 Hey everybody I think I might have heard Clemens and Eric in there, right? That's correct Me too. Yep. All right, and Christian are you there? Hey Doug? Hello Whoa, I just ray. Are you there? No, no microphone yet. How you guys doing? Doing all right actually ray is my co-worker. He's he wants to sit in for today, too. Oh, okay, cool It's a ray with an E. Thank you Actually might be a really short call today It should be nice. I'm sure last one of the year. I know so excited Anybody have anything exciting planned for the vacation or just hanging out at home. That's my plan. Yeah Mostly mostly at home maybe a few little trips, but otherwise Yeah, yeah, we got lucky Both my parents and my wife's parents both seem to take a similar approach where They'll pick like a different holiday like my mom used to always pick Thanksgiving as you know her holiday Where she wants everybody to show up, but they both seem to agree that Christmas was you know, that's where you guys spend time at home and just relax and stuff And I'm so glad they both agree with that because it means it's so much easier much much more relaxing that way Yeah, we we live within an easy 20 minutes drive from either house. So You can see both in one day Yes, it's the we have two Christmas holidays Well, we have three days off But we have two Christmas holidays and the one is for that family and the other one is for that family Ah, cool. Yeah. Yeah, I can see them being close to you being really nice and really questionable at times It's so far. It's been work. It has worked out. Well, that's good. That's good. Everybody's still alive Hello Lucas Lucas are you there Fabio are you there? Yeah Hello like a Windows machine a little close Hi, Doug, how's it going? Great. Good That Matthews m-a-t-z-e w yes, that's right. All right. Okay, cool Ryan are you there? Yes, I am. Hello and Tommy. Oh, hey Lucas. Tell me you're there. All right. Thank you Tommy Hey Lucas, I can't I apologize a camera for sure if you've been on the call before or not If you this is your first time on if you want to be associated with a company can just drop your company name into the chat Just like marketing attendance. Oh red hat. Okay, right. Muhammad. Are you there? Morning and those of you who are new to the call we usually wait till at three after you get started Just get everybody a chance to join Chen are you there? Ah, yes Okay, when do we favor just paste your last name into the chat or you can actually edit the Agenda doc if you want and your company name because I think this might be your first time on Okay, thank you and let's see. I thought I thought someone else go flying by that was new. Oh Erwin. Are you there Erwin? Hello, and what about Mike Hemlick Mike, are you there? All right. What about Vilae? Sorry, I'm here. I'm new to zoom. So I didn't Microphone not a problem. The double you kills a lot of people. Yep. I'm here. Hey Vilae. How's it going? Great. How are you pretty good? Good, and then there's this n f e r r a r o. I'm not sure Well, they don't have a microphone. So I can't ask them anyway. Okay Alright, it's three after. Let's see if I got everybody Think I got everybody. Yeah, okay speak of it. I missed you Um, all right, so 17. All right, let's go ahead and get started. Maybe we can end this thing early Nothing new in the AIs. I really need to actually find out from Austin if he wants to keep this one going Relative to the other one We did we did actually talk to the CNC of TOC about Whether we want to start up a serverless SIG versus getting incorporated into one of the other SIGs that's getting created or create a brand new one That's not called serverless, but maybe app platform or something like that and there really wasn't a Consensus yet in the TOC. So I think Mark Ken and I still have sort of an AI to go back To work out with the TOC what we want to do going forward. I don't get the sense that this is an urgent thing That's why we kind of been letting it take a backseat to our discussions But I just want to let you guys know that it is sort of still lingering out there And we will try to figure out what the hat what we're gonna do going forward Well, but the TOC wants us to do going forward But as of right now nothing's really changed and it doesn't impact our day-to-day activities anyway, so it's not a big deal All right, community time. Is there anything from the community that people would like to bring up as a topic for discussion That's not on the agenda Typically, this is for newcomers All right, not hearing any I just want to mention obviously everybody knows about Ku Klun EU coming up the call for proposal is behind us However, I did notice just today that the serverless practitioner summits Announcement page or what you want to call it was actually Went online and so they are planning on having one on March 30th Which I think is a another day zero type of event kind of thing for Ku Klun I don't believe the CFP for that is open But I did want to mention this so you guys can start thinking about ideas if you do want to Submit a proposal for the service practitioner summit So just keep an eye out for that as I noticed the CFP comes online. I'll definitely let you guys know But obviously Ku Klun itself is March 30th to April 20th any