 Okay, can I I think we could go ahead and kick it off and I want to just throw out a proposal here that I think any kind of categorization or taxonomy just necessarily is limited and so I think we should just throw them all into the same bucket together and Just say these are all automated Sure, I'm good with that Very short call Funny anything else you want to say damn before I jump into kind of the pre Earlier work we did on this No, I mean I just I want to thank you for the fact that you you kick this off back in I think it was like August or 2016 when I first arrived at CMCF and I think it was really valuable then and in fact I mean I do think you have a lot to be proud of in terms of that initial work I think has stood the it's has to find quite well and so I'm like what I was saying before I Hope that we're looking at a tune up here and saying hey are there some additional details? And maybe combining some boxes together or separating some as opposed to a complete rethink or redo of it But at the end of the day, it's right, you know up to you to take the lead here and then whatever six members of the TOC Agree on is ultimately the reference architecture Right, yeah, definitely There's I want to kind of do today was this sort of you know kind of talk a little bit about What the original reference architecture came from? Back before Dan actually took over the helm which has been very helpful having Dan on board We had this really ugly diagram in our charter that just looked like nothing that anybody would recognize as a reference architecture and so Some of the TOC as we were forming they wanted to kind of have our first effort be to create some type of a reference architecture And there were a lot of discussions within the TOC early on about whether or not we should have a end user architecture or a more technical deeper level of the individual components and systems that make up a True architecture not just a reference architecture and And so you can kind of see that you know this slide that was put together Quite a while ago. This is what kind of drove the initial end user reference architecture And we kind of what we're targeting you know very simple use cases of You know What is what does a cloud native stack look like and so we we spent a little bit of time looking at? My mouse over there, sorry Kind of at the top of that stack, you know what it means to be containerized What distributed orchestration management means and what micro services architecture and Those are sort of the three if you guys remember back in the the charter You know, what are the the three things that make something cloud native? It was those three things and so we try to sort of say what do those three things relate to and they end user type of reference architecture And then we sort of end up developing this sort of a model Well, we we want to kind of capture at the bottom that there is you know infrastructure of some kind Underneath this reference architecture. We didn't go into any details About that infrastructure or what's needed or what's expected there But we did kind of focus on the provisioning layer the runtime orchestration management and the Application definition and development piece and so this is kind of the original and existing reference architecture From this architecture What Dan did which has been really really helpful is he went out I think I have it here the landscape. Yeah, Dan went out and worked with I think it's red. It's not coming up for me, but it's Wasn't even a red point in amplify. Yeah Trying to get this to come up. Hopefully it's just loading for me, but we had this sort of Landscape diagram that And what one more piece of context I included a link in the chat window to the CNCF sharder and I have the aspiration in the next month or so to get the governing board to agree to delete schedule a entirely and replace it with that To paragraph cloud native definition that the TOC just approved last week, right? And so when it can when that happens that old Out of date like three-year-old reference architecture will go away forever. Yep, exactly And so one of you know one of the options we have in this group is to you know come up with a new reference architecture That replaces that existing one We also I think have the ability to kind of update That existing user reference architecture taken into account some of the landscape work that we've done in The CNCF that I'm showing hopefully this did this show up finally for you guys too. Do you see it on the screen? Yep And so we could kind of update the We have two different architectures one this kind of an end user that one that that you know could go more technical If we wanted to or we could just we have that does that's something we can decide we have decided today, but What I liked about the work that Dan has led on the interactive landscape is that it kind of you know Leverages if you look on the left-hand side, it kind of leverages the same high-level Aspects of the user reference architecture as we discussed previously and Takes it a next level down right so kind of talks about the different aspects of the app definition and development the different aspects of orchestration and management And again going back to what you know, Dan was just saying with the new Definition we can update both of these at the same time, right? And then what I what I submitted to the CNCF a few months ago was was this