DPDK community structure changes
 help / color / Atom feed
* [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
@ 2017-01-25 11:57 O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-25 15:48 ` Wiles, Keith
  2017-01-31 11:12 ` [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-01-25 11:57 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: moving

Here are my notes from yesterday's call. Please feel free to correct any errors or to add additional details.

Attendees: Bruce Richardson (Intel), Ed Warnicke (Cisco), Erez Scop (Mellanox), Francois-Frederic Ozog (Linaro), George Zhou (Huawei), Hemant Agrawal (NXP), Jan Blunck (Brocade), Jim St. Leger (Intel), John Bromhead (Cavium), John McNamara (Intel), Keith Wiles (Intel), Matt Spencer (ARM), Mike Dolan (Linux Foundation), Olga Shern (Mellanox), Stephen Hemminger (Microsoft), Tim O'Driscoll (Intel), Vincent Jardin (6WIND).

Firstly, here are some links to help keep track of things:
Project Charter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x43ycfW3arJNX-e6NQt3OVzAuNXtD7dppIhrY48FoGs
Draft budget estimate: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256
Summary of discussion at Userspace event in Dublin: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049259.html
Minutes of October 31st call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000031.html
Minutes of November 8th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000058.html
Minutes of November 15th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000061.html
Minutes of November 22nd call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000085.html
Minutes of November 29th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000099.html
Minutes of December 6th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-December/000121.html
Minutes of December 13th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-December/000124.html
Minutes of December 20th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-December/000127.html
Minutes of January 10th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2017-January/000136.html
Minutes of January 17th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2017-January/000157.html
Technical governance, including info on Maintainers and sub-trees: http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/index.html & http://dpdk.org/dev.

Discussed next steps for identifying project members:
- Mike Dolan has posted a request on the moving@dpdk.org mailing list for people interested in becoming project members to reply to him. He'll follow up individually with these people to discuss membership levels etc.

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.
- Vincent proposed a sliding scale for Silver based on the number of employees for companies and a reduced rate for universities. 
- Discussed how long the commitment should be on joining the project. Mike's guidance was that Gold usually involves a 2 year commitment but there's only a 1 year commitment for Silver. Agreed that this is a good approach.

Lab Costs:
- Discussed whether lab costs should be included in the Gold membership level or if they should be charged for separately. At the moment, the charter allows either option. Including lab costs in the Gold membership fee gives a simpler funding model but the downside is that it raises the cost for Gold membership so it restricts the number of Gold members that we'll be able to attract.
- Agreed that Mike will ask whether companies are interested in participating in a DPDK lab when talking to potential project members. This will help to decide on the right pricing approach for the lab.
- Whichever approach we take, we'll need to make sure that the lab budget is carefully managed because if we do establish a lab but then some contributors pull out it will be difficult to cover costs.
- From previous discussions with the LF (see http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000058.html) lab costs for a full rack would start at ~$200k/year.

Desired budget:
- There was a question on what budget level we're trying to reach. There are two ways to approach this issue: a) we agree a required budget and then adjust membership fees to match that; b) we set membership fees at a reasonable level and then prioritise how we spend the resulting budget. We discussed previously and agreed on option b), but we can discuss this again at next week's meeting. Mike may have some preliminary input from his membership discussions by then which may help to guide this.

Next Meeting:
Tuesday January 31st at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We can discuss any preliminary input that Mike has from his membership discussions, discuss the desired budget level, and hopefully get an update from the Tech Board on any changes they're planning to make.
Access numbers for the call are:
  Skype meeting: https://meet.intel.com/tim.odriscoll/97F0Q1HF
  France: +33 1588 77298
  UK: +44 179340 2663
  USA: +1 916 356 2663	
  Bridge Number: 5
  Conference ID: 120705852

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 11:57 [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th O'Driscoll, Tim
@ 2017-01-25 15:48 ` Wiles, Keith
  2017-01-25 16:16   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-31 11:12 ` [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board Thomas Monjalon
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Wiles, Keith @ 2017-01-25 15:48 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: O'Driscoll, Tim; +Cc: moving



Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com> wrote:
> 
> Here are my notes from yesterday's call. Please feel free to correct any errors or to add additional details.
> 
> Attendees: Bruce Richardson (Intel), Ed Warnicke (Cisco), Erez Scop (Mellanox), Francois-Frederic Ozog (Linaro), George Zhou (Huawei), Hemant Agrawal (NXP), Jan Blunck (Brocade), Jim St. Leger (Intel), John Bromhead (Cavium), John McNamara (Intel), Keith Wiles (Intel), Matt Spencer (ARM), Mike Dolan (Linux Foundation), Olga Shern (Mellanox), Stephen Hemminger (Microsoft), Tim O'Driscoll (Intel), Vincent Jardin (6WIND).
> 
> Firstly, here are some links to help keep track of things:
> Project Charter: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1x43ycfW3arJNX-e6NQt3OVzAuNXtD7dppIhrY48FoGs
> Draft budget estimate: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1-3686Xb_jf4FtxdX8Mus9UwIxUb2vI_ppmJV5GnXcLg/edit#gid=302618256
> Summary of discussion at Userspace event in Dublin: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/dev/2016-October/049259.html
> Minutes of October 31st call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000031.html
> Minutes of November 8th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000058.html
> Minutes of November 15th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000061.html
> Minutes of November 22nd call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000085.html
> Minutes of November 29th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000099.html
> Minutes of December 6th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-December/000121.html
> Minutes of December 13th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-December/000124.html
> Minutes of December 20th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-December/000127.html
> Minutes of January 10th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2017-January/000136.html
> Minutes of January 17th call: http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2017-January/000157.html
> Technical governance, including info on Maintainers and sub-trees: http://dpdk.org/doc/guides/contributing/index.html & http://dpdk.org/dev.
> 
> Discussed next steps for identifying project members:
> - Mike Dolan has posted a request on the moving@dpdk.org mailing list for people interested in becoming project members to reply to him. He'll follow up individually with these people to discuss membership levels etc.
> 
> 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?

> - Vincent proposed a sliding scale for Silver based on the number of employees for companies and a reduced rate for universities. 
> - Discussed how long the commitment should be on joining the project. Mike's guidance was that Gold usually involves a 2 year commitment but there's only a 1 year commitment for Silver. Agreed that this is a good approach.
> 
> Lab Costs:
> - Discussed whether lab costs should be included in the Gold membership level or if they should be charged for separately. At the moment, the charter allows either option. Including lab costs in the Gold membership fee gives a simpler funding model but the downside is that it raises the cost for Gold membership so it restricts the number of Gold members that we'll be able to attract.
> - Agreed that Mike will ask whether companies are interested in participating in a DPDK lab when talking to potential project members. This will help to decide on the right pricing approach for the lab.
> - Whichever approach we take, we'll need to make sure that the lab budget is carefully managed because if we do establish a lab but then some contributors pull out it will be difficult to cover costs.
> - From previous discussions with the LF (see http://dpdk.org/ml/archives/moving/2016-November/000058.html) lab costs for a full rack would start at ~$200k/year.
> 
> Desired budget:
> - There was a question on what budget level we're trying to reach. There are two ways to approach this issue: a) we agree a required budget and then adjust membership fees to match that; b) we set membership fees at a reasonable level and then prioritise how we spend the resulting budget. We discussed previously and agreed on option b), but we can discuss this again at next week's meeting. Mike may have some preliminary input from his membership discussions by then which may help to guide this.
> 
> Next Meeting:
> Tuesday January 31st at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We can discuss any preliminary input that Mike has from his membership discussions, discuss the desired budget level, and hopefully get an update from the Tech Board on any changes they're planning to make.
> Access numbers for the call are:
>  Skype meeting: https://meet.intel.com/tim.odriscoll/97F0Q1HF
>  France: +33 1588 77298
>  UK: +44 179340 2663
>  USA: +1 916 356 2663    
>  Bridge Number: 5
>  Conference ID: 120705852

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 15:48 ` Wiles, Keith
@ 2017-01-25 16:16   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-25 16:30     ` Ed Warnicke
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-01-25 16:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Wiles, Keith; +Cc: moving

> From: Wiles, Keith
> 
> Sent from my iPhone
> 
> > On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <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.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 16:16   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
@ 2017-01-25 16:30     ` Ed Warnicke
  2017-01-25 17:10       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Ed Warnicke @ 2017-01-25 16:30 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: O'Driscoll, Tim; +Cc: Wiles, Keith, moving

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1964 bytes --]

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

Ed

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <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>
> > 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: 2511 bytes --]

<div dir="ltr">Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?  I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<div><br></div><div>Ed</div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O&#39;Driscoll, Tim <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
<span class="">&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O&#39;Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
</span><span class="">&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
</span>The membership rates we decide on will need to strike a balance between raising budget and having a broad membership that&#39;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&#39;t maximize our budget. We need to strike a balance between the two.<br>
<br>
The next step we agreed was for Mike to identify who&#39;s interested in membership (he&#39;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.<br>
<br>
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&#39;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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
</blockquote></div><br></div>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 16:30     ` Ed Warnicke
@ 2017-01-25 17:10       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-25 17:29         ` George Zhao
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-01-25 17:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Ed Warnicke; +Cc: Wiles, Keith, moving

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3232 bytes --]

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.


