 Hello and welcome everyone to another wonderful SMI community meeting. First things first, please put your name into the attendees list so that we all know who is who. Do we have anyone new, anyone who hasn't been around before? Yeah, do you want to introduce yourself? Yeah, so my name is Patrice Cracow and I'm working as an architect at ING, which is a bank mainly retail in Europe. I have been playing for the couple of weeks with SMI. So I was just thinking, let's have a look how this meeting looks like. I remember you ING folks. I was there when I was at Redhead in Amsterdam, I'm kind of aware, but cool. So you're kind of evaluating it or like what's your plan? The planning and gardening service mesh is that we have for a couple of years a kind of in-house service mesh and we are looking at on the market to maybe move to an off-the-shelf solution. And in this evaluation process, I have discovered SMI. I would say I like it. The support by the vendor is not up to the level I would like it to be so I can easily compare, but that's that's the whole story, I guess. Damn, CloudPro is a good thing that no one is around here. Oh, sorry, that's been recorded. But yeah, that's awesome. Anyone else? So thanks a lot. Anyone else who's been around not before and wants to introduce themselves? I'm a bit infrequent, but I've been here before. If you, sure, go ahead. Yeah, again, this will give some program manager here. I work alongside of Bridget, and I'm the PM for OSM. So I'm getting back into participating in these SMI conversations. So like he is the face and you're the brain. Yeah, that's it. We'll have to be sure to let Locky know that he is, in fact, a pretty face. Um, anyone else? Charles? No, everyone, everyone good? Yep. Hi, I'm Charles. I work at Boyant. So I spend a lot of time, spend all my time on LinkedIn. So we love working with SMI. So I'm here to see what's happening. Awesome. Thank you. Cool. All right, then let's get into it. First thing up in the agenda is Bridget, you put that on, I guess. Stefan submitted the ad TCP EDP routes and access control spec. Yeah, I met, I added it mostly as a reminder because I saw a couple of people had reviewed that, but it looked like if any other spec maintainers or others want to put comments on that, that seems like, sorry, it's very loud outside here. I'll mute, but yeah, I think people should review that. Do we have any guidance or any expectations here? I mean, I guess we want to wrap that up at some point in time, right? Yeah, I mean, we can defer discussion on it until Stefan is on, but I just wanted to make sure that we have it on our radar and don't forget it. Okay, that's fair. Cool. So next one, the first community blog post, it's hopefully just the first and not the last. So that's congratulations. That's already great and hopefully many more to follow. Anyone here who has an idea, like for example, Patrice, if you want to, I don't know how much you can share, but kind of like us, like we would kind of like be all over you and ask you about, you know, your experiences, whatever, how you evaluate a service measure, etc. And maybe you want to just, you know, put that up front, you write a blog post saying like, this is how we evaluate, and then we don't have any questions or we don't bother you anymore. How about that? Yeah, that's, I mean, it's still quite new, but this is definitely something I can consider for the weeks to come. Awesome. Cool. I have seen that there are some guidelines on how to write, what to write, so I will go through that. But I guess it's the usual stuff. So it's important because so many folks at the current point in time are evaluating and are kicking tires and trying to figure out coming up with a framework, how to actually look at stuff. So it's super important if, if you can share, I'm aware of that, you know, very often this cannot be shared. But if you can share that thing, like, this is the way how we look at it. And there's no right and wrong. It's like, it's your way, right? Describe what how you look at things. Yeah, that's, yeah, I will put that on my to-do list. Awesome. Thank you. Yeah, then Lucky gave a really great CNCF webinar. And any comments on that? Is there anything anyone wants to comment on that webinar? Go on twice. Okay. Keep it up, Lucky. Another Stefan issue, 177, concerning the renaming of the traffic target to traffic access. I guess the same applies as to the other. As long as he's not around, it's probably a little bit challenging, right? We can defer that until he's here. I just want to make sure that we, that looks like another one we don't want to forget about and want to make sure to follow up on. But on this one, specifically, I have, I have indeed commented that, yeah, it says access everywhere. And then suddenly you have this target prefix. And I think it would, it's definitely a good idea. Now, of course, I don't know what are the implications of that, but yes, that would sound terribly more consistent to call it traffic access instead of traffic targets. And same for traffic split. Maybe I should come with something that the word split might not be the best one. But I will make an issue for that. Cool. Yeah, I think all the usability UX, you know, it's not necessary that people who write specs have a wrong perception or whatever. It's just, is that what most people who are in that area consider as the most natural, most self-explanatory term or not? So, you know, all that input is super, super useful. Okay. And so, I think I wasn't around last time. So, you got to help me with that one. Meltron from the Keali team asked about more work on the Istio adapter to help Keali