 Good morning. We'll give it a few more minutes for folks to come on in. Dimms, I hope that you are ready to be ambushed this morning to introduce yourself. I mean, all things in time, but yes. I'm hearing me. Excellent. That was also a mic check. So perfect. Hello. Good morning. Hi. All as well. I've already let Dimms know that he's going to be ambushed and we've done a very short mic check. It's very exciting. Sorry. I'm like, this is your first official meeting. Oh, yeah. Good fun. Dimms looks ready. How are we doing on people? We're rockin' in about 19, so let's give it a few more minutes. Let's do that. Quite a few regrets this morning, so I am not certain if we're going to hit quorum on the other hand, there's nothing on the agenda that actually needs a vote. Six and one F does the other. Fair enough. Easter holidays are kind of continuing on for some folks. Makes sense. I hope everyone who had a long weekend had an enjoyable long weekend. And Liz, I have also added your item for any other items of business to the end of these slides. Okay, cool. Thank you. Yeah, I think I see apologies from two folks, Justin and Saad. And Shing, I think sent to me privately as well. Oh, okay. Hang on, count. How many people to count in here? So yes, good fun. All right, should we get rolling? All right, so welcome everyone. Usual rules apply, usual meeting logistics. And we have a new member of the TOC, DIMMS. I'm sure everyone knows that you are, but why not say hello? Take an opportunity to say hello. Hi, everyone. My nickname is DIMMS, so you can call me DIMMS. Please hit me up on Slack, CNCF or the Kubernetes one. Happy to chat with you to get to know how I can be of assistance. Thanks a lot to Michelle. Big shoes to fill. Hopefully I'll be able to learn and help. So, and thanks to the TOC for holding me in. So it's a big thumbs up for me. So thanks a lot. I work for VMware. I live just off of Boston. Well, two, two personal things. Great to have you on board DIMMS. And right, let's get started. So today is mostly about CIG updates. Looks like app delivery, I guess they're crossed out. App delivery is not presented today, but we've got all of the rest of them coming on in. Okay, so. Contributor strategy, shall we start with you? It's been real quick. We're almost done with the contributor site. We're working out some technical details for the new contributors site. Going up as soon as there's a result, you'll see it go live. I'll send an email to the list. Carolyn's been leading that. For governance working group, whose meeting is in two hours today. We're going to draft of. Advice to projects on having a charter statement or charter document. This is spearheaded by Dawn, who thinks we might eventually want to make it a requirement for graduated projects. A charter statement being something that says, this is what the project is. This is what the project scope is. This is what the project scope is. Because it can be a little bit confusing if you're coming across a project for the first time. And it does not have that information. And a surprising number of things you have projects don't. I for contributor growth. Whose meetings this afternoon. For documentation and progress. We've got the recruiting playbook. We're almost done with the contributor ladder template. We've got a couple of projects. We've got a couple of projects. We've got a couple of projects. Even though we haven't officially published it yet, a couple of projects have, have used our draft. The contributor ladder again is the one that says, you know, you do these things and your contributor, you do these things in your viewer. You do these things and you're eligible to become a maintainer. The. It goes hand in hand with. We've got a couple of projects. And finally for maintainer circle at the request of some of the maintainers. We are moving. To a cycle where. Once a month, we will have a regular contribex meeting and once a month. Well, once every four weeks. It will be maintainer circle section. So the maintainer. Circle. Sessions will be scheduled out for the rest of the year. And. And that's been this last month. Wonderful. Thank you. I'm wondering whether you're. Getting feedback from the projects for, I mean, you know, the things like the contributor ladder and the recruiting handbook sound. Amazing. Sound like really useful resources. And I'd love to know whether that's landing with the project. It's landing with specific projects. Like. The recruiting handbook started out because it started out honestly with the linker D folks. Coming to contributor strategy and look for help. I recruiting contributors. And getting a lot of interactive help. And deciding to write down everything they did. And what didn't did not work. So. A lot of this has been. That we've a certain skeleton of things that are like, these are things that, that we knew from the beginning that we needed. And then there's this other set of things like the recruiting handbook that came out of a project came to us and they needed this. The. And then sometimes those things overlap with the topic of the recruiting handbook. And so that's what we did. And so that's what we did