one. I think literally if we scroll to the bottom, it doesn't say here at the top, but if we scroll to the very bottom, we'll probably see a link to a previous document. So we could, you know, do the same thing with content. The only issue is this document being owned by CNCF officially. I don't think they matter and it may not matter to LFN, but Ranny, if you have input or need to ask Lincoln or whatever. It would be nicer if it was not linked to CNCF, but if it creates too much work or hassle, then let's leave it that way. It's really just a transition and we try to use the same Google Docs so that whatever people open is always there, but it's not a big deal if we're just going to do it once. So we create a new someone at Elephant and an Elephant account that has Google account creates the new document and then we'll just link it so that we'll just say new notes go here and be good to go at that point. So anyone can create it as long as you set up the access. I think right now it's anyone with on the internet. Yeah, can be an editor. That's how these are set up. Anyone with a link. I'll just put maybe this is like a to do. Create new meeting that's document under a open account. So Ranny or Oliver, can one of you all take that on to get a new document created? Yeah, I can do it. I'm driving right now, but I'll be at my computer in 10 minutes so I can do that. All right. And Oliver, you're going to figure out where to set up the new virtual meetings. Yep. Whatever that is zoom, Microsoft meeting, whatever. All right. What else do we have today? So I don't know if you got a chance to talk about it already, but there's this upcoming meeting with the Elephant pack, which I think is scheduled to be held for three weeks from now. Something like that. Yeah, that's on the 24th, Ranny. So we right before the right before the Chris. I should say right before the holiday break we had. We had a draft that we walked through on this call. I think we did that. Well, I think we did that, right? Remind me everyone because I think we did that on the. 18th. I think we walked through the short, you know, work in progress, Google slides. There's still some work to be done. I think I mentioned that Sanaa was, it was keen to, you know, at least for the first attack meeting to share some views from sort of from the operator viewpoint perspective, why this initiative is important. I did, I did understand from you, Ranny, that, you know, we shouldn't see this as, you know, the one and only attack meeting. This is going to be sort of continued reporting into the attack on our way to one summit. So that's fine. I think we'll use this first one to just, you know, level set and make sure everyone understands what we are actually doing because in some ways it hasn't been, it hasn't felt like, you know, we're all landed on that. So I think, I think one of the things we need to do, if we're going to have anything delivered by, by one summit is we need to start working with some assumptions. And, you know, so we'll make this presentation. Sanaa is going to help with a few slides that she wants to intro with. So we'll be coordinating with her over the next week or so. Now that we're all back getting back. So if anyone wants to look at those slides, feel free, feel free to add comments. You know, we will certainly try to address them. And if we don't understand the comment, we'll reach out to you and make sure we do. We want to have as much input as we can on this. So it's a, it's really meant to be a high level. What are we trying to do? What are we trying to accomplish? How can it help? And then we'll go from there. Yeah. That sounds good. I think just treat this, not as a sort of review, project review by the tech. It's just, it's a working session. And as you, as you said, there will be probably follow-up ones between now and one summit. And I mean, just think about it as people in the tech would be able to help this initiative move forward. So this is kind of more of a joint work meeting. More than anything else. That's, that's excellent, Randy. So can I just, if I play it back in a slightly different, as I was having this thought a little bit this, you know, over the holiday, I think. I feel like we're, we've been a little bit like in the. Trying to, you know, trying to, you know, share what this initiative was and getting people's input. And I think we need to start moving into the mode of, let's start working and we can share that work with the tech. And as they see what we're working on, what, you know, where, what areas we might be struggling with, they can hopefully help and, you know, support us. So I think that's what I'm hearing you say. And if that is the case, that's fantastic. Yeah. Yeah. That's how I think things are. And that's what I'm sensing from the tech members and all of the tech chair. All right. Excellent. Cause that, that also is, I mean, I think these slides with hearing that in mind, so anybody who does look at the slides, just bear in mind, it may be right now is a little bit geared towards trying to, you know, convince people that this is a good idea. I think some of that we can maybe tone down. I think we'll just more be a little bit more factual. This is what we're doing. This is how we think we're going to help. And then I think we had already mentioned this last time, we need to start talking about a plan. So what do we want to