right sort of a you know high-level picture of Kind of you know thinking about The cloud native architecture more logically you sort of get this model of there's really You know these these orchestration pieces these components where you're trying to observe and And and and monitor what's going on then you have this optimization aspect Which led to you know kind of looking at maybe this as a logical starting point to kind of pull together the reference architecture the the end user Reference architecture and the interactive map right to sort of give you a single View of you know these are the three main components that make up the logical architecture and You know here's how they sort of correlate to these different aspects that are captured in the reference architecture And so this was kind of like a what I thought would be a good starting point for discussion Happy to you know kind of Open up to two discussion now and sort of see if there's any any thoughts on First of all, I guess the chart of what we want to do in this working group and then secondly we can get into You know if there were some people who have other ideas they'd like to share we could start you know collecting those ideas and communicating them when we meet Every two weeks So I guess I'll start off with kind of the the charter any anyone have any Suggestions on a different charter than we've outlined here as a starting point. I mean for me. This is Jacob But the question is who is the intended audience? Like that that's sort of the first principle question for me because if it's a technical audience I would suggest we go more technical If you know more of a marketing orientation and I would go more broad like who is our intended audience Yeah, and so I kind of in the beginning When we did the end user reference architecture the intended audience was more marketing and more like the end user Kind of like an education if you will of what cloud native means And that's why I think that that might still be worthwhile to keep around even though we need to update it Just because it is and I'm sure Dan would agree There's always a need for kind of marketing and educating the community as to what cloud native means I really think this logical architecture starting point to me is more Targeting the technical audience and probably wants to be we want to get more technical With what the architecture looks like and how these interfaces work together with cloud native But that's just my opinion. I'm open to like what other people think of you know one or two views of an architecture And if we you know need to go more technical if we need to go more marketing Yeah, I mean from the so Kim when we had discussed this logical architecture slide, you know a couple months ago I think the the impetus for sort of the design was to Take from to go from a market map to something sort of more functionally and capability driven Which was intended to give people sort of a view of how these things plug into each other and importantly Help folks as a decision-making document in terms of like what the blueprint for a cloud native architecture could look like The the challenge I have with market maps in general You know either as an investor or as a consumer of technology is that they're they're quite noisy And there's a there's a lot on there and so by cutting it from a sort of capability driven Architecture first and then showing that really, you know These are these are taking a view on these are the few things that matter and these are technologies within those buckets But that are what matter now is really the Original intention of this slide and by showing how kind of everything else plugged into that as not really, you know Commodity is too tough a word, but I'm sort of as a decision of secondary Can it can people hear me, okay? How it you're breaking up for me, and it could just be my connection. Anybody else having trouble hearing? I Heard I'm fine. Okay. It's fine. Just me my work doesn't yeah And so That was the original intention and I still you know, I still think like having a Difficult in the context of sort of like a cloud native competing foundation. I think because You know, I don't know what the the appetite is to take a view on putting forth like one or two technologies as opposed to broader pockets of technologies I'm always of the view that it's good to sort of have a suggestion or recommendation But I think for me you like this would this would make a lot of sense as a certain point Yes, so just I mean I just a couple real quick points I definitely agree with I think that that was my view going into this And if you look at the landscape, you know, we do have like CNCF incubating CNCF sandbox And like Kubernetes is a CNCF graduated and so we do have You know, I don't think we are opposed as a community and it's something that you know, obviously I can now take back to the TOC at our next meeting, but Based on our discussion today. I don't believe that you need to be worried or constrained to whether or not the CNCF wants to get more technical and define more of the the blueprints and the components and the Architecture on how these things should connect together and work together We don't want to basically, you know, select other than the projects that we already have in the landscape. We don't want to During the community. We don't want to Necessarily select one as the winner as or as the way But you