this month for maintainer circle and then get a lot more feedback on them from that. Great. I'm also seeing Paris talking about how it would be helpful to get more outreach to maintainers. And I'm actually thinking, well, we have some mailing lists. Right. So I don't know how responsive people are on those. Not terribly. I mean, as you might imagine. Project maintainers tend to be super busy and get a ton of emails. So I think it's, you know, stuff gets read selectively. Just like it does for, for, you know, to see members for that matter, because, you know, get a ton of email. So. The. Yeah. The. So. Wait, where are the comments? And I'll, Paris is making a note about like their reserve mostly for KubeCon activities. We really try to be able to cut down the amount of emails that we send out to the maintainer groups because there are a lot of things that we're going to be able to do. But I really need to respond by this deadline. And if it starts getting missed, because there's a whole lot of things in there, it's, it's no fun. So. Happy to be able to hear ideas on how to be able to reach maintainers better. Well, part of it is we want to get the contributor side up because I feel once the contributor side is up. And all of this information has a published location that is not just this document inside a GitHub repo. That will probably get more eyeballs and thus more feedback on it. Particularly from newly selected projects. So I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think that's a good point. I think you are after all the ones who need our help the most. Yeah. And I also, I think. I completely see the point of. Waiting until we have things live before we start trying to point too many people at them. But I also think that on a. Considered basis and occasional basis. We've got really useful information. We should use those mailing lists. You know, we don't, it's not going to be spamming them if we've got like, here is some really cool resources that we think you can use. Let's try and find a happy medium for using those mailing lists where we've got great info to send them. Wonderful. Anything else? Any questions for contributed strategy? Okay. Let's. Oh, thank you. That's the. Contributor site. Thank you, Josh. Yeah, there's a branch for the new version of the site. So pulls. It also pulls documents out of the contributor strategy. Repo, but you can. Yep. All right. So it sounds like now is a good time for people to take a look at all those resources and. Give you feedback before, before we push the button on them going live. It'll be a work in progress. Nothing is ever finished. All right. Thank you very much, Josh. SIG network. Who do we have today? Hey, it's Lee here. So I've long been very excited about contributor strategy, but I've yet to. Offer up meaningful feedback. Now might be. I'm trying to hold myself publicly accountable. But I don't think that's going to be an advantageous time. There's a couple of. Well, there's a couple of smaller or, or burgeoning projects that are. Mostly being advanced through the. CNCF service master working group. Which is a working group within SIG network. A couple of these projects on the last time we met this past week, there were. Maintainer nominations. And so. And so, I think that's been a good instance upon governance for those projects and sort of the contributor ladder for those projects. Neither of which are. I don't think are necessarily explicitly stated. And so. The two projects that I'm referring to, one of them is service mesh performance. The other one is get nighthawk. And. Both of these are potential. I don't know if I don't know if this is a potential guinea group. So. I'll offer that up. So speaking of the. Yeah. Oh, nice. Good. I've unleashed Paris. So I'm good. Within the service, the service mesh working group within SIG network has a few different. Cross project initiatives. We've spoken of these in the past. We've talked about this during the bi-weekly meetings is spent to spend sort of advancing these three initiatives. One on service mesh conformance. Which helps. SMI move forward in. As a specification as, as one that, that can, you can measure the conformance of each individual service mesh with. There will be. There'll be some of that shown. I think inside the SMIs virtual community. We've talked about this in the past. We've talked about this in the past. The service mesh performance has seen an uptick. From. Some kind of folks at Intel who've been bringing their knowledge to bear on the. On both the spec and some of their, their prior work in the space. If I recall that they'll be speaking on some of that at service mesh con. Get Nighthawk helps advance and get on boy into the hands of others. So, um, or rather Nighthawk is. It's almost as interesting as on boy, which means that since, um, which means that I expect, um, people will want to get more Nighthawk if they think they understood the power of it. So anyway, um, Yeah, the, so if Lee Zhang is on, I think there, there's an outstanding item. Um, in collaboration with, uh, open application, uh, model on and how it is that service mesh patterns, the effort that has