DPDK community structure changes
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: "Xu, Qian Q" <qian.q.xu@intel.com>
To: George Zhao <George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com>,
	"O'Driscoll, Tim" <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>,
	Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com>
Cc: "Wiles, Keith" <keith.wiles@intel.com>,
	"moving@dpdk.org" <moving@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
Date: Thu, 26 Jan 2017 01:33:58 +0000
Message-ID: <82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E3B4FFE7D@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <EF69F56A52CA2F4482BEDEA83F4E08DB2EC22A3D@SJCEML703-CHM.china.huawei.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4329 bytes --]

George and all,
Do you have any preference on the 2 ways? Could you give some comments here?

From: moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of George Zhao
Sent: Thursday, January 26, 2017 1:29 AM
To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>; Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com>
Cc: Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com>; moving@dpdk.org
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th

I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like fd.io project,  CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the other is like OpenDaylight where member companies open their lab to share with community.

Do we decide which way for DPDK lab?


From: moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of O'Driscoll, Tim
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM
To: Ed Warnicke
Cc: Wiles, Keith; moving@dpdk.org<mailto:moving@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th

We haven’t yet agreed that we definitely need a lab, how big it needs to be, and how much it will cost. Our team in PRC have been working on a proposal, but with their New Year holidays that’s a couple of weeks away from being ready to share with the community.

The scope we’ve been discussing for the lab is quite small when compared to FD.io’s CSIT project. It would be a reference lab to provide independent performance data and to identify any performance regression. The ~$200k I quoted for a single rack is really the minimum starting point. If we agree we need more and have the budget to cover it, then we can expand beyond that.

Mike will explore interest in the lab as part of his discussions, and we’ll also have one of our PRC team present the proposal to the community when they return from their New Year holiday. After that, we’ll know more about the level of interest in the lab and the cost associated with it.


From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM
To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com<mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com>>
Cc: Wiles, Keith <keith.wiles@intel.com<mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com>>; moving@dpdk.org<mailto:moving@dpdk.org>
Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th

Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?  I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...


On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com<mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com>> wrote:
> From: Wiles, Keith
> Sent from my iPhone
> > On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com<mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com>>
> wrote:
> >
> >
> > Membership costs:
> > - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for
> Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting
> point for discussions.
> I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was
> going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?

The membership rates we decide on will need to strike a balance between raising budget and having a broad membership that's representative of the breadth of DPDK contributions/usage. If we choose a high figure it will limit the number of companies prepared to join. If we choose too low a number then we won't maximize our budget. We need to strike a balance between the two.

The next step we agreed was for Mike to identify who's interested in membership (he's already posted on the moving list asking for contacts) and begin to have individual discussions with them. Feedback on membership rates from these discussions will help us to make a final decision.

I think we need to be careful on lab costs. Some high figures have been mentioned based on FD.io, but from the beginning of these discussions we've agreed that we want a smaller scope and lower cost level for DPDK. Rough estimate for a full rack with a part time sys admin and a part time release engineer is ~$200k/year.

We also discussed yesterday whether lab costs should be fully accounted for in the Gold membership fee, or if they should be handled separately. Mike will also ask about interest in the lab as part of his discussions which will help us to reach a conclusion on this.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 10913 bytes --]

  parent reply	other threads:[~2017-01-26  1:34 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 15+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2017-01-25 11:57 O'Driscoll, Tim
2017-01-25 15:48 ` Wiles, Keith
2017-01-25 16:16   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2017-01-25 16:30     ` Ed Warnicke
2017-01-25 17:10       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2017-01-25 17:29         ` George Zhao
2017-01-25 17:39           ` Zhu, Heqing
2017-01-25 18:06             ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2017-01-25 18:15               ` Michael Dolan
2017-01-26  1:33           ` Xu, Qian Q [this message]
2017-01-31 11:12 ` [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board Thomas Monjalon
2017-01-31 11:55   ` Vincent Jardin
2017-01-31 13:16     ` Thomas Monjalon
2017-01-31 13:40   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
2017-02-06 12:53   ` [dpdk-moving] [dpdk-techboard] " Hemant Agrawal

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=82F45D86ADE5454A95A89742C8D1410E3B4FFE7D@shsmsx102.ccr.corp.intel.com \
    --to=qian.q.xu@intel.com \
    --cc=George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com \
    --cc=hagbard@gmail.com \
    --cc=keith.wiles@intel.com \
    --cc=moving@dpdk.org \
    --cc=tim.odriscoll@intel.com \


* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link

DPDK community structure changes

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror http://inbox.dpdk.org/moving/0 moving/git/0.git

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V2 moving moving/ http://inbox.dpdk.org/moving \
	public-inbox-index moving

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:

AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git