 Shall we get going? Sounds good. All right Where's your hair? Lost it somewhere on the way to work Whoa, I'm on a three-year haircut cycle. So This is the year of awesome bike commutes. Whoa big change Is this like do you do you cut it off like this often or is this like a bit? It was like a big every every two to three years. Yeah, no way. Oh, wow, okay So I must have met you right right after the last the last cutoff I'm literally considered putting on the agenda because I'm like at some point They're gonna notice and it's gonna come up so I could be like hey, Alyssa's shorn. Did you did you do it yourself? First time I always have it done by a hairdresser because going from super long to short Otherwise it ends up like super uneven stubbly and then yeah, wow crazy. All right Cool All right, it looks like Josh is first on the agenda. Is he is he here? Yeah, okay Yeah, I just wanted to see if anybody was signing up for canarying the new buffers It's so it'd be great to just turn them on and yeah, I can I can give that a whirl at lift But it would be nice if a couple people could do it I actually wonder could we just open an issue to actually track Like getting people to test the new implementation The last thing is I thought we planned on doing thorough fuzzing of it first I don't know if we did we did that. Okay, cool. Yeah, it's it's it's getting fuzzed now And Harvey's not here to speak to it But I actually think that we've been finding more issues in LibEvent than we have in the new implementation So I think that's why people want to switch over so we can avoid that. Yeah But I think what I would suggest doing is maybe If we could just just open an issue and then people can just ping back Like maybe we could just get a couple of users to actually test Okay, I'll open the issue. Okay Yeah, and I can hopefully do that in the next week week or week and a half. I can do a small little test there Okay, and just quick announcement we posted the envoy con CFP so that'll be Co-located with coupon in San Diego November 18th is the date So look forward to everyone's proposals. Feel free to reach out if you Need any help? Any questions about that No Okay, next. Let's see this morning. We announced envoy mobile, which is our new project to run envoy on iOS and Android Check it out and would love to chat with anyone who is interested Alright, there's that I Was just thinking please on that week I mean just there's so much going on with like Azure pipelines and circles CI and our RBE and all that maybe could you just give just a little status update of what's going on? I'm sure so what the first thing is I think the basal point 27 turn happened yesterday. I think I fixed that All of the issues right now Except the one that doesn't run on central seven or like proven to 14 or four I For RBE, I think it's almost ready to run that submit the PR for that Azure pipeline so Azure pipeline has basically Depends on the RBE what's going on with RBE because it doesn't provision large instance at this moment So basically it depends on how we goes Otherwise, I cannot migrate to Azure from More on Mac OS is now fully running on Mac OS. I think that saves money I'm Pinging Chris to increase a parallel build for either pipeline. So that's a status for now Sorry and and just because I'm this is very confusing for me at least The the issue with RBE is around permissions, right? Like it's around credentials. Is that yeah, that correct? Pipeline doesn't have that issue at this moment So it can have different sets of the credentials for PR and for master run and For so basically for different set you can have different sets of permissions other than circles Is like you only have this or expose that to PR or not Okay, so we so we feel though that we need to move to Azure pipelines to do RBE. Is that is that correct? If we want to do RBE with PRs and everything then that will be on Azure pipeline Okay Master it's fine to do either way. Okay, and but you don't you don't Are you blocked on anything right now? Or are you feel like you generally have what you need? I have what I need. I'm just too busy to make some progress on them Yeah, and like the one thing that I'm still a little confused about is just can Could we use repo kid a to do some of this? So like maybe we need to talk about that off offline Right. I think the API Required for repo kitty. I'm not sure it's Enough for that. Okay All right, sounds good But I think in general I drop I have more flexibility and We probably might all want to revisit what is really required from repo kitty once If we go with Azure pipeline since some of them is to fit in the gap Right. We just circle CI API and what we want right and I mean one thing and again We don't have to dig into it deep here But I wonder if we made we made the bot a little more stateful and that might that might be something that ita won't do But we could pay a contractor to Like if that would help somehow Yeah, all right Cool, I guess does anyone have any questions out there about CI Just Michael pain here just to comment on building