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

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 5 Next »

Attendees

Eyal Lavee (Mellanox)

Joseph Gasparakis (Intel)

Paul Carver (AT&T)

Henry Fowler (AT&T)

Edward Ting (Lenovo)

Agenda

  • Release schedule for 5.1
  • Patches from Netronome
    •  If we have an interface in TF where a vendor can implement some functionality in form of a binary (which source code will not be distributed in any shape or form) that dynamically links in kernel space, would that be ok from legal perspective?
    • And if so, is there any restriction in the license that this binary (that will be loaded in Linux kernel space) will have?

    • Ultimately, it seems like whichever party is going to have an issue will have to do the legal research is this part Juniper and/or whoever distributes a commercial version of TF?

    • Any other concerns? Most concerns were discussed in last week's SmartNIC meeting on 2018-10-18
  • TSC/TC Elections: voting now for two members -vs- voting now for all TSC 
  • Tools for Release Notes - Ed Ting

Minutes

  • 5.1 release review
    • Dev complete is now November 15th
    • Release targeted for December 15th
  • Discussion of smartNIC offload, licensing and code changes
    • There might be some legal issues with whoever distributes the binary but it seems it doesn't affect TF community.  Can we get feedback from LF's legal expert on Friday's meeting?
    • About CI we need a 3rd party CI that will require each vendor's hardware (which is fine and expected) but there is some discussion on how this will integrate with the rest of the CI.
    • There are questions about documentation.  Frikke from Netronome said that they can provide it.
    • Joseph brought up the question of tainted kernel.  (Joseph can you clarify your concern here?)
    • Eyal raised the point that there is a tension between having the community work on a common interface, and enabling vendor-specific interfaces which may reduce the motivation for a common industry standard.  He added that it is understood that it will take time to develop the common interface, and that creates pressure for interim (vendor-specific) solutions.
    • Jan raised the point that this approach would be the first proposal for the full offload, and would enable OpenStack work to begin sooner.
  • Elections:
    • Joseph proposed that the entire TSC be voted on - not just the replacements.  A vote is needed on Joseph's proposal.
    • Paul pointed out that we do not have a list of who voters are.  We have rules in the by-laws, but have not applied the rules to create a list of people. 
    • The official by-laws are in a PDF, per Casey (no longer editable, of course).  It was agreed that this should be posted in a conspicuous location. 
  • No labels