April 2nd if you want to start making plans So I'm sure like me is aware of that All right, just a reminder we did agree no calls next week we got to that or do we get to that So this is the last call for this week and then we'll meet again with January night to the next one So just a quick reminder All right, SDK call. I think we actually did have a call last week But I don't remember anything too exciting happening in there If somebody was on the call who wants to speak up feel free to now. Otherwise, I'm gonna keep going I don't think there's anything too exciting happen last week's call. Can anybody think of anything? All right moving forward I don't see Kathy on so there's no I don't see anybody from the workflow group on the call I don't think let's check So I'm not sure there's anything to mention there relative to going on anything going on with the workflow stuff Actually, what I will do as an AI to myself is I'll try to ping somebody over there to get them to At least join the calls when they think something worthy of mentioning Happens in the group that might be of attention to people The one thing that I can think of because I am kind of watching it out of the corner of my eye is They are working on a governance doc to describe how you can get You know committer rights and all that are maintainer rights in that little subgroup So if that is of interest to you feel free to look at the PR that's opened up over there If you want to review that I've had chance to take a look at it myself But I suspect it's pretty probably pretty similar to what most people would expect But anyway, take a look if you want to do that All right quick go through some issues here. These two issues were there from last week. I think thank you Scott, you know, I don't think it's on the call for Responding to both of those And I'm going to double back with the authors to see if we can close those two issues Although the first one may lead to a syntactical Wording change nothing normative. I don't believe in the spec, but I'll work with the authors of those issues to see if anything has happened there and Just to skip the backlog moving along Clouse since you're on the call. Yes, I was wondering if you've had anything about this one From my perspective, it's it's closed by now. I mean I opened it when we I think were even before the first draft version of the spec or something So for me, it's solved but I could as I promised in this discussion Provide some example That's needed. Okay. If that's something you might be able to work on Relatively soon. Are you gonna go vacation? We should wait till next year. Just trying to get a time frame kind of a thing I can try to do it before I go on vacation. I think it's okay Okay, that'd be great. Just just trying to clean up the backlog. So I appreciate that. Yeah, sure I mean, it's been around for a long time. Yeah, yeah And so anybody anybody else who may have opened up an issue be warned at some point I will ping you to got what you want to do with your issues. So we got to get that backlog down All right, cool Let's say I don't see mark on the call. So I can't nag him about his so okay We'll keep moving them. We have no open PR. So that's good. I'll be discussed there So all right onto the meat of the meeting itself. So as a refresher on last week's call we talked about all the various options in terms of what to work on next and There are lots of obvious that obviously we had lots of different topics that were brought up and we kind of narrowed it down to To that people thought were worthy of discussion or possible work items Or work streams at this point in time. That's not to say that some of the other ones that people thought were important Should not be worked on at all It's just sort of a timing perspective because we seem to think we can only do one one bigger thing at a time And in fact, I actually am hoping that for some of the items There may be some background discussions going on in preparation for maybe working on it after whatever the next thing is So we do a little bit of parallel work in terms of thinking but in terms of hardcore work We're probably gonna have to serialize things was I think general sense And what I think it came down to was these two discovering subscription APIs, which does also now include based on last week's discussions a Delivery mechanisms, I can't read the exact phrase who brought it up There was something wrong the delivery of events itself as I think fits in nicely with subscription and API type stuff And we did decide that if for some reason that one gets to be Too big almost like it should become its own thing Then we could look at splitting it out But I think we agreed for right now try to keep it under this one and see if we can do it all at once End-to-end security was mentioned by Jim Although Jim, I don't believe can make the call today. I do and I hope I'm not saying something I shouldn't but in private chats with him I was asking him if he could provide a little bit more detail in terms of what he was thinking there Just so you guys had a little more background in terms of what his thought process was terms of what end-to-end security would include You know, what's in scope by that was out of scope Unfortunately, he didn't actually