been going on inside the working group, um, to define what those patterns are, um, are being realized in implementation, leveraging home and meshery. Um, Meshery and service mesh performance, uh, are being reviewed. So, um, I'm going to, um, talk about Sandbox during this last review. Um, so they'll be up for review. Next month. Along with project reviews. Um, one of the projects within, um, SIG network KGB was just reviewed this, this last. Last week. And, and accepted into Sandbox. Um, it, if you haven't seen KGB at, you know, it's, you know, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's, it's fairly focused and it's, it's use cases or I would say, you know, pretty helpful. Um, fill in unmet. Kind of, uh, unmet niche, niche. Specific in a Kubernetes native way. It's not that that need hasn't been met in many other ways, but the Kubernetes native way here is, it's pretty nice for KGB. Um, I think it's still out for review. Um, for incubation proposal. But I could be behind of my mailing list. Linkard. Uh, Proposed for graduation here. About three weeks ago. Yes. And so it's review is. Um, Should be done this week. Um, But from the SIG's perspective and then available. Um, A report to the, the, to the TOC to carry forth with. For the review. Yep. And the SIG has a deep dive scheduled that at cube cone. Um, the last item here to maybe highlight is. Oh, there's been, I've spoken of this a couple of times really. There's probably a need for assistance here. And that is with respect to. A service mesh usage survey. Um, maybe ideally done in coordination with the end user group and the radars that go on. There's been. Some people have expressed frustration about the depth of that. That survey on, on this topic. And, uh, And so as the radar comes around, it might be a good time to offer up assistance from the SIG and, and, um, help collaborate. To make sure that it's a. You know, detailed survey to offer up. Um, Uh, domain expertise from the SIG. Is that the end? End use of radar. Yeah. And that's just a. Yeah. And that is not, uh, that's just a suggest. Yes, it is. And it's just a suggestion that the SIG could assist with. Some domain expertise kind of level of depth of the, the questions asked or. So I think, yeah, I think that would be a really good idea. Cheryl. Hung is the. Uh, Person to speak to about that. I think. And I think it's also up to the end users to determine which. Radars they choose to do, you know, whatever they choose to do next. But I agree. If they were to do a service mesh radar, that would certainly make for extremely interesting. Really. Yeah. It might save us all some time on Twitter. Actually. Uh, Josh is asking about service mesh performance. Yeah, I loved it. Um, yep. It's all right. I'll speak to it verbally. It's, um, it's a specification. Um, so I would think of it in a similar, you know, a spec in the similar way as, you know, I would think of it in a similar, you know, a spec in the similar way as to. SMI being a set of specs as C and I being a set of specs. SMP itself is, um, it's a, it defines a standard way of. Um, characterizing. Um, characterizing the resources in a given environment. So in, you know, one Kubernetes or cluster or multiple Kubernetes clusters with different size nodes and different, different resources available. Um, with, uh, a given service mesh deployed under a given configuration and there's a lot to configure within a given, you know, across the meshes. Uh, and to be able to describe, um, the application that's deployed as well. And the type of performance tests to be run. So the configuration of that test, sort of it's set up in framework to be able to define that in a similar format. Such that a few things are facilitated on one is. One is for the individuals that are the projects or the individual end users that are using that format to be able to have conversations on between themselves in, in to facilitate those in an easier way to compare across, uh, across deployments to be able to compare to themselves historically. So to have a common format for describing what those environments are, you can imagine it actually takes kind of a deep breath to articulate like all of how that's working. Um, and it, then that specification then also facilitates, um, potentially creating new, a new yardstick by which sort of a new metric by which, um, performance is spoken to. Um, and so that might be something simple, like, um, uh, like, like a mesh mark. Um, so, so if the performance of a given environment is running at a mesh mark of 85. Great. That can be articulated in two seconds. Uh, you know, with all of that, that spec detail behind it. Um, and so service messages like console have, um, been early proponents of this type of a specification so that they can speak, um, you know, um, fairly or I think both fairly and accurately to customers who are adopting that mesh and to be able to say, to be able to empower them to sort of speak in this common format, to say that here's, here's, here answers to your questions about the overhead of a mesh, the, the under head, if you will, like the, what you're gleaning from it, what it's giving to you in context