know, like we have something like C&I from the network side This is a reference implementation of a network interface, right? And so I don't think we are Necessarily opposed to saying here's the way we see that the architecture coming together technically But we we're not going to sit back and say that this one solution this one technology is the only way to do it if that makes sense Yeah, just a previous question I feel like the architecture in the form of the landscape has had tons of different audiences. So it's absolutely marketing document. We have Legal size printouts that we're giving out today at DockerCon. We have the trail map on the front side and the Landscape on the back of it. I also think it's useful as a technical document where I've heard from Well, I guess I've put Brian Grant who has both said time called it useful and at times called it the health scape that useful as your sometimes as you're trying to understand an area like key management or Secure images or such to say what are the authors here one of the closed-source and the open-source ones and the comprehensive nature of what we've done I think has been useful the overwhelming aspect of it. I feel like the Trail map has been some antidote for not a not necessarily a perfect one, but I I think the simplest answer is that this architecture work has a variety of audiences I would probably make a distinction that we Have had an aspiration over the last year or so Within CNCF and it failed so far to deliver it of doing what I've described as pattern work Where Brendan Burns had created a document on talking about different Collaborative patterns and we had hoped to have a series of blog posts around those and illustrations about patterns that were things like a circuit breaker or an air releases or side part and and there's really Dozens and dozens of them over time, but I'm So I would question Whether this kind of reference architecture can also cover all of those other sorts of things And I'll stop there Yeah, I definitely I Guess I guess to me that it might be more of the end user reference architecture goes away and we leverage the landscape for that aspect right and What we're defining is actually the rural reference architecture that is more technical down below this so That make me might make a lot more sense because you really don't need a landscape and the end user high-level reference architecture In my opinion, but again, I'm hoping to others other thoughts on that I'm Hi, this is Paul Fremantle. I don't I'm not sure I agree because I think I Think the the the high-level reference architecture is really what a customer's reference architecture is going to be right, right? and I think that that You know these projects. I think there's a need to address it from the customer viewpoint first and Then help the customer see how to fit these projects in and I think that the the landscape is sort of You know because there's so many projects it Inevitably has to have a project first focus in a way and I know I know it's not really that but it does have a bit of that and I think that I Think it's worth at least exploring what a what a High-level enterprise architecture would look like independent from this And then going into the details of the enterprise architecture. Yeah That makes sense so we have We haven't done like introductions. I mean we should have started with that but Before we jumped in a doctor's any other comments or thoughts anyone wants to share on On this first part of the discussion kind of a second that last statement is that you know the things that will help in Reference architecture are kind of talking about the things that we don't expect to change a lot over time brands projects Over time right makes perfect sense. Yep. I like to I like that that view of how I look at it, too That's a good a good way to phrase it, you know that this is gonna last, you know do multiple projects that change Because it's not tied to any specific project. So So with that, I know Danny introduced himself. I'm gonna introduce myself quickly. I am on the TOC I work at MasterCard currently and I was one of the original founding for you recall like Finding companies when I was at Cisco for for the CNCF and so Been working a lot of different projects and helping a lot of different projects mature and Helped them getting into the CNCF See Joe is next on the list. Joe you want to give a quick intro. Yeah, can you hear me okay? Yep, you know you fine. Hey Joe Carvalho Intel I'm a senior architect and the software services group formerly data center group And I've actually been a part of the CNCF for quite a long time back when Intel actually built a bare-metal scale cluster and And Ken you and I were on a we're on a panel way back then So happy to be back in this conversation and to be a part of this effort Yeah, I mean, I was very happy to see you join this Joe. Thank you. It's good to have you here Thanks, it's great to see you and everybody else on the on the call. This is awesome And I'm hey Andres, maybe you can give a quick intro as well Thanks for joining and I hey Annie Good to see you again. We're gonna give a quick intro. Sure. My name is Annie Lai. I am with Huawei I'm responsible for how is all the cloud related open source project on the operation side I'm trying to get one of our architects to come to this meeting on regular basis But in the meantime, I am going to be the filler