 Shall we get started? Yep, it's done. Cool. So welcome to the next network service mesh meeting. So before we get started, if you have anything to put onto the agenda, please bring it up or add it on and. And we'll see about about getting to it. Also, please add yourself to the attendees list. So the attendees list is really useful because. When we go and do outreach, it makes it very easy for us to say that we have a community there that people who are involved, that's diverse. So if you're able to please add yourself to the attendees list. The meeting notes have been posted onto the chat. So feel free to open up there. And with that, let's go ahead and get started with my agenda. So we have. Three recurring meetings. We have this meeting every Tuesday at this time, the NSM doc meeting, which occurs every Wednesday at 8am Pacific time and the NSM use case, which occurs every second, fourth and fifth. At 8am Pacific time as well. There will be a use case meeting this coming. Monday. So. Parking calendars for that. We also participate in the CNCF telecom user group, which occurs every first and third Monday at 8am, which rotates with the use case. We have Shanghai. Cube con China coming up in Shanghai. And the client I will be giving an intro maintainer track. So there is a CNCF answer bar that will also be on. I, I suppose somebody will be. Manning it from NSM from 1132 12. That's me. Cool. And we have a. Tug birds of a feather kickoff, which is going to occur on Tuesday from 11 to 1135. Actually that, that time seems short. We should double check that because last one was an hour and a half. And this one's showing only half an hour. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It's really short. That's. Yeah. Okay. And 10 minutes after that is our talk. So. So if you're going to be in Shanghai. Come visit us. We also have a dbtk user space in bird of France. I've submitted a call for paper discussing NSM plus the dbtk integration. The notifications for them should come out. Sometime this week, perhaps. So we'll see. These things sometimes run a bit late. We have a new, so we have something called open core summit. Can someone discuss open core summit? I haven't heard of this one. If someone's discussing it, you're on mute. I am not super familiar with it. We got a direct message on Twitter from open core summit saying, Hey, it would be great to see you there. So there's. I guess you're welcome to learn more on Twitter at open core summit. Cool. So. In my scenario, the main problem is it's probably going to bill. It is during the same time as dbtk dbtk user space, but. Yeah, let's take a look at it and see if there's any possibility we can get someone to, to attend. Yeah. You know where it is. So I'm from school. That makes it much easier. That definitely makes it much easier. So. We have. Oh, and that's Europe coming up. And the call for paper for that is closed. And I believe the, the. Submission should either come out. I think the end of this month or early next month. In terms of the entrance of this, this like that schedule. That will be held in Antwerp. We've had some questions, which the call for paper closes on July 1st. And I believe Nikolai is supplying for a talk there. Yes, I will do probably. We'll see what you figure out. That's still sometimes. Yeah. So for all and has actually. Yeah. We submitted. Me and Taylor and then also. as you probably know yeah I mean maybe we want to track this and see yeah so I put in I put in a talk on crafting of CNF yeah I hope that that one will be accepted to be sure in nice to share our experience and probably get some feedback from what other people think on this and how they see this moving cool yeah and not just crafting a CNF but crashing crafting it with best practices so yeah so we have so we have three other talks then the testbed with Taylor the kernel forder and a possible SMI SNSM integration oh so in terms of we have KubeCon call for papers coming up the closes on July 12th so we need to get a shared document and start gathering ideas so the KubeCon ones tend to give us a lot of mileage and so if you could only attend one that would be either KubeCon would be high up on that list if not at the top we have also there'll be co-located events we know that there's a convoy con will be will be there as well I intend to put something forward on envoy in that particular talk or in that particular co-located event and I'm pretty sure there'll be there'll be a range of others that we can participate in December 10th and 11th we have edge computing world coming up in Mountain View the website is still to be to be announced and we also have Edge Congress Prem I think I saw you want can you tell us about Edge Congress yeah I just got this mail from them saying that this most mostly focused on edge so that's where I posted the program also seems to be relevant more from the edge computing perspective they are open for proposals probably we should submit a proposal so with that if we have any any events that have been confirmed please add them to the website with a pull request we had so on to the social media community team so Lucinda you have the floor good morning great we had a nice post from VMware open source yesterday so I linked to that there and in the last week 15 more accounts followed and service mesh we followed 61 more accounts and posted 23 times I posted about the Cisco live event the kubecon china saved the date and some CNCF events as well so we already talked about the open core summit dm there's also a mention question from someone and I believe Frederick may have responded and continued on the conversation about that no so that's there if anyone would like to continue the conversation I haven't seen this one yet oh I haven't either this is cool thank you so much for bringing it to our attention sure you're welcome so that's linked here in the notes and there's I also noticed a call for demos in the kubernetes community meetings those are held every thursday at 10 a.m pacific time I believe they have things on their calendar maybe through June maybe mid july so if there's if you'd like to do a demo there's a link here for the kubernetes community so I was directed here also because I reached out for this