of, you know, what that costs you. Maybe also in context of what you're able to give up. So if you're able to give up, you know, tracing somewhere else or logging somewhere else that, um, so it ends up, um, just eat unto its own as a spec. You know, somewhat, I think specs are somewhat boring actually, but, but what it facilitates, um, um, can be really helpful to, to end users, to, to projects. Um, the, at, at some point we're going to need to come up with a way to address our various spec projects because specs have slightly different needs from code projects. Um, and I know a couple of the spec projects we already have have been, um, struggling with getting the kind of awareness that they actually need, um, which is different from a piece of code that you download and run, but not in this meeting. Yeah. Yeah. We do have precedent for spec projects in things like tough, for example. So, um, yeah. Yeah. I think the interesting thing here is that it's kind of more the output from a working group. Um, so it's not officially a project. I would say which, you know, that kind of, yeah, that's just, that's just nomenclature. It's not really, you know, but, uh, if we, if we want to turn it into a spec project, we should turn it into a project. Um, So, uh, Lee, I had a question on the conformance work. Is this supposed to be something that would be run by end users, just like they run Kubernetes conformance? Or is it, uh, something just to qualify as like a helping test suite? Uh, or is it like end user oriented? Which, which one is it? Yeah, it ends up being both. Um, I think that to your point, uh, immediately it probably finds that the individual projects that there's about, there's either seven or eight of them that have, um, and I don't mean to use this. Don't, don't interpret any connotation when I use the term claimed, but there's, you know, seven or eight projects that have claimed to be SMI conformant. And, and, um, I think that there's probably the, the initial immediate value is with those projects and their ability to be aware of where they're at with respect to the spec and the spec with respect to its customers, if you will, or its implementations. Um, but then forth going, I would enter my, the hope there is that, um, the end users that, um, invest into that integrate with SMI or end users or other tools, not so their service measures themselves, but other tooling that integrates with SMI to benefit from its ubiquity, you know, it's, um, that, yeah, there's, there's sort of those three entities, if we'll, the end users that want to verify that as they go to upgrade from one version of their chosen mesh to the next, where they're using SMI to integrate. Yeah. The reason for asking that question is, um, the CNCF runs a formal program for conformance of Kubernetes where people upload their results and then somebody gives them a thumbs up, uh, somebody from CNCF gives them a thumbs up and say, uh, yes, you can do this. Uh, and it looks good. So if you have to set up a formal program of that sort, then there is more work to be done on the CNCF side, um, to, to set up and run that program. That's why I was asking. Oh, sure. Nice. Yeah. I did. That's very much desired by the SMI project itself. There's been, uh, as a prelude to that, there's been some, um, some work with the tooling that basically, this is something of a sonar boy for SMI. They've been work done, um, with the tooling to help verify, guarantee provenance of the results and integrity of them as they're sent in, but, but very much so to, to what you were set, like I will, for my part, I'll follow up with you to get plugged in in the right way at that project plugged in. All right. Anything else? Any other questions for SIG network? And for Lee. Okay. Who's up next? Observability. Yes. Um, and also just to reinforce the one, uh, that one point from, uh, SIG network just now, um, there is tremendous user interest in having specification for both transport and for, for everything which is testing off, off of implementations, uh, speeds, compliance, everything. We are seeing this in, in Prometheus left and right. There is, there is substantial interest from, from end users. So I think it would make sense to, to pursue this. Sorry for the noise. So, um, things we were able to close with the help of TOC. Thank you again. Um, the due diligence for open telemetry incubation status has been closed last week. We managed to get through the whole document, but we managed to just closing the door. Um, Alina and Cornelia pulled the rest or the remaining parts of that document to themselves with the SIG, obviously supporting where, wherever they need support. Um, so yeah, um, that is basically the, um, the 2021 work package or the major blocker for SIG Observability done. So we are now focusing on the other stuff. Um, there is a document on how to do cloud native observability, which has already seen, uh, I think easily a dozen different companies and people, uh, giving input on, on how that, um, on how to do a proper, uh, observability one-on-one down in depth, like from the beginning to the real implementation and what to be aware of. Um, the other