give me a concrete answer for that but I what he did say But I thought that was interesting was he's actually in favor of looking at subscription and discovery first So while I that wasn't quote an official vote for him in terms of which way to go I'm going to interpret it and in that way For the purposes of us deciding so I just thought I'd throw that out there to help you guys as you go through your thought process I think it's interesting that the person who proposed the end-to-end security also does believe that More thinking needs to happen about that before we actually choose to work on it So I just thought that was interesting not that I'm trying to bias anybody great like that, of course Like this is Vladimir. I can confirm I talked to Jim. He is not able to join us. But yes he is Or we are on the opinion that we should a little bit postponed with security because there is a large number of Potentially rather complex issues. Yep, and perhaps Engaging some people who are really focusing on on depths of security will be appropriate at some point later Okay, excellent. Thank you very much for clarifying that wonderful. Yep. All right. Cool. Okay. So with that Even though The proposer of this Wants to do the other one had a fairness. We did mention both as options so let me open up the floor to people and See what people think Is there any actually may be afraid that differently with is there anybody who would like to Speak now in favor of one or the other I think last I'm last week's call. We had quite a few people speaking in favor of description and discovery. I'm sorry subscription discovery But is there anybody in the call who would like to speak to doing and insecurity before we do something like discovery and subscription Okay, but if you allow I'm not going to speak for it, but I'm speaking for stage staging these things because I think we will do both mm-hmm, but So we will need a some sort of of registry API that we agree on that has The ability to store You know a catalog of events and then has the ability to store schemas and it has the ability to store secrets of some sort And I think of this of the secret the secrets are The less important one that's why I'm favorite discovery subscription But ideally we'll have some something that is uniform before the end to end security. It will be Important to have a model where we can store Secrets of information of some sort because we're doing we need to be doing you know broadcast of Infected broadcasts of datagrams, which means you can't go organize session key. We can't negotiate session key So and then security is going to be a fairly involved thing that requires distributing storing distributing key information And so we'll that's something we'll have to tackle I think we have to go and deal with you know, what is the red what is that our registry model look like What is our registry interface look like and we'll probably also have to go and think about this for multiple protocols and not just HTTP And I think once we have that as a template and that once we've made that robust using something that's a little simpler like the schema registry and or Event registry then we can go and move ahead and start thinking about how a key vault will look like but ideally the interface is not very different Yeah I thought you're done. Go ahead and finish and so I think the The discovery and subscription API that that model of we need to have there is somewhat prerequisite to the security story if we want to have something that's consistent Okay, and just for clarity's sake when you when you talk about the registry stuff Are you talking about the registry from or that that's sitting on top of an event producer? So you can see what he's producing or are you thinking about some standalone registry someplace? Or do you actually see one solution be able to couple both? So I think I believe there are there are three things that fall into the discovery and subscription pocket and that is and discovery it discovery is I can walk up to I can walk up to a Publisher or a delegate of the publisher And I can ask which events shall be expected from a particular source And then I can go and subscribe to them but then once I go to walk up to that catalog that catalog should also give me a information about You know what is contained in that what is contained in that event and That then almost necessity necessitates a schema registry of some sort That you can then also use to for instance drive the serialization of protobuf Okay, I don't think it make I don't think it makes sense to have a catalog Of events that are being published by a source without that catalog being able to refer to a schema registry Right, but but that schema registry Can technically be part of that same Yes, that same thing, right? Yeah, okay. Yeah, it's it's I think I think of these things as three Interfaces that kind of are Interdependent right But they might be implemented if we use the fancy fashion term as independent microservices, right? Yeah, okay. It's a it's be like just curious when you think about the schema registry Are you thinking about an API proper or are you just thinking about the actual? Format of the schema because in the cloud events we have to scheme a URL. It's a pointer, right? Is