You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Next »

Insert Meeting Recording

Insert Meeting Chat File

Attendees & Representation. Please add your name to the attendance table below.


Attendees

Name

Company


































LF Staff:  LJ Illuzzi

Agenda

  • With respect to marketplace and eBPF programs, might we consider L3AF badging for programs?
  • Holiday schedule:
    • Meetings on Dec. 8, 15
    • Dec. 22 and 29th to be canceled
    • Jan 5th: Developer and Testing Forum Prep.
  • General Topics (cover as needed)

    • Use Cases

    • Roadmap

    • Project structure

      • Governance

      • Technical Steering Committee

Minutes/Updates

Action Items

  • Schdule Dev & Testing Forum L3AF session (LJ/Daniel/Poorna)
  • Schedule call with Raga to fill out the PEN application. (LJ/Raga)

Future Agenda Items


***** Minutes from previous call *****

  • Abhi Patil: Where is the L3AF project at currently? (high level overview)
    • Orchestration across any eBPF platform in order to solve business problems
    • L3AFd which runs on any host.
    • Many eBPF programs - see wiki
    • Create marketplace/repo of eBPF programs
    • Simplify chaining of eBPF programs
    • extend eBPF programs to Kubernetes
  • Abhi P:
    • Targeting DDOS programs
    • Lead for DDOS initiative
      • Peraton Labs and Georgia tech working on their project
  • Karan: More details on the and use case yo move forward
  • General Topics (cover as needed)

    • Use Cases
    • eBPF program (soon to be open sourced)
      • export records in IBPF format
      • Enterprise number will be needed for this
      • Dave T: eBPF programs that will be put into marketplace

        • L3AF could include signed programs
        • samples
        • Include other programs that are not signed by L3AF
      • Is L3AF a framework for marketplace?
      • Vicky B: Peel off marketplace from L3AF?
        • Handled by different team that works with L3AF so it can support different project such as Polycube 
      • Dave T: Is the PEN for L3AF
      • Karan: L3AF team is contributing programs and that is what the PEN is for.
    • Jason: Agree with Dave, be careful with diluting L3AF
      • Wallmart added programs should not be natively part of L3AF itself, but rather the Wallmart contribution to L3AF
    • Dave T: Could you use a Wallmart PEN and contribute that to L3AF?
    • Karan: Once the eBPF program is OSSed then we should use the Wallmart PEN and it should be under the LF after OSSing
      • What kind of signing are we looking for?
        • Verification that the eBPF programs are compatible with the L3AF platform
          • For instance chaining.
          • Need deeper dive.
    • Dave T: Whose PEN do you use. Whoever the signer is going to be?
      • Karan: For now we don't have a clear bifurcation. It's just one L3AF.
        • We should consider how to do this.
      • Louis: IPfix program, is this a one time sign off or every time it is used?
        • Dave T: Whenever there is a change to the program it must be resigned. Not a one time thing.
        • PEN is a one time number. The signature changes with updates and revs.
      • Karan: If someone wants to use IPfix and change the PEN they can do this. Not tying anyone to the existing PEN.
      • Dave T: Then it would be a different program. Stars and other marketplace artifacet would be invalidated.
      • Christopher L: Maintainer of the code should sign the code. The org that controls the commit bit.
      • Raga P: planning to use PEN on IPfix to define custom fields. If there is no PEN then it would be an unknown field.
      • Karan: Anyone could pass a PEN into these fields and change things. If you don't change things then you get the predefined custom fields.
        • Term L3AF has been overloaded. L3AF team, platform, project, marketplace
      • Dave T: L3AF is the foundation. The more we put programs into it the more it becomes the L3A instead of L3AF.
      • Karan: If L3AF is the platform (L3AFd) how do we want to structure the remaining components?
        • Keep L3AF marketplace as a separate project? Should we drop the L3AF branding on it?
      • Vicky: Makes sense to have the marketplace be a separate thing with separate branding that is closely tied into L3AF.
        • L3AF becomes the initial consumer of this, but we plan for other consumers.
      • Louis: Consider breaking off separate projects under L3AF to ensure that the output of these is compatible with L3AF.
        • Common in OSS world for Project Tech Leads to spin off other projects in this manner.
      • Vicky: Makes a lot of sense to have things under L3AF initially. Perhaps move them later (eBPF Foundation).
      • Jason: Small set of programs provided by L3AF itself and make sure they are compatible to help get things started in the begining.
      • Vicky: This will help to get L3AF off the ground with a small set of programs that are useful and work.
      • Jason: Yeah, these could be examples and building blocks that others can use.
      • Karan: Definitely a good thing.
      • Dave T: 3 catergories of stuff: core daemon, marketplace, programs
        • Which one should be in different projects?
        • Are they all under the L3AF?
        • Where do the programs go?
        • Is the marketplace part of the L3AF repo?
        • Multiple marketplaces (Google, Apple, etc.). Is the marketplace part of the foundation?
        • Does L3AF just contain samples? Leaning towards this one?
      • Vicky: If marketplace is separate this is incredibly valuable because orgs can run their own marketplace. Should be a separate project.
      • LJ: are any programs in the marketplace paid for items?
      • DaveT: Yes, Vicky: leave door open
      • LJ: Not sure it should be OSS?
      • DaveT: Marketplace is not the programs. Paid programs can be distributed by on open source marketplace.
      • Vicky: cannot confuse monitization strategy with the licensing strategy. For pay programs should not be excluded from an OSS project. It's the licensing.
      • Brian M: This is good. Will take all these thoughts and work them into paper. Available this month(?), when we reconvene.
      • Karan: Better to leave it open so that it is an attractive proposition for folks to contribute. We need to iterate on this a little more.
      • Vicky: Brian's paper will help us to create a parallel working group to address this.
      • Jason: Start them in the base and then move when available.
    • Housekeeping: Next meeting is the 15th. Dec 22 and 29th are cancelled, reconvene on January 5th for Dev and testing forum prep
  • No labels