what was the name of the event that we wanted to do the webinar yeah so essentially I think it was Chris telling answering me that because we are a sandbox project we are not supported for a webinar as a project we can do it from the company perspective like VMware or Cisco or you know some of the companies that are participating there and there was essentially saying if you want to do something you can I think that that everyone of the maintainers should be there on the thread you can do this community meeting demos or something like this so yeah it's a thing that's that was the point that makes sense so we'll just we'll just have to make our own webinars in the in the meantime great and last week we reviewed the ovs orbit podcast with interest in giving an interview are there any updates on this possible event we have a scheduled interview with Ben interviewing Nikolai and I about network service mesh it's going to be second of july right I believe so but I don't think he'll release it immediately I think he's trying to build up content so he could really yeah yeah yeah yeah okay so this is where the recording should happen fingers crossed and then yeah well that's great congratulations on getting on the schedule thank you so and on the webinar just to share my experience with the service everything went really smooth really quick I mean like in an hour it was clear that yeah I mean there were a couple of people involved sending responses back and forth and in the end it was clear what what we should do so just to share that if we need it it works really well the service desk I mean great is there anything more on that or should we jump straight into the code of conduct I think that's all from my side yeah great so a couple of weeks ago we brought up the code of conduct so have people had a chance to review it or were there any major issues that popped up in people's mind this is I mean I looked at it before the meeting last week and was pretty happy with the cnc of code of conduct but I wanted to make sure that other people had a chance to see if there were any things that they thought we should do differently and we did get did we get a ping back from me she was saying that that you know from letting her know that that we would be another another group of people through and mediating for yeah I I think I think that the initial request she was a little bit confused because she may have thought we were actually asking for services um oh yeah they can't be confusing we suddenly people don't want anything immediately from you exactly especially especially in this area so so we've we've notified Michie that we were uh that we're considering uh putting adding it on and so she wanted to know as well if there's any problems uh with um with the wording or anything like that as well because the the wording can be changed or clarified as well so if there's any if there's any problems with the code of conduct that we flag they are there are something we can bring up with them or bring it with Michie so cool shall we go ahead and do this then um yeah I'm I'm up for I'm up for for adding an end as are there any how do we want to do this so what should we do a vote do we um so I do have one to ask if you before we merge it if we could remove the work in progress from the PR that would be great yeah all right my ask is to to have the formal approvals of uh everyone on the maintainers list okay um hi Bruce yeah I mean you have the like you have to submit to the PR I mean like I see oh hang on that I see your point yes there's actually a button for it yeah on the formal approval now with the button and everything one other thing I will suggest to folks look into with the with the work in progress tag there is actually a new github feature called draft that will let you push a pull release in the draft mode which literally precludes it being merged until you click the publish button and and that I'm finding to be super cool um because I'm working in other places where sometimes people are super happy to merge the thing you pushed and it's like no stop stop not yet okay so we need one more than um um Andre can you um add your approval or rejection sorry uh yeah okay check yeah don't let us bully you into something as well if there's something that you don't like about it you know definitely and I will change the work in progress right now so I'm not able to to vote on my own ploy request so I'm going to add I'm going to add a comment on it showing my approval so while we're waiting for that last approval let's go ahead and jump into the to the next topic so we'll come back to this can you click on the back lock just it Nikolai has the far um okay so uh the the situation here in the on the release hasn't changed that much since last week except for um we now have the two docker hub uh repos where we can push different images and I guess that it's going to be a manual process for now like publishing the docker images for the release um I can really just talk and so I'm in the process right now for the right of that actually we'll actually use the network ci repo because right now oh we do have the repo but it's not being used and I'm chasing down a few bugs on that PR there's actually a link in the meeting agenda pointing to that outstanding action item so once I've got that so it will actually merge then we can merge it and merge it also to the branch and then we'll start publishing to the network service mesh ci repo for the ci artifacts and then from there we can look at um actually handling proper publishing the way we discussed for the main repo and I think the things we discussed for the main repo was we would have things tagged as releases we would have a latest tag that pointed to the latest release artifact we would have a master tag that points to the latest stuff coming off master and then we would have for release throttle branches you know something like you know branch dash v zero dot one that points to the latest from that branch that was my understanding of the last discussion um that's what I'm trying to do in the PR if I got in the wrong just comment and we can get it fixed so can anyone hear me I don't hear anyone yeah we can we can hear you yeah yeah but but but I was muted and