that is there is there actually a proper API that is necessary or can we just utilize a URL and so So yes, so right now we're we're happy to have just a URL But I think you should be able to so subscriptions is effectively the ability to go in and ask for a For a new subscription to be created, right? So that's already an API and If there's middle where so if you're a publisher, but you're using some middleware you probably want to go and and define a You want you want to publish into that middleware what shape your events are so which events you offer and what shape your events are So yes, I believe that's an API Okay, so it's not only a matter of get you think that it's actually gonna be It's gonna be modified, right? Yeah, so there's a I think there is a lightweight and And I don't think it's it's it's a spectacular, you know new invention It's effectively a crud API. We're just gonna be for HCP a very simple rest service But the very simple rest service we have to go and agree on the shape of that very simple rest service And the simpler we can make it the better it is Yeah, I understood I was just trying to The only tricky bit then now we have to deal with the the office and everything else So I just want to understand if it's strictly necessary or if we might be able to go ahead and and focus and read first But anyways, now we had I'll take the conversation elsewhere. I just want to understand I think the reads are also subject to often general Right because there are there are schemas which are secret As much as you wouldn't believe it Okay, so so I feel like there is something I have to say here just as sort of like a moderator of the call Without saying whether I agree or disagree with anything Clemens said here, even though it would be a foolish to ever disagree with them I think it's important to say that everything that Clemens just said is Him speaking for himself and or Microsoft that is correct, right? So if for example, we choose to work on discovery and subscription discovery and subscription The exact scope of that the exact thing that what's in or out is TBD right we will decide what that is the agreement here is not to say yes Everything come in just said we're going to work on rather It's we're green we're green and that general direction And then as the process goes along we'll figure out exactly what's in or out of scope and whether or lines Clemens just said or not is yet to be determined But the entire point of that discussion was just to hear one person's point of view and that's and that's great But I just don't want anybody thinking that one person is setting the group that the groups to sit the direction And it's not it's the group is deciding on the overall direction And then we'll narrow down the scope or what's out of scope as we go along just want to clarify that All right all right anybody else want to speak up then in favor of Or talk about end-to-end security at all because the reason I'm asking it this way I know it's a little bit of a leading question is because It seemed like most people on last week's call did wanted to say yes Discovering description was the choice, but I don't want to downplay and then security if somebody really wants to promote that one That's the one as the way to go Okay in that case is there any objection to the group deciding that yes We're going to look at discovery slash event subscription API as the next big thing that we are going to work on All right, so that is approved. We'll work on that. Okay. So then the next steps um So A while ago I put together this doc simply as a thought exercise for myself just to see what I thought might be included As a starting point for mainly around the subscription API I didn't I don't think I really much include things around Discovery and it definitely didn't include schema registering any other stuff How do people want to take the next steps here in terms of going forward? I suspect people will probably not a whole lot of time before the beginning of the year So obviously you can think about it over, you know, the holidays coming up But do we want to start with a clean sheet of paper? Do people think that this is enough of a starting point? We could start with this and then people just start editing it like crazy through google doc and then once it settles down We can move it over to markdown and do prs Is there preference people have in terms of how we go forward here? I'm to be honest, even though I wrote this I'm perfectly okay with starting with this fresh piece of paper If somebody wants to do that. I don't really care. Just want to know how you guys feel So anybody want to volunteer an opinion? Scott your hands up I've read through that doc and my only comment was If we're going to invent a new api it needs to be declarative and it probably should look like a kubernetes api Is that something you think we need to actually decide now or I think that's a like that should be a Like a tenant that we work with um, so Wire protocol is something that I care about first and then an implementation on top of the on top of whatever the wire protocol is So I would say declarative api sounds like you're writing code, which is great But we also need to need to worry about how the pieces talk to each