Date   

Re: [TF TSC] LFN Committer Representative to the Board Election Results

Ian Rae <irae@...>
 

Bravo et merci Cédric!!!

Ian Rae  
CEO | PDG
c: 514.944.4008

CloudOps | Cloud Platform and Networking Solutions
www.cloudops.com | 423 Saint-Nicolas | Montreal | Canada


On Thu, Mar 19, 2020 at 8:35 PM Casey Cain <ccain@...> wrote:
Hello, everyone.

Please join me in congratulating Cédric Ollivier as the new LFN Committer Representative to the Board.  Cédric will be representing the committers and contributors to LFN projects at the LFN Governing Board.   

Thank you to everyone who participated in the Election!

Best,
Casey Cain
Technical Program Manager / Community Architect
Linux Foundation
_________________
IRC - CaseyLF
WeChat - okaru6


Re: call timing?

Edward Warnicke
 

Should be PT.

Ed

On Mar 18, 2020, at 10:54 AM, Joel Halpern via Lists.Fd.Io <joel.halpern=ericsson.com@...> wrote:

Which time zone is the TSC call anchored to?  Based on last week, I think it is US.  But my calendar thinks it is tied somewhere else.  I presume my calendar is confused?
 
Thanks,
Joel


call timing?

Joel Halpern
 

Which time zone is the TSC call anchored to?  Based on last week, I think it is US.  But my calendar thinks it is tied somewhere else.  I presume my calendar is confused?

 

Thanks,

Joel


LFN Developer & Testing Forum Report (January 2020) Now Available

Brandon Wick
 

LFN Communities:

The full event report from the LFN Developer & Testing Forum (January 2020) in Prague is now available on lfnetworking.org:


We encourage you to download the report and share it with your various project teams and channels. Please let me know directly if you have any questions or comments. Thanks!

Best, 

Brandon Wick
Senior Integrated Marketing Manager
The Linux Foundation
+1.917.282.0960


Re: New committer hicn/cicn projects

Ray Kinsella
 

Angelo Mantellini was approved at today’s TSC.

Congratulations Angelo.

 

https://jira.linuxfoundation.org/servicedesk/customer/portal/2/IT-19160

 

Ray K

 

From: tsc@... <tsc@...> On Behalf Of Luca Muscariello
Sent: Friday 28 February 2020 10:12
To: tsc@...
Cc: hicn-dev@...; cicn-dev@...
Subject: Re: [tsc] New committer hicn/cicn projects

 

Dear TSC members,

 

I wanted to fix my previous request for Angelo Mantellini to become a committer for hicn AND cicn project.

Since the committers in the hicn projects are also committers in the cicn project (but not viceversa)

I thought it was redundant to ask people to vote twice.

 

To avoid misunderstanding, I asked people to vote in the cicn list only.

 

 

The result of the poll is 100% to accept Angelo as committer in the CICN project.

 

With the PLT's hat on, I would ask the TSC members to accept

this proposal.

 

I take the opportunity to ask for an update of the status of Jim Gibson who's not active as committer since 

two years in CICN.

 

Thank you

Best 

Luca

 

 

 

On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:00 PM Luca Muscariello <muscariello@...> wrote:

Dear TSC members,

 

The team of committers has voted to elevate Angelo Mantellini

to project committers in hicn/cicn projects.

 

 

Polls are available here 

 

 

Angelo has done a lot of work to support hicn portability across

all client OSes such as macOS, Windows 10, iOS, Android, Ubuntu.

He also takes care of all software release and distribution

for all these platforms.

 

More on Angelo's contributions

 

 

 

 

With the PLT's hat on, I would ask the TSC members to accept

this proposal.

 

Thank you

Best

Luca

 


NOTICE: ONES North America POSTPONED

Heather Kirksey <hkirksey@...>
 

LFN Community Projects and Working Groups,

Each year, we look forward to gathering at Open Networking & Edge Summit to share information, collaborate, and learn together. Due to continual assessments and growing concerns around COVID-19, we have made the decision to postpone Open Networking & Edge Summit North America (originally planned to take place April 20 - 21, 2020) to this fall (August/September/October timeframe).  We expect that by mid-summer there will be more clarity on the effectiveness of control measures to enable safe travel to industry events like this one. We are finalizing the new dates and details, and will announce them as soon as possible.


We will notify attendees and sponsors later today. 