Great, you're a good fellow to have any so thanks for joining. Thank you Chris short you want to give a quick intro? Sure, I'm Chris short currently devops consultant with SJ technologies and the CNCF ambassador And I'll be changing jobs here in the next couple weeks moving over to redhead on the Ansible team Oh, cool I have a lot of friends on the Ansible team. Tell them I said hi Will do Uh, Colin Hello Hello, you give a quick intro Uh, yeah, yeah, sorry. I'm Colin Sullivan. I'm in I'm a product manager on the NATS team um Yeah, and NATS was just admitted to CNCF in late March. So I'm happy to be here Okay And uh, see Craig Hi, all I'm Craig Peters. I'm a product manager at JFrog. I work Primarily with our partner ecosystem and so My job is to figure out where what we do Uh contributes to all of this The way all these tools work together Great Thanks for joining And I'm not sure the first thing but it's Jay cold cold cold That should be jenny curve and I'm sure you know who she is. I do know jenny. Yep She knows you. Yep She's probably on mute though Is my mic right now? Yep, it's working Okay, um, sorry So yes now I'm at intel and um I I I guess I Sorry, could you speak up? I can't hear you. Sure. I'm I'm sorry. I'm having trouble with my headset here. I um I straddle ecosystem strategy and architecture in uh, intel's open source technology center and I work closely with joe And I'm also back on the kubernetes cncf front. Um, although before I was peripherally peripherally involved We try to keep you close Hey, thanks for joining And then um, hey joe, want to give a quick? I know I know you but others probably don't so Maybe talking on mute You know, I wonder if you're referring to me ken. This is jacob. Um But my my screen name on you makes it look like my name is joe Um, I am part of index ventures. Um, I thought you were just As some of you who I've met within the past now now we we do a lot of investing in a lot of different areas One of those areas is enterprise. It was in the enterprise open sources A core focus for us and in that capacity we've gotten to know A number of the folks from the cloud native competing foundation. So You know, I'm excited to be partnering with you guys on this one. Um, you know looking at the landscape A bunch of times excited to see a bunch of our companies represented both open source and not open source like data So, um, Great And of course paul, you know, a quick introduction. Everybody knows you as well Hi, yes, my name's paul freemantle and i'm the cto at wso2 We're an integration vendor. We I guess compete with with uh red hat and mule and and people like that and we've been Uh, I've actually been over the last few months trying to develop our own reference architecture around Uh, what and how our kind of enterprise architecture is evolving. It's it's it's not as detailed as this um, so I was really interested to see And participate in in what the cncf is doing and and we're obviously very focused on cloud native uh aspects and and we're just Working on a new programming language which we which we think is very focused on cloud native scenarios. So Very relevant to all this great Good to have you on board And uh sarah jeans Yes, hello, so i'm sarah jeans I'm with the internet too. So internet too Runs and operates the us national research and education network As well as running and operating the identity federation in common for all the research and education institutions And I straddle our architecture and our cloud programs team And internet too just recently joined the cncf as a nonprofit member Right at the end of april, so happy to be here Welcome to the to the cncf Thank you. The last one is j jorge. I'm guessing is jacob. Is that right? Was it someone else? Yeah, that that was me, but I already uh, I've already chimed in We'll make you listen to me twice That's what I thought No, that's what I thought. I just want to make sure you're on it twice. So didn't want to Miss it if there was somebody else thing with that um abbreviation there, so All right, cool. So I uh, apologize for the introductions late, but I'm not used to um, I'm used to like running around but not fires these days so I'm not used to running community meetings, so I'll get better at it as a promise. Okay. It's coming back to me slowly um Did I miss anyone? I think I it's like a phone number on here. I didn't have a name or such a result That's somebody that had called in and already introduced themselves or not, but Did I miss anybody? Right cool um And so and you know in talking with um With dan and then jacob and the toc We there seemed to be interested in kind of using this as a starting point um And I guess what I'd like to you know, you don't have to kind of go into Um a lot of details today. This is kind of like a kickoff meeting in a way for what we want to try to do with this and Obviously, it's going to take a few meetings. It's sort of get some, you know Momentum and to you know start making some um, you know forming some opinions on what to do but um In terms of these areas, you know, you have sort of these three main buckets of monitoring service communication and orchestration um, and then sort of the um The components that make up Different parts of a logical architecture security compliance like continuous delivery platform management cloud Log analytics API management discovery and planning for services in the container registry