talking to to the okay that's good it was like something I lost with Sutton's Nikolayan but yeah so like I said I still need to be done this a little bit we don't necessarily do this live if people don't like the the the tag choices I'm making discussion okay I will defend the death the fact that it was a seeing choice I will not defend that it is the right choice um so yeah yeah it's a good it's a good start in any case I mean we need to to to move this forward we actually should have moved it much further by now but okay and this probably can also go into the release branch and should go there before we okay yeah better better to get it slow and right rather than rushed and wrong oh yeah that's trade-offs indeed um so the thing here was okay and the backlog so on on on the backlog things things are mostly frozen so probably we need to why is this one fixed that's wrong uh that's probably that's probably uh auto tagging from yeah yeah so I I was looking at some other projects I don't remember which one but people were having tags like near release next release like more generic tags that actually can somehow and this is a slide how to say in tradition to the next topic something that like you can reflect your roadmap in your issues like if you see what I mean like that that's actually interesting um it has the benefit that when that the stuff that you didn't actually get to um that was scheduled for next release if it doesn't get done next release it's still next release yeah exactly I kind of like that it's it's it's very low low effort in terms of going through issues um so I do like that approach yeah um I mean uh like we have a couple of things which are still pending from 0.1 which are obviously not getting there because the branch is there and we are not doing active development and we need to move them to the next release if we are planning for it or we need to kind of put them in some categories saying okay this is near future this is distant future and blah blah something like that although from what I can tell most of the things that we have on our list I mean not not not only here but in general you know the issues should be more or less uh near future um there are very few of the specs where we are kind of discussing conceptual things which might be implemented somewhere down the road but uh yeah as we as we were kind of discussing this uh where was the the link here for the roadmap I was expecting to be able there's a there's an attempt to get a symptom technology tree oh yeah yeah yeah and then there's the spec board because I don't think I want to be super clear the technology tree is probably not capturing everything yet yeah yeah and and so if you're sitting there going where's my spec the answer is um please let's get it worked in there right because I know we've got lots of people doing lots of interesting things in the in the spec space about what we could go forward and not everything has gotten as much love as I would like um because the world is full of shiny objects yeah one thing that actually I would I would love to wrap my head around a little more and it sounds like from the talk proposal Donna is looking at this is I I've glanced at SMI and I like a lot of what they're doing I'm not sure how that relates to network service mesh but I agree with the intuition that maybe somehow and so you know as if on it gets you get closer to sort of figuring out something that makes sense there I would love to see a spec for that um just so we can get a sense of how we might you know double tail end up bigger communities yeah I completely agree with that like I can I can see areas where they can potentially integrate with each other uh vertically but uh you may you may also have insights uh that because we're thinking more about it than than we have at this time so definitely definitely bring you up to us uh okay so at least from the first glance I mean I'm speaking instead of Ivana here but on the first glance it sounds like it's a pretty early development stage there I don't know Ivana do you want to say something yeah from my view I think it's so early that they don't seem very open for interaction yet they have one general slack channel that it's not pretty active they don't have any meetings so issues opened from external people or with no comments and or pull requests are from the few people that started the project so I think I even had some ideas where to start from if we want some integration but uh I at this moment I'm still not sure how we can interact well with the SMI community I think we might need to wait a bit yeah I mean my my general council would be probably patients I've worked with tons and tons and tons of communities including lots of communities and their initial stages and starting a community is way harder than it looks um and so usually when I see a community that's like the one you just described for SMI that's literally less than a month out of the gate and just seems to be having trouble setting up for interaction you just check back in a month they usually much better yeah even the the initial network service match meeting started off like that like it was me and Ed and a couple people hopping on as like man we need to get more people on here so yeah I think it's an important problem though so and the people driving it are pretty high they do have some pretty high-profile people on it so I think they will if they if they keep up with it I think they will build a community around it yeah I still have concerns it seems like SMI will be successful at least from politics point of view they are going to push for it but yeah I think it's good to wait a bit I'm continuing with your research I may start trying some things but let's see how things are going to develop in that direction I find that East York people are not very interested yet but it's still not sure maybe they will become interested in the near future yep and in one of the things I mean one of the nice things with all these layer 7 service meshes you're dovetailing with them is lovely but but do the wonders of layer separation and networking you can run the layer 7 service mesh on top of network service mesh and they don't have to know and so that that you know and we don't