thing is a white paper on how to do tracing from the end user perspective, which is currently in the works. Um, on janitorial level, uh, we're looking for additional chairs and tech leads, and they'll be coordinating this with the TOCV assault. And that's it from my side already. And do you have some candidates now for additional chairs and tech leads? I do have a few candidates and I managed to talk to one or two of them, um, but not everyone yet. Uh, as agreed with you Liz, uh, I want to talk to Cornelia and I forgot the name, um, to go through this. Uh, I think your other liaison is Harry. Yes, that's probably. Yeah. Okay. Great. So, um, if anyone else it's, I think there are a few potential candidates that. Kind of between us. Some of us have identified for that might be suitable for SIG observability. If anyone knows of anyone else who, um, the SIG should potentially be talking to for those roles. Yeah. Now is a good time to, uh, to put their names forward. Maybe, uh, talk to Richie about that. But yes, we'd like to fill those seats pretty promptly. I think. Okay. Uh, SIG runtime. Core, lots and lots of runtime projects there. Who do we have? Um, it's Ricardo. Um, Hope everyone is doing okay. So yeah. So we have, uh, a few projects that we have reached out and also presented in our, uh, meetings. So in the containers and runtime space, we had SSVM, which is a web assembly runtime. Uh, that's complete. Uh, they've also decided to, uh, apply for sandbox and I think they applied, but they, there might get accepted in the next, uh, uh, sandbox review meeting. So I think there was some questions for them to get accepted. Uh, in another, uh, initiative, uh, or project, uh, less containers presented. Uh, this is, um, initiative, uh, led by Akihira from NTT. Uh, they presented in our last meeting. Uh, so this is a way for, uh, users to take advantage of, uh, uh, username spaces and containers and having the ability for something like Docker to run as, um, uh, brute, uh, emulated root user. So on the host, uh, you're not running as, uh, as a root user. You're running as a different user. And in, in Docker, things is, things is rude and then you can instantiate containers, uh, using that. And, and so that it provides, uh, a different level of isolation. So interesting project. Uh, so we'll see a lot more progress there. Uh, there's another project quark. It's a another container runtime. They are presenting on April 15th. Uh, the difference with some of the container runtimes is that this is written in Rust. Uh, so we'll see how that compares to some of the other runtimes. Um, so some progress there and, um, using rust. Another project that we reached out to is, uh, in native. Uh, this is, um, project that allows you to, uh, create binaries, a small binaries from web assembly modules. So you can run them, uh, at the edge. And so they're presenting on, uh, April 15th. Uh, so it's interesting way of using web assembly. And that might be useful for edge type of workloads. They said that they're using this for, um, uh, uh, right now to run binaries for X box at the edge. So, uh, so we'll find out more from the presentation. And another, uh, uh, runtime that we reached out to is fizzy. This is written in C plus plus. And we'll ask me, which is a web assembly interpreter. Um, cool. So, so that's for, uh, container runtimes. Um, and, and, and, and in the ML ops edge, uh, AI IoT space. Uh, couple of projects that we reached out for machine learning. One of them is TFX. Uh, this is from tensor, the tensor flow community. Uh, in their presenting on June 17th. So there's still a couple of months out, but they're interested in presenting the, they said they'll go live around that time. And another project similar to TFX is ML flow. Uh, and this is backed by the folks from Databricks. They also, also express interest in presenting. So hopefully we'll have them soon. And a couple of other projects related to edge computing. So one of them is super edge, um, reached out and K zero S. So, so another cover that is distribution similar to K three S. So we'll see how that's different. Uh, hopefully they're, they'll be presenting too. And second time activities, uh, for specific to the six. So we have a QCOM present that EU presentation. So there will be some work group updates from the container orchestrator, um, device work group. And then we also have engaged, uh, so with the, the ASUS, so they can help out with some more engagement. So, uh, DIMPS and, and Ricardo and Alina are, are helping out in. This is a repeat from the, from the last, um, uh, uh, update, but, uh, they're upcoming events. So, uh, you know, we have that QCOM EU session and there's some other events that are related to the sake that I mean, they're not directly related to the sake, but, you know, there, there's some relationship there with, uh, cloud native wants some day. There's cloud native Rust day and Kubernetes AI day and Kubernetes, uh, on edge day. So that's it for the updates. I'm happy to take any questions if you have any. Uh, Ricardo, um, the container orchestrated device working group. The issue is still open in the cigarette on time, um, a