We will also be sending out speaker notifications to all those that submitted through the CFP. Those talks that are to be accepted will be used for the event later in the year, and we will plan to announce the schedule in the coming months once event dates are finalized and we start to plan for the new event dates.


As you know several communities (CNTT, ODL, ONAP, OPNFV, TF)  had also planned two day technical meetings co-located with ONES. We would like to explore the possibility of doing a virtual technical meeting, if there is community interest in doing so. In order to facilitate this conversation, we would like to invite members from the affected projects to an open discussion at the TAC meeting on March 11, 2020. 

 

We thank you for your patience and understanding while we work through this very fluid situation. A great deal of work and preparation has gone into the information and content planned to be delivered at ONES and we look forward to sharing it all with our community later this year. 


Thank you again for your support. Our sincere sympathies are with all those being affected and we wish for good health and safety for all.


Best,

Heather 

--
Heather Kirksey
VP, Ecosystem and Community
LF Networking
Mobile: +1.512.917.7938
Email/Google Talk: hkirksey@...
IRC: HKirksey


Re: Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions

Luca Muscariello
 

Ray

Unfortunately I have a conflict and cannot join today but I am interested to follow the discussion.
I do not know if someone will be taking notes.

My understanding of the current issue is that all GPL licensed pieces of code have to be replaced 
with a compatible license. Or convince all copyright holders to license FDio code with a double license Apache AND GPL.
I do not know what is harder. Probably the latter.

Is there any risk analysis being done on the current status?
IMO the current FDio distribution is violating the Apache license as interpreted by the Apache foundation but not the 
Free software foundation.


Luca





On Thu 5 Mar 2020 at 15:23, Kinsella, Ray <ray.kinsella@...> wrote:
Luca,

This is an excellent question and is something we missed - good catch and thanks.
Essentially do we have the right to relicense the affected code?

You are correct that has been problematic for other projects.
OpenSSL and VLC are notably examples of this at the extreme end.

Based on Charter Section 7 (https://old.fd.io/charter/)

1. Participants acknowledge that the copyright in all new contributions will be retained by the copyright holder as independent works of authorship and that no contributor or copyright holder will be required to assign copyrights to the Project.
2. Except as described in Section 7.c., all code contributions to the Project are subject to the following:
i. All new inbound code contributions to the Project must be made using the Apache License, Version 2.0 (available here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0) (the “Project License”).

So anyone contributing code to FD.io still retains the copyright.
And contributed code on the basis of the FD.io Apache 2 License.

We will need a followup discussion on this at today's TSC.
(can you join?)

Thanks,

Ray K

From: Luca Muscariello <muscariello@...>
Sent: Thursday 5 March 2020 13:01
To: Kinsella, Ray <ray.kinsella@...>
Cc: tsc@...; Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkonstan@...>; Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECH SRO at Cisco) <vrpolak@...>; Trishan de Lanerolle <tdelanerolle@...>
Subject: Re: [tsc] Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions

Hi Ray,

Can I ask a clarification question?
Only the copyright holder can modify a distribution license whereas it looks like the TSC is going to act 
as a copyright holder's proxy. Is this correct?

Thanks
Best
Luca



On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:51 PM Ray Kinsella <mailto:ray.kinsella@...> wrote:
Hi folks,
 
So we need to take a vote on the proposed Scapy licensing resolutions at today TSC.
 
That is we …
 
1. We approve of the mitigations listed in last Thursday’s presentation.
 
A. Explicit licensing of affected code as GPLv2 (CSIT, VPP & TRex)
B. Moving affected code to a GPL labelled directory (CSIT).
C. Preservation of project apache licensing through process separation (CSIT, VPP & TRex).
 
2. We approve these exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 Licensing for CSIT, VPP & TRex.
 
Proposed vote text:
 
Based on the mitigation described. The FD.io TSC approves exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 licensing permitting the use of Scapy by CSIT, VPP & TRex.
 
Any comments on the above are welcome.
 
Thanks,
 
Ray Kinsella
FD.io Project TSC Member


Re: Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions

Ray Kinsella
 

Luca,

This is an excellent question and is something we missed - good catch and thanks.
Essentially do we have the right to relicense the affected code?

You are correct that has been problematic for other projects.
OpenSSL and VLC are notably examples of this at the extreme end.

Based on Charter Section 7 (https://old.fd.io/charter/)

1. Participants acknowledge that the copyright in all new contributions will be retained by the copyright holder as independent works of authorship and that no contributor or copyright holder will be required to assign copyrights to the Project.
2. Except as described in Section 7.c., all code contributions to the Project are subject to the following:
i. All new inbound code contributions to the Project must be made using the Apache License, Version 2.0 (available here: https://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0) (the “Project License”).