accomplish? Or what do we believe we can accomplish by one summit? So that we'll have something that, you know, hopefully when we get to on something, one summit that we have some, some results, some progress that we can share with community. And really, you know, it would be a sort of proof point that this initiative is important and that, you know, we're gaining traction. So I think that we'll continue to tune on this. But again, feel free if anyone has any comments or wants to, to help out, just let me know or tell her no and do. We'll get something sorted out. Maybe we can start looking at this starting with the next call. On the, well, we assume right now for the 18th. But then we can share a new version of this. So everyone is up to speed. I have a topic of moisture is that in scope about workflow portability across different infrastructures. I find that at this point, there is not an easy way to do it on the Kubernetes level. So it's done more on the control panel level, just like nephew, the project is doing. However, at this point, nephew is only supporting three Amazon cloud Azure and Google cloud. I think it would be nice to extend that beyond the three cloud into more, even including private cloud, like open stack and all that. Is that going to be in scope for this discussion? I don't think non Kubernetes is going to be in scope in the short term. So Kubernetes is going to be the main focus. And then as far as cross cloud would be, well, are you referring to building out the, I hate to split between application and the platform, but Kubernetes based environments that run the applications or the cross cloud for the applications running? Kubernetes, just basically how Kubernetes workload, container workload to be, because right now, like for example, when you do auto scaling, right now there's no simple way to orchestrate the auto provisioning scaling of the infrastructure layer, the virtual machine or the bare metal layer. There is no such capability at this point. So nephew is closest to that capability, but they only support the big three cloud. So yeah, in order for Kubernetes to, like you take a workload on Google cloud and move it to on premise to run on VMware or run on open stack or any other virtualization platform or even bare metal, there's no easy way to do that. That's the problem. All right. So workload wise, it would be ensuring that different environments that are based on Kubernetes, that the workloads work there. So not just the single clouds. So there's some providers that are running Kubernetes based environments on bare metal themselves. And then there's others that are, or they also may be running on Microsoft Azure and AWS IBM's cloud or whatever. And, you know, red hat up and shift. So trying to make sure that or provide, I won't say make sure, but make it easier to provide interoperability between those different Kubernetes based environments that would be in scope. And I would say, even if it may not be the early focus, be in scope to try to provide that base level interoperability for the platform that's being built to run the workloads, that it's following practices that allow that cross cloud interoperability. As far as trying to provide interoperability between a Kubernetes environment and a open stack or VMware or Zen or anything else, or just bare metal, I think that's out of scope. I would say like on a personal level, you can follow cloud native best practices and apply them in those different environments. But I don't think that from a context point of view, we'd be trying to provide a best practice within the context of a VMware environment that also works on Kubernetes and try to show, let's say, the certification for the workload certification. I doubt we're going to write test at least anytime soon that would show that a workload or an application, that's part of a workload, is following a best practice and it's tested on VMware and Kubernetes. I doubt that's going to be something in scope anytime soon, partly just because you need the people available to do all of the testing and make sure that it works to then be able to say this is a good practice and here's how it would work and be implemented in VMware and here's how it works and would be implemented in Kubernetes. The actual principle and the idea of the best practice often would be applicable, but showing how that would work is, I think, out of scope. Branny, Oliver, I'm speaking up, but what are your thoughts on VMware, Opusack, anything other than Kubernetes being in scope? No, I think you're, I'm in line with what you just said, Taylor. I think that's why we're using this foundation and I think we're just trying to recognize, we're trying to find and we've been, I think for those of us who've been involved in this working group, we've basically identified the fact that the common denominator here is, of course, Kubernetes and so when we say Kubernetes and Cloud Native, best practices, tests, that's really recognizing that we're trying to find that common denominator because, of course, each of those different infrastructures have different, they're different flavors out there which mean different things are implemented or handled differently. We can't cater to them all. I'm like, Taylor, I'm speaking for myself. I basically see it. You either have one size fits for everyone, so there's a sort of an infrastructure that has been defined