have to really know that much either there are a couple places we could probably do some helpful things but yeah so I mean I think it's excellent to continue reaching out but I'm perfectly fine with whatever success we get and getting to respond I even think that the SMI people even if Istio contributors are not interested I think that SMI contributors should make some integration or even try to to run together with Istio to integrate it on their own in order to to be able to provide the common API and not have it separated having all the small meshes and excluding Istio I think they're going to do that. The two areas I would recommend looking at for an SMI integration at this point and not even implementing but even just like speccing out and and thinking about it but the first one is enablement being able to to add a service mesh by policy and so we we already have an Envoy example which can be used as a starting place for that and that that Envoy were happened to be configured to work with a service mesh then that would get you an initial interaction. The second one as well is around enabling federated communication and federated workloads so think of like right now a huge problem that many groups are trying to solve is like how do you get cluster to cluster networking to to work and many of them are unfortunately going down the path of let's assign a one block of IP addresses to this to these this cluster and a second block of IP addresses to these clusters that way they don't and that way they don't collide and then we'll turn them into a into a giant network with east-west traffic between them and rather than go through that perhaps a question would be how do you connect workloads to workloads between between clusters using network service mesh which could include an Envoy or service mesh component to that so those would be the two areas that I that I would recommend investigating and I'm sure there's there's others as well that that you may be able to think of. I have heard from some sources that the federation is not really a topic for the SMI I mean they want to keep this separated I mean I don't have any confirmation to that but that's what I've heard so that actually brings an interesting topic because I don't know we don't have this really on the road map and our actually our road map seems to be focused on very specific I don't know domains or points that we want to tackle and play with but do we want to put on the road map maybe in the distant future but still kind of at least starting the discussion with I don't know fellow CNCF projects like Lincardy or maybe not that fellow CNCF projects like these two some kind of underlying integration and I don't know verification and maybe maybe mesheries I don't know they all seem to be connected to all these technologies so what do people think about this I think generally speaking collaborating across various projects whether in the CNCF or not I know Istio is currently not a CNCF project yeah is is probably goodness I know for example I've been talking a lot with the spiffy spire guys and I don't think the spiffy spire guys are used to use network service mesh but they look exactly the right tools for solving a lot of problems that we have you know so there's there's a lot of good stuff going on there yeah spiffy is really spiffy I think I think that that's actually a really good example because when part of part of what we're going to have we're going to have to solve is how do you know who you're connecting to is actually who they say they are and not just some intercepted or random thing and spiffy inspire give us a a pass to that but I mean if we take our multi cluster I don't remember where it is here maybe on the on the roadmap so like floating in their domains or in general inter domain if we have this feature and we like enable like traditional service measure let's say level seven application service mesh on top of network service mesh then essentially for them it would be pretty transparent that there is kind of this inter domain thing going on because exactly from Istio's point of view it's just the one domain right yeah because they're running up of a network service map as network service of some kind and the fact that it happens to touch dozens of clusters is completely invisible I mean do do we think that that this also really huge problem that they're trying to solve in like other ways I know that council is doing some some some pretty smart things regarding this but I'm not sure how how the other guys are doing yeah if you if you step out of the service mesh domain for a bit then you'll start to see some other types of activity so that's that's why I mentioned like like the joining of L2 or L3 domains is is I know I know of a couple efforts where people our groups are trying to to perform that using various types of of the VPN strategies and so on and I can tell you they've worked on those for well over well over a year and still haven't produced anything that that's usable at this point and when I talk with people in those areas they're frustrated and so that inter domain problem is definitely a big problem and it's definitely something that that when we get around to solving it we can we can get a lot of mileage out of out of the inter domain because we'll we'll effectively enable the the federated multi-cluster and not just federated multi-cluster but across other other devices and domains as well but we'll we'll solve it as part of that as part of that effort and so I'm expecting to see not not a huge amount of stuff but for but for people or companies who really need it like they'll they'll definitely be a lot of excitement around it I think that that we mentioned the last time that essentially one of the steps that we need to take into the relation of how to say maturing as a project and moving into from sandboxing to incubation is to really have some some okay is as production as possible deployments I mean even if someone deploys NSM in a CI that would still maybe considered as some kind of production type of thing for some people but I mean I'm looking at the the technology here and I'm trying to to see what we'll what is the shortest path to to kind of attracting people start you know deploying