basal zero two seven so Bootstrapping off zero dot two six is on rel seven Bootstrapping of zero two six. I was able to build from source using the tip in the GitHub repo One of the flags for for basal. So I do have zero two seven running on rel seven Yeah, yeah, well that works. I think they're working on like Rebuild the radius artifacts on the same place as well. So I saw that Yeah, my my strong hope is that they're gonna fix both trustee and rel seven With a with a new release Because I mean I understand that trustee is an end of life, but there's paid support through 2022 It's pretty painful if they if they turn that off Yeah, I think Santa is on the rail is the one they want to support. So I Hope point twenty seven point one will be released. Yeah. Yeah, and I think if they support rel seven It should fix trustee also. That's my yeah suspicion. Yeah, that's my Understand to since the gdbc and Center C plus plus is all the wrong rail. Yeah, okay Cool All right, I don't think I have anything else anyone else have any other stuff that they want to discuss Okay. Hey One thing Alyssa is I'm wondering if in two weeks could we maybe have the quick folks come to the meeting? And maybe we could do like a quick update Sure, I will check to make sure they're available. And if not, well, yeah, or we can I mean it doesn't have to be in two Weeks, but I was just thinking that there's been a ton of development and it would be useful to sync up on on what's going on And we can talk about I'm gonna start working on that doc that we had talked about about doing the L4 Quick hashing proxy. So it would be nice maybe maybe just to talk about where we're at and timelines and stuff like that Because I think there's quite a few people who are interested Cool. Also, actually, do you want to call it the Ford proxy stuff while we're talking about it? Yeah, yeah, so I I did a initial PR for dynamic forward proxy so that allows envoy to be used as a generic HTTP proxy without prior DNS knowledge Very highly repressive feature. Obviously, this is alpha status. There's still a lot of a lot of work to do But we'd love people to check out the PR and the docs and there's a bunch of to-dos on stuff that we can do to make it better But I'll be iterating on that over the next couple of weeks. So we'd love to get folks feedback on that Yeah, I'm halfway through reviewing it I'm also tagging the person on our team who's in charge of Ford proxies and the person on our team who just transferred in Who's been doing Ford proxies for right? Yeah, five years. So just for like Yeah, yeah, that that that would be fantastic to get to get more eyes on it I mean, there's quite a few things that I know need to be implemented So once we get the initial review done, you know I'll be listing out various things that that we need to do that the biggest one that was already called out is that Right now today Because we inherit all of the TLS parameters from the cluster. Yep There's no there's no good way to say that, you know I want to do SNI right for the host that I'm proxying to or I want to do Cert verification of the host that are proxying to based on host name I'm I'm positive that I can fix that like we can have a TLS contacts per logical host But but again, it would be nice just to get People think of different things. So it'd be great to have people go through the code and just list out all the things That are missing a similar thought on on features that we're wanting from different levels of code Which is that I know for us we're gonna want to have Eventually an envoy like order of six months handle Supporting kind of multiple connections to a given upstream you just for scalability and the balancing reasons and then I was like Well, if we do all that work like over here like how are we gonna jam that into we're gonna need that before proxy to You know just thinking about like what layer we want to handle a group. Yeah Well, so so the for proxy code today because it runs through the conpo code will support multiple connections So that actually already works Okay, so you you would you would do it in the connection pool and one connection. Yeah So it so the way that the code was implemented today is that it works very much like logical DNS So it returns one logical host and then the connection pool will make as many connections as it would it would already make Meaning that if we eventually did the work that we've talked about for years of making the HTTP to connection I'll get me purpose for free. Yeah I was starting to spelunking and I was like, oh my gosh I like I spent an hour looking for the code because I hadn't looked at that code. Yeah Yeah, no, it would so like if we made the HTTP to connection pool support multiple connections It would just work. Take it out. Yeah Anyway, yeah, so thank you for people that have looked at it already, please drop comments. I'll be Updating that PR and and future to do work Yeah, that's fine. Yeah, thank you so much Um, okay, let's see anything else cool All right. Have a good week everyone. Hi. All right. Yeah