So anyone contributing code to FD.io still retains the copyright.
And contributed code on the basis of the FD.io Apache 2 License.

We will need a followup discussion on this at today's TSC.
(can you join?)

Thanks,

Ray K

From: Luca Muscariello <@muscariello>
Sent: Thursday 5 March 2020 13:01
To: Kinsella, Ray <ray.kinsella@...>
Cc: tsc@...; Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkonstan@...>; Vratko Polak -X (vrpolak - PANTHEON TECH SRO at Cisco) <vrpolak@...>; Trishan de Lanerolle <tdelanerolle@...>
Subject: Re: [tsc] Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions

Hi Ray,

Can I ask a clarification question?
Only the copyright holder can modify a distribution license whereas it looks like the TSC is going to act 
as a copyright holder's proxy. Is this correct?

Thanks
Best
Luca



On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:51 PM Ray Kinsella <mailto:ray.kinsella@...> wrote:
Hi folks,
 
So we need to take a vote on the proposed Scapy licensing resolutions at today TSC.
 
That is we …
 
1. We approve of the mitigations listed in last Thursday’s presentation.
 
A. Explicit licensing of affected code as GPLv2 (CSIT, VPP & TRex)
B. Moving affected code to a GPL labelled directory (CSIT).
C. Preservation of project apache licensing through process separation (CSIT, VPP & TRex).
 
2. We approve these exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 Licensing for CSIT, VPP & TRex.
 
Proposed vote text:
 
Based on the mitigation described. The FD.io TSC approves exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 licensing permitting the use of Scapy by CSIT, VPP & TRex.
 
Any comments on the above are welcome.
 
Thanks,
 
Ray Kinsella
FD.io Project TSC Member


Re: Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions

Luca Muscariello
 

Hi Ray,

Can I ask a clarification question?
Only the copyright holder can modify a distribution license whereas it looks like the TSC is going to act 
as a copyright holder's proxy. Is this correct?

Thanks
Best
Luca



On Thu, Mar 5, 2020 at 1:51 PM Ray Kinsella <ray.kinsella@...> wrote:

Hi folks,

 

So we need to take a vote on the proposed Scapy licensing resolutions at today TSC.

 

That is we …

 

1. We approve of the mitigations listed in last Thursday’s presentation.

 

  1. Explicit licensing of affected code as GPLv2 (CSIT, VPP & TRex)
  2. Moving affected code to a GPL labelled directory (CSIT).
  3. Preservation of project apache licensing through process separation (CSIT, VPP & TRex).

 

2. We approve these exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 Licensing for CSIT, VPP & TRex.

 

Proposed vote text:

 

Based on the mitigation described. The FD.io TSC approves exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 licensing permitting the use of Scapy by CSIT, VPP & TRex.

 

Any comments on the above are welcome.

 

Thanks,

 

Ray Kinsella
FD.io Project TSC Member



Voting on the Scapy licensing resolutions

Ray Kinsella
 

Hi folks,

 

So we need to take a vote on the proposed Scapy licensing resolutions at today TSC.

 

That is we …

 

1. We approve of the mitigations listed in last Thursday’s presentation.

 

  1. Explicit licensing of affected code as GPLv2 (CSIT, VPP & TRex)
  2. Moving affected code to a GPL labelled directory (CSIT).
  3. Preservation of project apache licensing through process separation (CSIT, VPP & TRex).

 

2. We approve these exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 Licensing for CSIT, VPP & TRex.

 

Proposed vote text:

 

Based on the mitigation described. The FD.io TSC approves exceptions to the FD.io Project Apache2 licensing permitting the use of Scapy by CSIT, VPP & TRex.

 

Any comments on the above are welcome.

 

Thanks,

 

Ray Kinsella
FD.io Project TSC Member


Proxies for Thu Mar 5 FD.io TSC

Edward Warnicke
 

Ole Troan will be my proxy to the FD.io TSC on this Thu Mar 5.
Ray Kinsella has graciously agreed to chair the meeting.

Ed


APPROVED: add Matt Smith as a vpp committer, subject to TSC approval this Thursday

Dave Barach
 

With 100% of the votes counted: 11 votes +1, no other votes.