Does it seem like you know, is there anything you guys have questions about with this? Or is there something that's missing or that you're not sure how it would fit into this? Obviously, there's a lot of details in those boxes on the outside of that That we're planning to get into and some definitions that are probably needed for the main boxes, but Did there anything you guys can think of that's just missing from this architecture diagram? I guess I guess the This is kind of like a Platform architecture diagram is kind of missing the actual applications and and And I feel like breaking out control and data plane might be useful But there are lots of different lenses. I agree. It doesn't include the application development itself or even methodologies there right Is that pertinent here though? No, I don't know That's a good question. I mean, this is this is kind of an operational view of the platform, right? What what is it doing in sort of static state not Sort of the life cycle or the deployment our topology, you know, what is it? We're trying to get across in such a reference architecture so The intention of this Was to present a logical view and then take a point of view on what technology is really differentiated And if you were gonna You know resources are limited everywhere and some of you are going to invest In a set of technologies The view is that these are the you know, these are the three starting points And then if you hook everything else into these three buckets monitoring service communication registration everything else stems from there The the context is broadened. I think This was originally intended solely for microservices And was really meant more of a as a blueprint for what we could do Um, but the intention of this was to take a view on saying hey, there's really only so many things that matter Um, and those are the key decisions and if you get those right, uh, everything else will follow But I I agree. I think that you know, it's a good starting point, but we need to build upon it I think that continuous deployment leaves us a little bit of room maybe to add some of the important development aspects to this as well, right Because like, you know, one of the the main things that that um, I'm always working with my developers on now is how do you, you know, get metrics and Understand what services and you associate master code really wait about the security of these Microservices and so how do you know that the service that you discovered is the right service and the actual service you think it is Out of curiosity, what is the the medium that we intend to deliver this in just online or are we actually trying to like print this out somehow? That's a good question. So to date we've sort of used, um the cncf Website is kind of a way to to have a clickable Journal in to these different components And so it's been very much an online sort of view With the serverless work group. We did do a white paper And while the white paper is still available online I would not be Opposed If we wanted to discuss having a white paper at some point I would not be opposed to sort of bring the other white paper to go into a little bit more of the the detail around Um, each of these areas that you probably wouldn't do online in an image view, right? Okay, thanks for clarifying and these um You know me I put like on William Lincoln D and and kumine is on this original one because those were the cncf projects that kind of fit in here um I I think I had plometheus on there at some point. Do you know what happened to it? But um You know, I don't I don't I was just kind of using this to kind of help The toc understand how my current projects at the time fit into this view um And we had more than these three, but I'm going to show it happen to you I just kind of put up an old toc Diagram that to show this without trying to update it today But I don't know if we'd necessarily show any projects on this is I guess the point I was trying to get to I put a couple on here just to sort of You know show what we could do In the tlc level with this, but Don't necessarily view that you have to we'd have to put projects in each of these but buckets I think um for the white paper Maybe it'll be good to have some examples of what kind of projects fall into each category So we know where the gaps are right Yeah, ideally kind of like we did with the user the end user reference architecture and the um landscape I'm hoping that there's a pretty obvious mapping of You know what the reference the logic architecture provides What sort of fits into that and then where there are gaps that we Have identified that are still needed to kind of your point annie if that makes sense yep If we're going to have these three different components Which I would discuss then I want to kind of just make sure that it's easy to kind of See how they fit together and go from a higher level here at the different set of projects that fit inside Ecosystem here's a kind of a customer reference architecture view of what you should be thinking about And then here's a logical architecture what play matters the most to get started And of course, you know all three of these should be living The user hasn't really been updated in a while to Dan's point, but all three of these should be more Which we updated on a regular basis not not update them just to update them, but as As we evolve as a community we should be updating