it and using it yeah no totally I I think the inter domain is the one that's going to be the big the big man you know because inter domain and floating inter domain because that allows people to break free of their cluster right and that's huge you know and and we've got lots of other people who are interested in other things like the SP guys are going to be interested in harmonics and SRV and they're going to be interested in SRV six etc but I think the broader enterprise world like floating inter domain will blow their minds so I would say even on the service provider space right like I host like hundreds and probably someday thousands of clusters and sometimes it's workloads that span these clusters so even in the MSP space inter domain is everybody wants to do hybrid cloud right like multi cloud like it doesn't matter if you're a two location pizza shop that uses AWS or like you just want all your crap to talk and do that so I think that's the big win and then on the left security nothing else matters if you don't have security because nobody wants the first person that's on the news their service mesh like just put everybody's information out on yeah I mean intermain isn't even he's even actually really doable and because it means not isolation and so you've got to be able to to deal with that and that's where I had that's where the conversations were going on with um that that's the wrong link sorry I put the wrong link there yeah back to the spec board you can find the inter domain that was my screw up um but you know that that's why I spent so much time talking to the spiffy inspire guys um about security um during NSM connection request closed as the security won't be others interdomain yeah but the that's why I spent so much time talking to the spiffy inspire guys because it turns out the heart the the good news is the really hard problem for us for security the spiffy spire guys are solving which is how to handle authenticatable identity and then the um from there we have a little bit of problem around provenance that turns out to be relatively easily solvable and it's in the security spec um and then um you know from there there will eventually be an authorization policy problem but I think we can shove that off on the open policy agent guys for authorization um because the people are going to have all kinds of opinions about who uh who's authorized for what but if you can secure identity which is what spiffy inspire does for us and you can get the information about provenance in other words who's been involved in getting this from me did you and me then you're in pretty good shape so and so if folks would please go look at the interdomain spec again even if you already have it's been updated a bit in response to comments um and also go have a look at the security spec the more eyeballs for security stuff is always better and the other thing I would have mentioned briefly is I know that there was a gateway spec that Matthew had opened and I need to actually go and put some comments because I think the recent update to the interdomain spec um actually will cover the gateway thing but I would want to make sure that Matthew actually can curse there because he often thinks very deep thoughts yeah I'll revise my comment about uh limited um versus big versus huge I think the use case itself is massive I think the number of people who are going to be willing to implement it is going to be limited which is good for us because that means we've been pretty much work with them once we demonstrate something working and we'll get and that should be that should be an easy driver for us to to grow the enterprise community quite significantly um cool is there um is there any other comments on the uh on the technology tree and that's a it's a pretty fun area yeah everyone likes the future even it's being distant right oh yeah actually one of the things that I really love about the technology tree is it reminds me of um of playing a video game and it's like you can choose where to where you spend your skill points and um which which tree do you want to get first and you know and it's the type of game you can get all of them but you have to but that early game you know and you're how fast you can level up depends on where you spend those skill points so it's almost like you tell you're telling me that that I can't have all the things all at once well you you can we just need to spend well I don't know maybe in our domains the exploit that puts your guild five months ahead of everybody else yeah okay we have 10 minutes left is there any any pressing topic that we want to go through one last thing so the community uh the uh so the patch was merged for the um for the code of conduct so as of as of today we are following the code of conduct and again if anyone runs into any issues you can find us and on the owners.md and we have our private emails listed there and you can also read the the actual document from the code of conduct to see where the to see where the mediator is if if you feel that you're not able to get resolution from from us as the maintainers so thank you all for for respecting not only the document but ourselves as well and with that are there any any other last comments before we build back a few minutes of our time okay with that we will see you we will see you all on either tomorrow for the documents call or next week at the same time actually that's that's probably a thing because next week me and you are going to be in china I hope some of the other people here maybe so I don't know it tomorrow this meeting cover waps with another meeting so maybe we are going to join for half only so I guess what you're saying is because next week you guys are going to literally be in the other side of the world um that that you may find this meeting time difficult is that what you're saying Nicolai uh yep no that seems perfectly fair I will definitely be here and if need be can pick up the gauntlet it should be 11 p.m. so I'm hoping to make it if if my internet connection and allows me to so great well with that um I think we've come to the end of our agenda and we will see you all at them at the same time next week enjoy the rest of your day cheers thanks bye bye thank you bye bye