other across the network Yes and no like Declarative api changes how you talk over the wire It is certain shapes in that that payload So let me start there then it helps you frame the rest of it So scott, let me ask you this I I do agree with you that most of what I put down here Kind of had an rpc mechanism in mind. I do agree with that and I probably should not have done it that way however um There are I it would not be very difficult for me to to twiddle this so that instead of saying Okay, here are the inputs and here are the outputs I could twiddle it to say these are the things that are required to set it up And these are the things that the person who did the setup Will need in order to actually use the next step in the process and whether you get that from an reply Versus from looking at the status section of a resource because it's a declarative model I can make it so that it's a little more abstract. So we don't necessarily have to choose at this point in time The exact wire protocol But focus focus first on what is the data that's necessary from a Initialization perspective versus usage perspective would gather help We could also possibly you know, just like cloud events. We could have a binding to Heritage applications versus declarative applications. That's kind of where I was going to go with this. Yes Yes, and then at some point though I do think we're probably going to have to have a discussion and say Which one do we promote so that we have interoperability because that's obviously a key point in all this, right? Because half the world uses rpc and half the world uses declarative. We may not have helped the community, right? It But I probably have to learn learn what the what the what declarative means in that particular core of the world Yeah, by my point by my bigger point is I'm not sure we have to decide that today. Yes, that's right So So sky if we decide to head in the direction of using this doc as a starting point I will take the action I'm trying to twiddle this around to not assume one particular wire protocol. Is that fair? Yep. Thank you Okay so So I'll probably bring a I'll probably bring a protocol a protocol level suggestion because the the You know how that looks how that looks up at the programming model layer Doesn't worry me as much as it does across system interoperability because this This should work with kubernetes, but that's not that's not everything that exists in the world that neither is the whole you know Go cncf infrastructure. I want this this should be as as much as cloud events as as fairly large reach Um, I think these apis should also have as as much reach Okay, um ryan your hands up So, uh, I forgot to lower it, but yeah, I'll just echo that. Um, I would Much prefer to focus on the optic model first and the semantics of that Um, and then keep that separate from how it's actually deployed and implemented Just personally coming from the twillio world Yep I think Okay, that's fine. I agree. Okay. Um, hamed your hands up Yeah, my only comment would be that I think traditionally if you look at this I would have assumed it'd be three separate akis like one for just generic discovery one for like and then the other two for pub sub Um, I would I guess my gut would be we should spend more time defining the discovery piece first And then once we go from there we can actually then define the pop some model I think I read the doc actually is really is it was awesome. I didn't notice it was a very deep into the subscription Uh, but it'd be cooler to hash out what discovery means and then from there we can talk about pop some Yeah, okay, and I tend to agree that in in fairness or in full disclosure I I did write it mainly from script subscription because that's Where the discussions were at the time, but I started writing it and that's why the discovery stuff is a little bit light That was relatively new for in my thought process. But yeah Okay, so It's all equally important I agree Yeah, okay um Okay, so How do people want to proceed blank sheet of paper a nbs have a proposal use that rough outline that I put together How do people want to start Ville I think we should I mean, I know I I think that's the same doc that I have already made comments Um, and it looks like other people have as well. I prefer that unless there's a very strong reason to start from blank sheet um We use that as a starting point and I prefer doing it using google docs over Over markup okay All right, um anybody else Disagree I have a concern. Hey in that direction Okay, so let me let me make it a little more formal Is there any objection then to starting with that doc which is under that rough idea link that's in the meeting notes And we'll obviously keep it as a google doc for down because that's easier to do quick edits going back and forth And then once we feel like the doc is starting to settle down Then we could switch over to something like mark down in the github repo and do prs and issues like we did for cloud events That sounds fair okay in that case, um in turn, uh Is there anything else worth discussing then on this call because that's technically into the agenda Are there do you guys want to start having more discussions around the document itself? Would you rather? Wait and start