the architecture to show that evolution So hi, I've got a quick question on this, right? So we talked about end user here and I was just looking at the end user reference architecture And it seemed like the end user who was running Your platform stack and here we're talking about the logical architecture for what is the platform stack But there's another end user in all of this which is the application developer and and sort of related the application operator That's dealing with that We're we're we're going to go into the space where we looked at Reference architectures for that end user and the kinds of tools related to that Or is it more going to stay with the platform stack rather than the applications that run in them? Yes, I think that's that's a really good point. I would love to take this high level Layer that we talked about and go deeper for the application view And then from an operation view, we don't only have that captured I think this Dislogical reference architecture we've been talking about maybe would be with that that operations discussion would happen the most cleanly Um But it's you know the point you're bringing up I think is is sort of the point we've been discussing that It's difficult in a concise manner to kind of capture the the customer view the application view the operation view And the ecosystem community view, you know all at the same time And so I think you know to your attention question. Yes, I would like to to take the application aspect deeper and the operational aspect deeper as well Well, yeah, and there are two different operational aspects, right? There's the cluster or your your infrastructure operation, which is where you've got your monitoring operation And then there's your application that the application And those are really two entirely separate roles that many organizations are different companies Are different people within the company. Yeah, exactly Yep, absolutely And that's why that's where there seems to be the most confusion in my discussions with with companies So I think that'd be very important to do that I I think that's a really good point that will eliminate a lot of confusion if we can have separate white papers targeting different, you know audience developers, operations people and users And they have a different architecture that kind of applies in their sphere Yeah Yeah, I think that'd be very helpful as well anyone like to take a stab at One of those three I'd like to get like all three have have like a small group of us think about All three of them as anyone who's interested in in one of those areas more than the other You have to tell me not to send me a note and We'll start maybe I'll send you kind of like a template that we like to use in the CNCF to kind of get started on You know brainstorming what you know the app App you the app for you and the infrastructure ops you would be go ahead, Dan Oh, I was just asking if we could use the reference architecture mailing list that we've set up rather than just having them send in their directly to you Yeah, I should have said that. Sorry. Yeah, use the mailing list to let me know to let everyone know what you're interested in working on I should say And I'll send it out I'll just paste the link in the mailing list But it is it's a public list. So anyone's Welcome to participate I'm not sure if you'd seen the email that I sent to the list this morning where I had some dreamly detailed concrete Questions or proposals about the existing reference architecture and how it fit into the landscape And so I guess I I was interested in hearing if you Were comfortable sticking with that aspect of the reference architecture such that it would make sense to Talk about some of our existing categories and whether we could Split them off or combine them and that's a kind of additional workflow we can look at to the group I I definitely think that is Dan for sure Good point Anyone else have thoughts on what Dan was just asking? You might get a chance to kind of respond or think about the questions Yeah, unfortunately, I haven't had the check to really digest that email And then I um, I I think you were on a few hood-wise it earlier, but I that's definitely my intention is to Make sure there's a very obvious bridge between The landscape and the in-usual reference architecture and logical architecture, so Ken I have kind of poor Wi-Fi here, but I did just paste into the chat window for people to see the guts of that message Where when you look at the landscape And I think most folks are familiar with the fact that we have this interactive version of the landscape that I'll also paste in the The link to that that shows this but there's there's three Boxes in particular that are quite Big and have a ton of content there and I'm it's not obvious to me how to split them up into some categories But I would love to do so if there were a relatively clear bright land rule And then I mentioned three kind of lower level boxes that seem like they might be worth trying to combine into one or two Yep But I'm happy to have folks just follow up on the mailing list and argue for against any of these or any other changes Yeah, it makes it makes a lot of sense to me Dan I like it So then one can kind of get on the Use the mailing list to sort of discuss Um, not only you know the email that Dan sent out, but also kind of these three different Views we want to try to create one that's