repository. Is it, is it actually working? Where do people sign up? Is there public information on how to engage with this working group? Um, is it, is it already on? Yeah, it is, it is active. Uh, so, uh, I think the issue I need to follow up with the, the chair, which is, um, um, we're not, uh, go there and, uh, about that issue. So, but then if you, if there's something that is not, um, clear, yeah, just we can chat offline and we can actually, you know. Yeah, I just got curious to figure out like how, how and where they are doing their work. So, and I can find it. Yeah. I ended up looking at this issue. Okay. Thanks, Ricardo. No problem. Are there any questions? So cloud native wasm date. Uh, okay. So I'm scrolling through the notes here. Okay. SSVM is renaming. Okay. Oh, trademark concerns. Yeah. Uh, and cloud native wasm day is a thing. Yeah. Cool. Yeah. If any, we all had time to, well, if we could all clone ourselves, we could all go to all the day zero events. There's a lot going on. There's a lot of tracks going on on days one to however many as well. So yeah. When's the cloning project? That's what I want to know. All right. Uh, thank you, Ricardo. Six security, I think is up next. Hello. Hey, it's Brandon. Um, so quick update for six security. Um, couple, couple things are coming up and, you know, some us, um, for the sake, uh, we had the retrospective survey from the security white paper that's now out. Um, so we're getting feedback from, you know, what, what do people think about the white paper? What do you want to see more on some topics that we should cover? Um, so, um, we are sending this out right now. And, you know, it would be nice if everyone can take the survey and as well as, you know, share this around. That would be awesome. Uh, we have the cognitive security lexicon. This was, um, stand from the discussion from a previous to a meeting on, uh, some of the security terms, um, for example, key management and, um, and cognitive, uh, and CNCF. So this project is going to start up. It's going to be kind of like a glossary of the different, uh, terms in security for cognitive. Um, so it's a reference that people can point back to. Um, so this is one of the next efforts that are going to be, um, moving forward. So we have a team of about a contributors now. So it's, uh, it's pretty, uh, people are pretty excited about this. Um, and the last big update on the projects that we have now is we have the software supply chain paper. Um, so this is to add a bit of context. Um, this is really looking at securing the supply chain as well as, um, creating a secure software factory in which we can build the artifacts. Um, so the white paper has reached kind of near the final drafts. Um, and so we're going to send out a commentary review of that. So, um, keep an eye out for the email. Uh, we'll probably be sharing that and the sick, um, mailing list. Um, so also, uh, a special update we have is, um, we, we got given an award, uh, for the most effective death psych ops team of 2020 from the death.com. Uh, so that's, um, uh, around the, the award is for the work that we've done with, um, the white paper, the book that we've done with the, the, the different efforts, um, all together in security. Um, and, and the kind of last update, which is, isn't really on this slide, but we, we have a new project board, which I'm going to link into, um, the chat. Um, this is something that we've, um, started in terms of helping us, um, govern kind of projects that are going on and to provide, uh, a better view for new members into what are the projects that are currently going on in security and how to get involved. Um, so yeah, that is the end of my quick update. Uh, any questions? No question, but congratulations on the award. Very awesome. Thank you. Okay. I guess it's six storage up next. So following on from the previous two, um, tech leads nominations, um, which were, which were voted through. So thank you again to you for that. Um, we are, um, we are doing a bit of a reshuffle on the co-chairs, um, as Aaron, um, has taken up a position in the TOC. Um, we'd like to nominate, uh, Jing, uh, to take the, um, to take the co-chair position that, that Aaron has, has, uh, has vacated. Um, Jing has been, um, a member of the CNCF storage site for, for a long time. One of the original members in fact, was, um, also co-author of the white paper. Um, and, and I'm sure a lot of you also know her from the Kubernetes storage site where she's a co-chair there. Um, and, and, you know, various other open source projects. Um, so we, we'd, we'd very much like to nominate, uh, we'd very, very much like to nominate, uh, Nick for the, for the co-chair and put that for, for a vote. Um, and I'd also like to nominate, uh, Nick Connolly, um, who has been working with the, the SIG for a while and has been, uh, helping us build the, the performance, um, white paper and, uh, contributing, um, his, his, uh, sort of many years of fast experience, uh, an in-depth experience in this space, um, to the performance white paper. So, so we'd like to have him as a tech lead nominee as well. Um, I'll follow up after this, um, with an email to the TOC