Tim

From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM
To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.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

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

Ed

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: 7095 bytes --]

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
Tim<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_____replyseparator"></a><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard@gmail.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;tim.odriscoll@intel.com&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;keith.wiles@intel.com&gt;; moving@dpdk.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?&nbsp; I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ed<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<p class="MsoNormal">&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 17:10       ` O'Driscoll, Tim
@ 2017-01-25 17:29         ` George Zhao
  2017-01-25 17:39           ` Zhu, Heqing
  2017-01-26  1:33           ` Xu, Qian Q
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: George Zhao @ 2017-01-25 17:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: O'Driscoll, Tim, Ed Warnicke; +Cc: Wiles, Keith, moving

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3773 bytes --]

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?

George

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
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.


Tim

From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM
To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.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

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

Ed

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: 9402 bytes --]

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 12 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:SimSun;
	panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"\@SimSun";
	panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
	color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like fd.io project,&nbsp; CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the other is like OpenDaylight
 where member companies open their lab to share with community.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">Do we decide which way for DPDK lab?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">George<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;"> moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>O'Driscoll, Tim<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ed Warnicke<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith; moving@dpdk.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
Tim<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"></a><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_____replyseparator"></a><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,&quot;sans-serif&quot;"> Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard@gmail.com]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;tim.odriscoll@intel.com&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;keith.wiles@intel.com&gt;; moving@dpdk.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?&nbsp; I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ed<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 17:29         ` George Zhao
@ 2017-01-25 17:39           ` Zhu, Heqing
  2017-01-25 18:06             ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-26  1:33           ` Xu, Qian Q
  1 sibling, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Zhu, Heqing @ 2017-01-25 17:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: George Zhao, O'Driscoll, Tim, Ed Warnicke
  Cc: Wiles, Keith, moving, Zhu, Heqing

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4427 bytes --]

As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim said, we will make a proposal after CNY.

DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed.

From: moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of George Zhao
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 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?

George

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.


Tim

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...

Ed

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: 11711 bytes --]

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:宋体;
	panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Cambria;
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"\@宋体";
	panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0cm;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Cambria",serif;
	color:#993366;
	font-weight:normal;
	font-style:normal;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
	margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="ZH-CN" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366">As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim said, we will make a proposal after CNY.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366">DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></a></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_____replyseparator"></a><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>George Zhao<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;tim.odriscoll@intel.com&gt;; Ed Warnicke &lt;hagbard@gmail.com&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;keith.wiles@intel.com&gt;; moving@dpdk.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like fd.io project,&nbsp; CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the other is like
 OpenDaylight where member companies open their lab to share with community.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Do we decide which way for DPDK lab?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">George<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif"> moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>O'Driscoll, Tim<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ed Warnicke<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
Tim<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0cm 0cm 0cm">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span lang="EN-US" style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> Ed Warnicke [<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com">mailto:hagbard@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;;
<a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?&nbsp; I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">Ed<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0cm 0cm 0cm 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0cm;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US">&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span lang="EN-US"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 17:39           ` Zhu, Heqing
@ 2017-01-25 18:06             ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-25 18:15               ` Michael Dolan
  0 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-01-25 18:06 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Zhu, Heqing, George Zhao, Ed Warnicke; +Cc: Wiles, Keith, moving

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5832 bytes --]

Yes, agreed, more proposals and participation are always good.

In terms of the lab models that George asked about, we decided early in our discussions to implement a distributed CI solution. Thomas has done great work to integrate this with Patchwork, so you can see which CI tests each patch has passed/failed at: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/project/dpdk/list/ (see the Success/Warning/Fail (S/W/F) columns).

There was interest in creating a community lab to be hosted by the Linux Foundation for independent performance testing and for identifying performance regressions. It was felt that results from an independent lab would have more credibility than results from vendor labs. As Heqing said, we’ll have a proposal on this after the PRC New Year holiday. If we end up not having budget for this, or don’t agree that it’s required, then we can explore other options such as a distributed solution.

From: Zhu, Heqing
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:39 PM
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; Zhu, Heqing <heqing.zhu@intel.com>
Subject: RE: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th

As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim said, we will make a proposal after CNY.

DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed.

From: moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of George Zhao
Sent: Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 AM
To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com<mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com>>; Ed Warnicke <hagbard@gmail.com<mailto:hagbard@gmail.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

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?

George

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.


Tim

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...