kind of the app or developer view Of a reference architecture one one is kind of more of the application dev ops or ops view And then the last So the infrastructure ops view And kind of leveraging, you know, I think thinking about those three views in line with the categories we've defined in the The interactive landscape along with Where we want to sort of condense those into a smaller subset of architectural themes that we then define more specific Components to make up that architecture for that end user to a targeting for that that audience That makes sense Anything else Dan you wanted to um to raise up No, I'm just happy to have an ongoing email conversation I mean, we were a little slow getting this meeting slot set with the doodle poll and then getting the Email piece revitalized, but I mean I'd love to have real discussions and debates ongoing I don't think any of this is um necessarily obvious So very interesting to hear people's feedback Yeah, but you want to start with your thread and I'll add another thread on sort of the um The way that we want to think about reference architectures and the cncf for discussion and then We'll continue the discussion and email and then we meet I think two weeks from today if I remember correctly Unfortunately, it's not we actually just set it up as a monthly poll One thing the 11th Yep to love it. Yeah Okay, but we I mean we can increase the frequency if if necessary I think we'll see if the email I think the email is the better way to sort of Start making progress and then At on these meetings. We'll just maybe discuss And what I might also do Dan is I might I might work with Chris on this one might create like three Eventually I might create three separate get hub repos for each of the reference architecture types. We just we agree on And then we can kind of capture Those architectures and get and then You know discuss them and do poll requests as needed type of thing and define issues so Between that and I might start with Moveable slides and then when we get some consensus moving over to be Pages markdown pages on the to see us or we can also create repos for issues like them Yeah, we definitely will get it's going to take us a while I think to get to that point But yeah, I think that's exactly what I was thinking what you just described with the mic downs eventually We'll start with slides and then move over once we get some some definitions and some Some consensus amongst us I have a question Dan. I'm a question Ken. So what so when we produce the output the three reference architectures What's the process do they have to be approved by? uh TLC or is absolutely So TLC approved that means TLC put us them bonnet saying this is official and we published them, correct? Correct. That's correct. Yep So this is a working group This group Okay Just for we're not actually an official working group yet Working groups also have to be approved by the TLC. We should come up with some euphemism for a subgroup or a bop or an ad hoc something I mean if we felt like this was going to be like a meaningful ongoing activity We could chart of the working group I just didn't really seem worth the trouble to create a charter and other sort of stuff My hope is that we could create these documents get some consensus around them Get the TLC to approve them and then kind of put the work on hiatus But the mailing list of course would would stay around But we can create a more formal structure if necessary But but the key thought is that anything we do no matter how great Ken loves it. It's not until five other TLC members Agree as well that it's a official CMCF output. Yep Okay, thank you and should be clear on that and I don't even get a vote So Ten at least is one of one of the nine this year Yeah, and we we like to get nine. We don't we we can get five, but we like six we like to get nine though, so We don't like we don't mind dissension, but we kind of want to have a unanimous because it's a lot more powerful obviously And we will um, you know along those lines And I think you join a lot of the TLC causes where they are open Calls you can join And for them for the most part we try to give a a working group and and this isn't a working group But they have us on the agenda after the working groups and so um, there's usually a slot where we can kind of give a quick update and so um Maybe monthly what I'll do is after we have a monthly meeting. I might try to get on the next agenda for the next TLC just to give a quick update into our progress because they are The TLC members are interested in in this group and what we're working on so Great. Thank you. I think this is a very good discussion. I'm very happy that I joined Yeah, thanks. Thanks for joining everyone. I um, are any other questions? I I've been kind of following the google mentality of any of my meetings 10 minutes early kind of like college. I guess so Any Any other I don't want to like leave questions. Are there any other questions? Feel free to to ask them now but for those of you who Need some time before before your next meeting feel free to drop off Can I lose you guys? Are you the artist drop off? Big thumbs up and and thank you for volunteering to shepherd to shepherd Yeah, sorry. It took so long to get it going dan, but I'm glad we got it going. Thanks for your help on that That's good. Thanks. Well, take care everyone. Have a great afternoon. Bye. Thank you Thank you