Dave


Re: Please add "approve Matt Smith as a vpp project committer" to the TSC meeting agenda

Edward Warnicke
 

On Mon, Mar 2, 2020 at 9:22 AM Dave Barach via Lists.Fd.Io <dbarach=cisco.com@...> wrote:

Dear Ed,

 

The formal vote closes Wednesday, however a supermajority of the committers have already voted +1, with no objections in sight.

Matt has contributed O(100) merged patches, and he recently contributed the entire vrrp plugin. See https://gerrit.fd.io/r/q/owner:mgsmith%2540netgate.com for details.

Thanks... Dave

 



Please add "approve Matt Smith as a vpp project committer" to the TSC meeting agenda

Dave Barach
 

Dear Ed,

 

The formal vote closes Wednesday, however a supermajority of the committers have already voted +1, with no objections in sight.

Matt has contributed O(100) merged patches, and he recently contributed the entire vrrp plugin. See https://gerrit.fd.io/r/q/owner:mgsmith%2540netgate.com for details.

Thanks... Dave

 


Re: New committer hicn/cicn projects

Edward Warnicke
 

I've added it to the agenda :)


On Fri, Feb 28, 2020 at 4:11 AM Luca Muscariello <muscariello@...> wrote:
Dear TSC members,

I wanted to fix my previous request for Angelo Mantellini to become a committer for hicn AND cicn project.
Since the committers in the hicn projects are also committers in the cicn project (but not viceversa)
I thought it was redundant to ask people to vote twice.

To avoid misunderstanding, I asked people to vote in the cicn list only.


The result of the poll is 100% to accept Angelo as committer in the CICN project.

With the PLT's hat on, I would ask the TSC members to accept
this proposal.

I take the opportunity to ask for an update of the status of Jim Gibson who's not active as committer since 
two years in CICN.

Thank you
Best 
Luca



On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:00 PM Luca Muscariello <muscariello@...> wrote:
Dear TSC members,

The team of committers has voted to elevate Angelo Mantellini
to project committers in hicn/cicn projects.


Polls are available here 


Angelo has done a lot of work to support hicn portability across
all client OSes such as macOS, Windows 10, iOS, Android, Ubuntu.
He also takes care of all software release and distribution
for all these platforms.

More on Angelo's contributions




With the PLT's hat on, I would ask the TSC members to accept
this proposal.

Thank you
Best
Luca



Re: New committer hicn/cicn projects

Luca Muscariello
 

Dear TSC members,

I wanted to fix my previous request for Angelo Mantellini to become a committer for hicn AND cicn project.
Since the committers in the hicn projects are also committers in the cicn project (but not viceversa)
I thought it was redundant to ask people to vote twice.

To avoid misunderstanding, I asked people to vote in the cicn list only.


The result of the poll is 100% to accept Angelo as committer in the CICN project.

With the PLT's hat on, I would ask the TSC members to accept
this proposal.

I take the opportunity to ask for an update of the status of Jim Gibson who's not active as committer since 
two years in CICN.

Thank you
Best 
Luca



On Thu, Jan 30, 2020 at 2:00 PM Luca Muscariello <muscariello@...> wrote:
Dear TSC members,

The team of committers has voted to elevate Angelo Mantellini
to project committers in hicn/cicn projects.


Polls are available here 


Angelo has done a lot of work to support hicn portability across
all client OSes such as macOS, Windows 10, iOS, Android, Ubuntu.
He also takes care of all software release and distribution
for all these platforms.

More on Angelo's contributions




With the PLT's hat on, I would ask the TSC members to accept
this proposal.

Thank you
Best
Luca


Published: FD.io CSIT-2001 Release Report - CSIT-2001.09 update

Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan)
 

Update: CSIT-2001.09 maintenance report has been published:

    https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/

Changes from last week version include:

    Added VPP performance test data into Detailed Results per testbed types:
      - 2n-clx (Xeon Cascadelake): IPv4, IPv6, L2.
      - 2n-dnv (Atom Denverton): IPsec, IPv4 tunnels.
      - 3n-hsw (Xeon Haswell): IPv4, L2, vhost.

    Added VPP performance tests selected for analysis and graphs per testbed types:
      - 2n-clx (Xeon Cascadelake): all tests.
      - 3n-tsh (Arm Cortex-A72 Taishan): all tests.

    Added DPDK performance tests selected for analysis and graphs per testbed types:
      - 2n-clx (Xeon Cascadelake): all tests.


2n-skx and 3n-skx testbeds (Xeon Skylake) are still out of service due to the processor microcode issue.
For status see:


Welcome all comments, best by email to csit-dev@....