making comments into the doc over the next couple weeks um It's up to you guys. I mean we can end the call early. We can have discussions now about from technical perspective It's completely up to you guys. We have half an hour to do stuff that you really want to I need to I think I need to go and read read through the the document as it is But I think from a from an approach perspective I mean we started with cloud with cloud events as a as an abstraction and then meet that more concrete towards the wire part Um, and so that seems to be the approach that everybody's favorite. And so I'm cool with that The um, but I am I am a little worried about the or or I'm I'm worried about making sure that the the You know, there are the the api definitions whatever they are map into Um wire interactions that can be implemented by the publishers or by generic metalware In a way that you can go and realize though. So if you have a declarative api Um You have a configuration declaration that says I need to go and subscribe to these three things Then there's will presumably be be an engine that does that realizes those But the engine needs to go and talk to external parties and so that api That that engine uses to talk to external parties um, I think that's the more difficult piece Then the or or the the piece that really needs to be harmonized Rather than the the piece that really says, you know Here's how to tie up a subscription into a particular infrastructure Because that's a matter of taste and whatever your infrastructure is Okay, um To me, I think I I kind of focused on the very beginning of what you said there, which was you need time to go look at that dock um I I agree with everything else you said there too, but I think Just my gut reaction based upon how I've seen this group work in the past. Um, I think Most people I've probably not Really looked at the dock very much even though it's it's been out there for I think at least a week or so Um, so I would like to suggest that we don't go into a deep dive discussion here about anything But rather give people the opportunity to look at it over the next couple weeks and then when we come back Um, one of the January 9th Um, then start having a discussion Based upon the comments people left in the dock Does that sound fair to people? Yeah All right, Clemens. I heard Clemens anybody else want to Voice an opinion. Yes or no Sounds great. Okay. That sounds good. Okay. The only thing I would suggest in terms of a in the dock and If people disagree with this that's fine, but obviously small little Typographical things or wording changes, you know, that's fine. You make those in line and stuff and and I'll probably accept them all no big deal um But if there's a there's a there's a section of the dock where there's like two different ideas at play Rather than having a very long discussion in a comment about a particular idea If possible try to put the text you'd like to see into the dock itself Even if it just means that in particular sections we have three or four different versions of what people want to see that way people have very concrete Text to review of what your idea is and it's not just some abstract thing in a comment I find it much easier for people to say, ah, I see what you mean. I like it or oh I don't like that now that I've actually seen what that means realized And they then they could say no I think it's a lot easier if you just put your actual text in there And that way people can compare and contrast the various ideas in a more concrete form rather than just an abstract idea in a comment So don't feel like you have to Build necessarily upon what's already in there and keep that that basic idea You can have completely radical new idea Just put it after the previous one so people can compare and contrast just put like a line You know dash lines between them so people can know that you're trying to replace the previous section something like that Does that make sense to people? Okay, because because I don't want people to assume that anything in there has to stay if the entire thing could be tossed out over time I have no problem with that whatsoever. This was just a brainstorming exercise for myself to get a little more Concreteness in my mind in terms of what I thought people were thinking Okay All right with that Any other topics who want to bring up at all either about next steps or just in general Only holiday wishes only how I was yes happy holidays everybody But of course we can't leave without me doing the final world call because I know how much scott loves that So dug amary is still there Doug How about This person n f e r r aro I'm here. I'm nicole after that From bradette. Okay. Can you in favor put your name into the chat or into the agenda doc Just so I can get the right spelling and stuff because I am horrible when it comes to spelling people's names Okay, okay, did I miss anybody and I heard Doug I saw you coming off of you. So you're there, right? Yeah, I'm here Excellent. Cool. All right. Did I miss anybody for the agenda or the attendance list? All right, cool in that case. I believe we are done 25 minutes of spare And as someone said happy holidays everybody and we'll talk again on january 9th All right, happy holidays All right Bye