and everyone has agreed upon it and it's the same, everyone uses the same, which I don't think that that's ever going to happen. Otherwise, you have all the different choices and so what I think we're really trying to do here and I think one of the slides and if you don't mind, Taylor, moving forward maybe. One slide forward. Yeah. I mean, again, bear in mind these are work in progress, but I think this was an attempt to try to explain that today we have a lot of different, we have different telco clouds just been talking about it now and each of the vendors is doing sort of, not saying there's any wrong decisions being made, but we're just simply saying they are doing things in their way and what we're trying to say is that if we can agree on a set of foundational cloud native and Kubernetes native best practices and we can provide tests that allow you to say whether that's infrastructure or whether that's a workload can help you to validate that you're following those best practices. We believe we can expand that blue portion and we're never going to get rid of the differences. I mean, that's maybe my view of it. I don't think we're going to get to the point where everyone has exactly the same, but we can try to find, expand that common, commonly used and commonly agreed pieces, how to do things in a cloud native and a Kubernetes native way. So I think I said the same thing. You did. Taylor just maybe slightly differently. Okay. Thank you. Any other questions. Or topics. Well, I would, I would just ask Taylor just sort of within mine with kind of what we kicked off here today. I think if we're, and even Ranny, I think is just, you know, kind of supported what was what we were saying there in the very beginning of the call. Let's move into. Let's start making this happen mode. So in my mind, I think we have a number of assets that we have had. And then I think we can start, you know, looking at moving those, I mean, we can, we will inform of course, attack and others about what our decisions are in terms of this group saying, okay, our suggestion or our recommendation is to use this as the basis for a test catalog. You know, we have a lot of this information available. And as long as I think we're communicating to people that what we are doing. If there's a better tool or if there's a better way to do it, then we know we'll hear that otherwise. So in other words, let's, let's already now, I think, you know, for those who are interested in working and participating in this, I think that would be interesting to capture. As we, so we can start looking at what are our first steps. We have a wiki probably need to do, continue to work on that wiki to make information available, easy to access. We have existing badges. We have existing tools. You know, so that's, I guess the question is how do we do that? You know, between now and the next meeting, you know, how do we start making progress on that? And I think I'm not sure, at least in my mind, unless we have regular meetings in the week, you know, it's going to be two weeks and we'll come back and say, who did, did anyone do anything? I'm just trying to sort of find if there's a way for us to, anybody who's interested in participating and working, maybe, you know, just to show a hands and then, you know, maybe Taylor yourself, you and myself, we can, you know, we can start looking at some, a few working sessions over the next week or two where we can start, you know, concrete working on some of these items. Does that, does that make sense? Yeah, I think it'll be easier for people to volunteer to help if we have a list of things to do, rather than just saying, yeah, we're going to do stuff, volunteer yourself. Oh wait, what'd I get myself? Yeah, no, I agree. I agree. Maybe that's what we need to do. We started with the working group already saying, where do we put meeting notes? You know, we need to set up the calls. That's part of the working group. That's something to get done. Other parts that we have here are the, the GitHub repo, which happens to also be where documentation meets the contentness that we're creating for the working group. So this could be something to continue. Where do we want to put this? I think a wiki page for some of it makes sense, but you know, I don't, I don't know. The easier way to do things as far as saying, we're moving it to elephant as transfer ownership of the repo. So if, if we create a github.com slash elephant slash whatever we want to call this, we, or we transitioned it over really is what it would be. So we could do that. If we want to move any content documents somewhere else, that can be done. I know that the CNTT, um, etiquette stuff was in github. And then there was, um, like the webpage document format, format was actually just created from the github. So we can do something like that, but that can, I don't think we need to worry about trying to get that up quickly. But if we keep it in the Google docs, like all the content from this group, then we have the opportunity to do the generation of docs, which is what I'd suggest. But the first step would be moving it over ownership. If we want to do that. So Taylor just maybe in light with what you said, I mean, this is an asset list. So maybe what, what the next activity right now, and this is, if you were to go back to the presentation that you were showing us, yeah, this slide where again, this is