Cheers,
-Maciek


On 14 Feb 2020, at 14:02, Maciek Konstantynowicz (mkonstan) <mkonstan@...> wrote:

Hi All,

FD.io CSIT-2001 report has been published on FD.io docs site:

   https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/

Many thanks to All in CSIT, VPP and wider FD.io community who
contributed and worked hard to make CSIT-2001 happen!

Below three summaries:
- Intel Xeon 2n-skx, 3n-skx and 2n-clx Testbeds microcode issue.
- CSIT-2001 Release Summary, a high-level summary.
- Points of Note in CSIT-2001 Report, with specific links to report.

Welcome all comments, best by email to csit-dev@....

Cheers,
-Maciek

------------------------------------------------------------------------
NOTE: Intel Xeon 2n-skx, 3n-skx and 2n-clx Testbeds microcode issue.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
   VPP and DPDK performance test data is not included in this report
   version. This is due to the lower performance and behaviour
   inconsistency of these systems following the upgrade of processor
   microcode packages (skx ucode 0x2000064, clx ucode 0x500002c), done
   as part of updating Ubuntu 18.04 LTS kernel version. Tested VPP and
   DPDK applications (L3fwd) are affected. Skx and Clx test data will
   be added in subsequent maintenance report version(s) once the issue
   is resolved. See https://jira.fd.io/browse/CSIT-1675.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
CSIT-2001 Release Summary
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1. CSIT-2001 Report

  - html link: https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/
  - pdf link: https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/_static/archive/csit_rls2001.pdf

2. New Tests

  - NFV density tests with IPsec encryption between DUTs.

  - Full test coverage for VPP AVF driver for Fortville NICs.

  - VPP Hoststack TCP/IP tests with wrk, iperf3 with LDPreload tests
    without and with packet loss via VPP NSIM plugin), and QUIC/UDP/IP
    transport tests.

  - Mellanox ConnectX5-2p100GE NICs in 2n-clx testbeds using VPP native
    rdma driver.

  - Load Balancer tests.

3. Benchmarking

  - Fully onboarded new Intel Xeon Cascadelake Testbeds with x710,
    xxv710 and mcx556a-edat NIC cards.

  - Added new High Dynamic Range Histogram latency measurements.

4. Infrastructure

  - Full migration of CSIT from Python2.7 to Python3.6.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Points of Note in the CSIT-2001 Report
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Indexed specific links listed at the bottom.

1. VPP release notes
  a. Changes in CSIT-2001:     [1]
  b. Known issues:             [2]

2. VPP performance - 64B/IMIX throughput graphs (selected NIC models):
  a. Graphs explained:         [3]
  b. L2 Ethernet Switching:    [4]
  c. IPv4 Routing:             [5]
  d. IPv6 Routing:             [6]
  e. SRv6 Routing:             [7]
  f. IPv4 Tunnels:             [8]
  g. KVM VMs vhost-user:       [9]
  h. LXC/DRC Container Memif: [10]
  e. IPsec IPv4 Routing:      [11]
  f. Virtual Topology System: [12]

3. VPP performance - multi-core and latency graphs:
  a. Speedup Multi-Core:      [13]
  b. Latency:                 [14]

4. VPP performance comparisons
  a. VPP-20.01 vs. VPP-19.08:              [15]

5. VPP performance test details - all NICs:
  a. Detailed results 64B IMIX 1518B 9kB:  [16]
  b. Configuration:                        [17]

DPDK Testpmd and L3fwd performance sections follow similar structure.

6. DPDK applications:
 a. Release notes:                               [18]
 b. DPDK performance - 64B throughput graphs:    [19]
 c. DPDK performance - latency graphs:           [20]
 d. DPDK performance - DPDK-19.08 vs. DPDK-19.05: [21]

Functional tests, including VPP_Device (functional device tests),
VPP_VIRL and HoneyComb are all included in the report.