plug in. Do we have something from who is working on the Istio adapter? I'm not sure. Yeah, I don't think we have anyone present who is actively working on that, which is okay. Again, I was looking at the last couple of meetings and I was like, I don't want to forget that somebody is asking about that. Maybe kind of an action item that I can take going forward is try to figure out who is going to work on that going forward. Yeah. Yeah, I'm interested in that because I'd like to have maybe like an Uber demo of all the providers if that makes sense. And then I was going to ask, I noticed that Istio adapted, it's in a separate like repo. Is that due to, is there's like some CI testing or something? Is there a reason it's like spawned off? Who are you asking this question? Oh, anybody? I don't know. I just know it's outside of the main repo. Like if we put like a linkerd example in there or Keali, like are we just creating a repo per? I think it's the ones that needed a separate adapter that don't implement the spec. So I think the console adapter and the Istio adapter were necessary. Okay, I got it. So if they're not implementing the spec and they're kind of at an adaptive status. I was just saying I do have experience with console, not with Istio, but for console, that's the same as you said, Bridget. It's you have the console repo and then you have another SMI console adapter or something like that, which kind of translates the SMI API into the native console one. I think that we have guidance for kind of like how we would structure the, I don't know, maybe we do and I'm not aware of it. That could perfectly be the case in terms of how we structure the overall GitHub organization, right? If we have one per whatever. But do we want something? Do we like from working backwards from a user coming to it, like what would you expect? Would you like, you know, what they have one big with all the sub-correctories or per? No, you know what? I mean, I'll give my two cents. I've been kind of talking to a lot of filled people, et cetera. And I think that, you know, when we show off some of this, you know, people who are kind of working in more of like a homogeneous environment, they don't understand the value of SMI. I think if we can have some examples right next to each other, showcasing the different providers and saying, Hey, here's the common API. I think the light bulb comes on. I'm just finding that a lot of people who like dedicated their life to like Istio, et cetera, they, when you show them this, they're like, well, I don't get it, you know, but then you say, Hey, look, here's a way if you have a common tool chain of an API across, you know, multiple measures. But right now, I think what's happening, it's hard to do a search and get that kind of consolidated view of kind of what SMI is touching. And I think that's missing. Right. Right. No, that's a very valid point. And I do remember, I used to be active in W3C many years ago, 15 years or whatever. And they are essentially in order to graduate to TR, essentially was the requirement to have three interoperable implementations, right? So it could not be a tech TR, without showing you have three interoperable implementations. And that's something that I think makes it, it's not about a shootout, right? It's not about, oh, like, I'm covering more. It's showing that actually, look, the spec does something for you. Exactly. You can move stuff around. You get interoperability, right? And if you, you know, doesn't have to be a formal thing, it doesn't have to be, you know, a table or whatever, but having some device that actually shows that a nice demo, as you said, like an Uber demo, Umbrella, whatever you want to call it. Right. Right. Something that shows that value. And I would also be, you know, I'm more than happy, not in the driving seat, but if you have, if you would own that, I would be more than happy to do my share in terms of like, you know, whatever is necessary, implementing, writing docs, whatever is necessary, just kind of really. Yeah, yeah, I don't mind. Yeah, we can, I'm sure I could tag team with Bridget on that. Cool. Let's start off with an issue and then we can all try and do whoever wants to. Awesome. And since I'm taking notes, I'm writing down that Phil and Michael are doing this. I noticed how you tried to volunteer me, Phil. That's right. I'm going to be on vacation next week. I don't want to stall this. All right. Cool. As far as I can tell, that was it in terms of the agenda. So just going to open up the floor to your, and if no one has anything, then we just grab it. Any question, suggestions? I have a suggestion. My suggestion is someone should decide if they want to moderate on September 16th. Michael has done a very good job of showing us what that looks like and someone else could decide if they want to take notes on September 16th. And I've been doing that and the notes are, I will drop them into the chat. So if you haven't been looking at the notes, you can look at the notes. It's a good practice that the person who chaired or moderated next time takes notes. So I'm, unless again, if someone else wants to, I'm more than happy to take the notes. And hopefully someone else moderates the chair. Great. Yeah. If schedule permits. Sorry, what was that, Phil? If schedule permits. I mean, sign in for that. Okay. All right. Any other input questions? If you join late, if you have anything you want to ask or say, now is your moment. Going once, going twice. And I give you back 13 minutes of your life. Have a great day. Thank you. And good luck. Good luck with your vacation. Nice. All right. Take care. Thanks, Otto. Thank you.