work in progress. But if you go forward, um, a few slides a little bit more, one more. So this is not, you know, you and I, and I don't think the scene though, I don't know that we really discussed this. I think we've been, you know, at points we've discussed it. But I think, you know, now I think if we start thinking about one summit. As a date where we want to, you know, inform the community of progress that's been made. I think we almost need to work backwards or, you know, we need to think about, you know, what are the objectives? What do we want to have accomplished by one summit? Um, I don't think one person can answer that. I think a couple, you know, good minds need to come together and say, so what, what do we think is a realistic goal to have? Um, that at least something that we can be working towards. And then we start backing up in terms of a plan. Um, I think that would also help us to identify the things that need to be done. Cause I mean, you were into the stuff moving, you know, moving the repo. Um, so I think that's a good idea. Um, I think that a good idea is to be done. But I think we need to almost like. Some kind of high level plan. Uh, just to sort of say, what are we trying to accomplish by when and then start getting to the men? This is something I think we could put on the Wiki. Right. So everyone sees what our plan is. We can report on this with tax, uh, share that information as we're going along. Um, so. A suggestion might be that we, the first thing we do is create a high level plan. That we foresee are needed before we get to one summit. And then start, you know, from there, people, that if they're interested in helping out on any of those tasks, can raise their hand up and, and help out set. Make sense. Sure. What are the high level things we'd like to accomplish by one summit? Do we want to start brainstorming that get some feedback right now? Yeah. Yeah, sure. Let's get some, let's get some feedback. If you go to that slide just for a second, I mean, maybe I'm not sure this slide has been even, you know, discussed with this group. So for those of you, I mean. Why don't you take over sharing for a moment. Sure. Okay. Give me a second. Okay. Share here. Okay. Share screen. It's lit up as green, but nothing's happening. Why is that? There we go. All right. That should be it now, right? Looks good. Okay. So. Yeah, I mean, so again, consider this work in progress. I keep saying that, but I just want people to understand. I mean, these are like, you know, ideas that are coming out and putting them down. So I think one of the things that we have been, you know, when we talk about this initiative, we've said. And I think before I go to this slide, I'm going to just quickly recap on slide 11. For those of you who have not seen it. So what we have proposed. Is a new cloud native networking initiative within LFN. The reason why this is positioned like this is basically showing, you know, from a foundational perspective, we're talking about best practices. We're talking about a testing catalog that validates those best practices. And we're talking about a certification program. Certification for cloud, you know, we don't know all the badges that that might entail in the long run, but we're saying that we believe that there's a need for, if we're going to, if we're going to drive adoption, we need to give vendors an opportunity to show that they are following these best practices and that that we're hoping. And this is part of the discussion for CSPs. Is there a desire from the CSP to see that? Will that provide, you know, confidence to them that some of the network functions or the different applications that are, are interesting for them, that are, you know, should be, that are part of networking, that they're displaying those cloud native behaviors. And so that certification program can play a part of that. What we're basically showing then is that the middle piece there, this is collaboration to create a robust test catalog and support certification needs. What we are not saying is we're not going into every LFN project and we're telling them, here you have to use this testing catalog, or here's a certification that we're doing. We want to provide it as a service. We want to basically say, if, for example, Anakit is interested, we believe they are, in leveraging a test suite for testing cloud native best practices, as they do today, we believe that that will continue and we hope we want to work with them to expand the support that we can provide to them. Bearing in mind, it needs to be relevant to other projects as well. In other words, we're trying to avoid going all in on Anakit and then it becomes, some of those tests are not interesting for others because it's very specific to Anakit. We have to work through some of that because I think the idea is to have high reuse and applicability to as many projects as possible. Same with Nephios. Nephios is another project that is fairly early days, but we believe that since they are looking to deploy and orchestrate the lifecycle of cloud native network functions, that they may have an interest in validating cloud native network functions that they have, they are displaying or exhibiting the right behaviors so that they will actually be able to be orchestrated by Nephios. These are just examples. They're just ideas as we look at LFN projects. If we look at adjacent