Specific links within the report:

[1] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/csit_release_notes.html#changes-in-csit-release
[2] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/csit_release_notes.html#known-issues
[3] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/index.html
[4] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/l2.html
[5] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/ip4.html
[6] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/ip6.html
[7] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/srv6.html
[8] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/ip4_tunnels.html
[9] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/vm_vhost.html
[10] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/container_memif.html
[11] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/ipsec.html
[12] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/vts.html
[13] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/throughput_speedup_multi_core/index.html
[14] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/packet_latency/index.html
[15] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/vpp_performance_tests/comparisons/current_vs_previous_release.html
[16] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/detailed_test_results/vpp_performance_results/index.html
[17] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/test_configuration/vpp_performance_configuration/index.html
[18] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/dpdk_performance_tests/csit_release_notes.html
[19] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/dpdk_performance_tests/packet_throughput_graphs/index.html
[20] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/dpdk_performance_tests/packet_latency/index.html
[21] https://docs.fd.io/csit/rls2001/report/dpdk_performance_tests/comparisons/current_vs_previous_release.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------



LFN mentorship proposals due tomorrow Feb 28th.

Trishan de Lanerolle
 

We’re excited to open the call for mentors and project proposals for the 2020 LF Networking Mentorship Program. This is the first year we're bringing all community intern/mentor projects, under an integrated program schedule. This is intended to provide a formal structure to connect mentors and student developers from around the globe, to contribute their enthusiasm, time, and experience toward building sustainable LFN communities.

  I am interested in mentoring but how do I get started? 

Why should you consider mentoring for LF Networking Mentorship Program?
  • You believe in the value of mentorship in helping new developers to navigate open source development, the culture, the tooling and infrastructure to be a productive member of the community.  
  • You are passionate about teaching and guiding student developers, many of whom may be first time open-source contributors, 
  • You are eager to bring in new perspectives, new ideas, and new talent into your community and projects.
  • You have a narrowly scoped mentorship project with clear learning objectives/outcomes and a mentee's work and potential contributions could add value to the project or community of which you're an active developer or maintainer.     

What are the elements the LFN Mentorship Program will implement to maximize mentor/mentee collaboration success?
  • Mentor and mentee onboarding will be conducted at the start of the Program
  • Mentor and mentee guide will be available as part of the Linux Foundation CommunityBridge Mentorship initiative
  • Project planning that includes deliverables, milestones, and tasks will be completed collaboratively between the mentors and mentees during the first two weeks of the program and posted on the wiki to increase transparency and accountability.
  • Mentee presentations will be required to sharpen both presentation skills and to cultivate the ability to provide constructive feedback and critique that’s the norm in the open source community for developing technologies collaboratively and openly.
  • Mentee evaluation will be conducted on a regular cadence tied to milestone deliverable schedules to help mentors and LFN staff formalize and respond to progress.
While mentors will be on a voluntary basis, the hired mentees will be eligible to receive a stipend. As an added bonus, each mentee who successfully completes the Program will be invited and financially sponsored by LF Networking to attend an event/conference and present their work to the broader community (specific event TBD but will be during Q3 or Q4 of this year or Q1 of the following year).

If you have any questions, please contact mentorship@...

We look forward to your submission of a mentorship project and thank you in advance for volunteering your time to contribute to the training of the new talent pool in the LF Networking communities.


--
Trishan R. de Lanerolle
Technical Program Manager & Community Architect 
Networking, Linux Foundation
voice: +1.203.699.6401
skype: tdelanerolle


Re: GPL/Scapy issue

Ed Warnicke (eaw) <eaw@...>
 

I’m happy to do so :)

Ed

On Feb 27, 2020, at 5:21 AM, Kinsella, Ray <ray.kinsella@...> wrote:

Hi folks,
 
Would it be possible to cover the GPL/Scapy up front on today’s call?
It has been pushed a number of times recently, and unfortunately today I need to drop early.
 
Would be good to close the issue, right?
 
Ray K


Re: [vpp-dev] RFC: FD.io Summit (Userspace), September, Bordeaux France

Honnappa Nagarahalli <Honnappa.Nagarahalli@...>
 

<snip>


Hi folks,

A 2020 FD.io event is something that has been discussed a number of times
recently at the FD.io TSC.
With the possibility of co-locating such an event with DPDK Userspace, in
Bordeaux, in September.

Clearly, we are incredibly eager to make sure that such an event would be a
success.
That FD.io users and contributors would attend, and get value out of the
event.
(it is a ton of work for those involved - we want people to benefit)

The likelihood is that this would be the only FD.io event of this kind in 2020.

So instead of speculating, it is better to ask a direct question to the
community and ask for honest feedback.
How does the community feel about such an event at DPDK Userspace:-

* Do they value co-locating with DPDK Userspace?
* Are they likely to attend?
IMO, this is valuable and would definitely be helpful to solve problems across the aisle
I would attend.


Thanks,

Ray K
FD.io TSC