mailing list. Um, and, uh, to, to, to make the vote official. Any questions on this? Great. Well done finding some candidates. Indeed. We're, we're, we're, uh, we're very happy, actually. Um, so we talked, we already talked about the tech leads and their points, um, stepping down, uh, to whilst on the TOC. Um, I wanted to give a quick update on the, the projects that are going through the review process. Um, the, the Longhorn project, um, we're kicking off the DD process, um, with Saad. Um, following the feedback we had from the TOC, we're going to make sure that we, um, provide additional information during the DD process on sort of the differentiation between Longhorn and some of the other projects. Um, ChabroFS, which is, um, a distributed file system that's also going through, um, the incubation process, the project, um, presented, uh, to the SIG, um, we think the project is, um, is suitable for, uh, um, moving to incubation from Sandbox. Um, but before we make a formal recommendation, we're going to be nominating a tech leads to, um, to review, uh, the, the project and do sort of a trial deployment, um, to, to make sure we have all of the relevant information to submit for the, for the recommendation. Um, OpenEBS, uh, we've had some updates from, um, from the project team we're going to make. We're going to have a final meeting with the team, which we're, which we're about to schedule. Um, and, and then, um, we'll provide a final recommendation from the SIG to the, to the TOC, um, to, to, to cover off sort of any outstanding issues or, or, or any concerns that we might have. Um, and then we have ongoing work, um, on two documents that we're building. One is, um, a disaster recovery document, um, which still needs some work, but hopefully we'll have um, uh, but, but we have a draft open for comments. Um, and hopefully we'll, we'll get some additional feedback before KubeCon and the performance and benchmarking where paper is also open for comments. There's some final cleanup to be done, but we hope to, to finalize before, um, before KubeCon, um, as well. Um, and there was a, there was a note on the TOC mailing list about, uh, the TOC had some follow-up questions about, um, about the vineyard projects that had a Sandbox submission. I'm not sure where the questions were, but if, um, if, uh, if you have any, if the TOC has any questions and would like to follow up on where we're obviously happy to, to try and help in any way possible and cover off the information we had from the, from this, um, project presentation. I think that covers everything. My recollection and, uh, somebody jump in if I'm recording this incorrectly. My recollection is that on vineyard, we were really just wondering if, um, CNCF is the most appropriate. It's, it's the one that has quite a lot to do with, um, uh, like machine learning data manipulation, I think, isn't it? Is that the one? It's, yeah, it, well, it, it, it provides, um, an in-memory, um, I guess an in-memory object store for, um, sort of, it can be used for analytic purposes, but also for, you know, long, um, long data pipelines where, where, you know, data has to be written and read on multiple nodes, um, simultaneously. So it kind of does this in-memory sharding, um, as a, as a, to be able to handle those, those data workloads at speed. Um, so there is a very strong storage following. Um, uh, and it can be used for lots of other things other than analytics, but obviously analytics is a very strong use case. Yeah. There's, there's a lot of things on there around like high torch distributed training. Yeah. They, they, they have done, they have done a quite a lot of work to, to integrate into those tools. Yeah. I mean, it's like an interesting project. So I think I'll, uh, you know, there'll be more detail in the recording, but my recollection is that we weren't concerned that it was, you know, we thought it was a great project. We just wanted to make sure that the CNCF would be the home that would give it the best support. Yeah. Okay. All right. Any questions for storage or any other sig related things? Okay. Um, I had a quick, any other business. Um, we discussed, I think back in February, the idea of adding a requirement to, um, for incubation and graduation projects to have some form of documented security processes. We don't want to say what they have to be. We just want to say they should have processes for people to report security issues and for addressing security issues within a project. Um, I'm just flagging it up in case there are any last minute comments because I would really quite like to get my small, uh, PR merged if we can, and I'll send a link into the chat because many of you probably can't click on that. So, uh, that's the chat. So yeah, basically last call for comments on that call request. Uh, anyone have anything else they would like to bring up today? Paris saying everyone is great. Very true. Okay. I think with that, have 10 minutes to. Chill out or do something exciting. Step outside if the weather is nice where you are. Have a, have a little break and, uh, I will see you next time. Super. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.