projects, we know Silva has been talking a lot about some of the same things. That is based on, it is also leveraging Anakit underneath as far as cloud infrastructure. There could be other projects. The stuff on the right-hand side is basically CSPs could use these testing tools and best practices. The cloud providers and CNF vendors like the company I work for might be interested in leveraging this test catalog, maybe interested in doing certifications. That's why I've put them like that. They're dotted but basically just showing there are other members sort of adjacent, if you will, community members that could also gain benefit from this. That's the sort of suggestion on how we're going to operate. It's not folding into any specific LFN project. Rather, it is a standalone. If you look at the next slide here, based on what I've just told you then, I think if we look at between now and one summit where we believe, I think we can collaborate and make advances. I think that's either going to be Anakit and Silver, which is an adjacent project. It's LF Europe and Nefio. So I think we have a good excuse to talk to those communities and see how we can provide additional support and help to them based on the work that we're doing. Priorities, this is just, again, very quickly. I'm not sure that this can all be done. So I think we need to bootstrap this initiative. We need a lot of, you know, very, I mean, rudimentary things that we've got to get in place as we move things over. We need to transition assets. We need to start, you know, very quickly. We're looking at how we expand the testing catalog. So we have a number of tests. How can we make, how can we expand that and get the community to help contribute to new test development and expansions there. And then of course, I think the lowest hanging fruit that we've got to do with testing is creating a very first LFN certified CNF certification, you know, program or badge or, oh, you know, if you want basically allowing vendors to show that their networking application is conforming to whatever these best practices would be, you know, available in the testing catalog and what we think would make sense as a first version. So objectives then I think, you know, in my mind a little bit, you know, I think we're not going to go very far if we don't build a community and if we don't grow the number of contributors and consumers. So consumers of the test suite, the testing catalog, those best practices, I think we need to, we're going to need to be a combination of marketing efforts but also, you know, word of mouth, getting people involved that we believe can benefit from this program. So building brand and market awareness for this, I think we need to, you know, we need to move from calling this sort of a cloud native network initiative. I think we should come up with a name that really rolls off the tongue and people know what you're talking about and it starts to build value for that particular brand. And then ideally we're great if we could have our first certified CNF badge awarded to a particular vendor by one summit. It may be way too ambitious, just wanted to kind of give you some, you know, some high level thoughts on what my planning goals might be for the initiative. So, and that may be also a reason why I think you started looking at this, why we might need to get started sooner rather than later if we want to see some progress. So I'll stop there and just hand it back maybe if you want to share the meeting notes, Taylor and grab some comments if there are any. That makes sense. Any thoughts? Comments? So, however, out of all the things that you mentioned, I'm sensing that maybe creating this Certification 1.0 program is the most, I would say, pragmatic thing to, I mean, don't get me wrong, everything needs to be worked on in parallel, but I think it's very important to have this Certification 1.0 in place. We are starting from here to hear from CNF vendors that they'll be interested in certifying their CNFs. And I'm sure your company, Oliver Matrix, has some intents of doing similarly. So, I think maybe, and Taylor mentioned things that people can sign up to work on very soon. So I think my gut feeling is that maybe this should be the first thing to focus on. Do you agree? Yeah, I think it is. And we've referred a little bit to it in the past, sort of as the low hanging fruit, because I mean, again, we think we all recognize that we have, we're bringing assets from across CNCF and LFN. And there is a certification program today, so I think we can build from that. And we may start some of those conversations with projects like Anakitz and Nephew, but to your point, that will probably take some time. And we will probably have more success in getting a first version of an LFN certification in place and have companies actually either certified or in progress of certifying by one summit. So I do tend to agree with you. I think that would be, and we have, you know, I think we have a number of vendors who've already done this when it was CNCF. So those might be also, you know, we can certainly start talking to them and making them aware of such an opportunity to be one of the first ones to go through this LFN certification. And that might, you know, that will, again, have some traction and adoption here. So I would agree with you. The other thing, Oliver, that I was thinking about, increasing the number of contributors and users, I guess that's fine. The only thing that we have to do now is to create the baseline, how many contributors we have and what is the current amount of users. So in that way, we can track like the progress that we are doing, the percentage or like, I don't know, the rate that we are growing. So what would the goal be regarding contributors? I think that Oliver just heard like just increasing the number. I mean, we don't have an increasing. Yeah, we don't have like a specific goal. But I guess that's fine. Maybe. The number of contributors to the entire initiative or a specific part, like the meetings, they. I think it can be probably can be broken down, Taylor. But again, I think what we got to keep coming back to is what's the most important for, you know, one song, you know, basically by the timeframe we've got, right? So I think we're going to have to pick and choose things. But I think the increasing in the number of, you know, we want to grow a community. So I think, you know, it's a question of how do you measure that we are growing? I mean, it's great that people attend a meeting, but I think also we want people, we want vendors certifying. We want CSP saying this is really good and this is going to be useful for us. Here's how, here's what we're going to do with it. And we want people being able to both consume and contribute to the tests, to the tests. That might not all happen within the next four months. But I think we need to, we need to think about, you know, if we agree that certification is maybe the lowest hanging fruit here to create a version 1.0, then we start thinking about, so where do we need to get, you know, where do we need to increase the involvement of the community in terms of, you know, is that vendors getting certified? That might be the most obvious, right? Yeah, I'll stop there. I think it's just to make sure that we, people do understand that they can, you know, there's a test catalog as we move that over. You know, it might also require providing some sessions that, you know, that share information about how you can, if you're a developer and you want to help develop tests in the test catalog, you know, some kind of overview on the test catalog and the tools and technologies and how to get started. I mean, that's probably going to be something that will be useful as well. So right now, the test suite under the, for the test catalog, it's running in a CI system on a CNCF account. And it runs on, it had been running on every commit for the main branch, the idea is to ensure that it's going to always be working. There's specifications or spec tests or whatever terminology that you're familiar with. There's tests to test that the testing framework and the suite of tests actually function as they're expected. And having something set up where it can at least be triggered in some type of reoccurring fashion is a good idea so that you don't have a vendor say, hey, I want to certify and they try to run it and it doesn't even work. So going back to this, we need something that's available to run that. I think we're looking at maybe moving over to CircleCI because the cost is lower. CNCF has an open source lab agreement with Equinix. So the runners that do the work under the current CI system, they were running on that, but we won't be at CNCF so we need something else. We did some research on what would be available to run equivalent and it looks like open CircleCI could do something equivalent for a low cost but there's other things that needs to be decided on. If we're going to have contributors to the test catalog that are actually either writing bug fixes or new tests or anything else, then we need it available somewhere and in my mind it needs to be running in the CI system so they can see the results. I think we're over time here. So just from goals for one summit, I think this gives a pretty high level suggestion of 1.0 sort of occasion place with LFN and we can continue to refine this I think a little bit but if we use this to sort of drive a high level plan then we can start sharing that. We can come back to, so what is our goal? What is the high level plan? And then I think we become, that sets us up for, okay, so here's the things, here's the first things we need to be working on. Here's some of the open questions that we need to resolve anybody. And if people can feel inclined to be part of this community and help us move it forward, then there's going to be a list of things that they can figure out where they can, where it makes sense and where they might be able to help us. So I think this is a good start. All right, any objections or can I hear some more votes on canceling next week? Seems like we got a good number here but. At me. Yeah, I'll be out next week, so plus one. Victor. You did it. Victor, Victor. Put it in my man. Yeah, you can put one. All right, so cancels for next week. Thanks everyone. Have a good week and I guess we can continue async a little bit right now. We don't, I don't think we've moved over to the elephant slacks. So there's still the CNCF slack with the CNF working group. We can keep doing stuff to move things forward and. When we have a slack channel. Or maybe we do have a slight channel, but either way. You can hop in there. We can continue async with any of these. If you have time. Have a good day. Have a good day. Thank you. Thank you.