Ed

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: 15114 bytes --]

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Cambria;
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Cambria",serif;
	color:#993366;
	font-weight:normal;
	font-style:normal;}
span.EmailStyle20
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Yes, agreed, more proposals and participation are always good.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">In terms of the lab models that George asked about, we decided early in our discussions to implement a distributed CI solution. Thomas has done great work to
 integrate this with Patchwork, so you can see which CI tests each patch has passed/failed at:
<a href="http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/project/dpdk/list/">http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/project/dpdk/list/</a> (see the Success/Warning/Fail (S/W/F) columns).<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">There was interest in creating a community lab to be hosted by the Linux Foundation for independent performance testing and for identifying performance regressions.
 It was felt that results from an independent lab would have more credibility than results from vendor labs. As Heqing said, we’ll have a proposal on this after the PRC New Year holiday. If we end up not having budget for this, or don’t agree that it’s required,
 then we can explore other options such as a distributed solution.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_____replyseparator"></a><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> Zhu, Heqing
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:39 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> George Zhao &lt;George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com&gt;; O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;tim.odriscoll@intel.com&gt;; Ed Warnicke &lt;hagbard@gmail.com&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;keith.wiles@intel.com&gt;; moving@dpdk.org; Zhu, Heqing &lt;heqing.zhu@intel.com&gt;<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim said, we will make a proposal after CNY.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed.
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"> moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>George Zhao<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;; Ed Warnicke &lt;<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com">hagbard@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;;
<a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like fd.io project,&nbsp; CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the
 other is like OpenDaylight where member companies open their lab to share with community.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">Do we decide which way for DPDK lab?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">George<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"> moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>O'Driscoll, Tim<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ed Warnicke<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><br>
<br>
Tim<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"> Ed Warnicke [<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com">mailto:hagbard@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;;
<a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?&nbsp; I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">Ed<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 18:06             ` O'Driscoll, Tim
@ 2017-01-25 18:15               ` Michael Dolan
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Michael Dolan @ 2017-01-25 18:15 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: O'Driscoll, Tim
  Cc: Zhu, Heqing, George Zhao, Ed Warnicke, Wiles, Keith, moving

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 6484 bytes --]

OPNFV also uses distributed labs and came to agreement in the community on
what those should look like.

https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/pharos/Pharos+Home

---
Mike Dolan
VP of Strategic Programs
The Linux Foundation
Office: +1.330.460.3250   Cell: +1.440.552.5322  Skype: michaelkdolan
mdolan@linuxfoundation.org
---

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:06 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
wrote:

> Yes, agreed, more proposals and participation are always good.
>
>
>
> In terms of the lab models that George asked about, we decided early in
> our discussions to implement a distributed CI solution. Thomas has done
> great work to integrate this with Patchwork, so you can see which CI tests
> each patch has passed/failed at: http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/
> project/dpdk/list/ (see the Success/Warning/Fail (S/W/F) columns).
>
>
>
> There was interest in creating a community lab to be hosted by the Linux
> Foundation for independent performance testing and for identifying
> performance regressions. It was felt that results from an independent lab
> would have more credibility than results from vendor labs. As Heqing said,
> we’ll have a proposal on this after the PRC New Year holiday. If we end up
> not having budget for this, or don’t agree that it’s required, then we can
> explore other options such as a distributed solution.
>
>
>
> *From:* Zhu, Heqing
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:39 PM
> *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; Zhu, Heqing <
> heqing.zhu@intel.com>
> *Subject:* RE: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux
> Foundation" call, January 24th
>
>
>
> As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim
> said, we will make a proposal after CNY.
>
>
>
> DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed.
>
>
>
> *From:* moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org <moving-bounces@dpdk.org>] *On
> Behalf Of *George Zhao
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 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?
>
>
>
> George
>
>
>
> *From:* moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org <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
> *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.
>
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
> *From:* Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard@gmail.com <hagbard@gmail.com>]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM
> *To:* O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.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
>
>
>
> Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?  I ask, because *one*
> rack can fill pretty quick...
>
>
>
> Ed
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim <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>
> > 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: 14115 bytes --]

<div dir="ltr">OPNFV also uses distributed labs and came to agreement in the community on what those should look like. <div><br></div><div><a href="https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/pharos/Pharos+Home">https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/pharos/Pharos+Home</a><br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br clear="all"><div><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr">







<p><font size="2">---<br>Mike Dolan<br>VP of Strategic Programs<br>The Linux Foundation<br>Office: +1.330.460.3250   Cell: +1.440.552.5322  Skype: michaelkdolan<br><a href="mailto:mdolan@linuxfoundation.org" target="_blank">mdolan@linuxfoundation.org</a><br>---</font></p></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 10:06 AM, O&#39;Driscoll, Tim <span dir="ltr">&lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">





<div lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="m_7349304858349545197WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Yes, agreed, more proposals and participation are always good.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">In terms of the lab models that George asked about, we decided early in our discussions to implement a distributed CI solution. Thomas has done great work to
 integrate this with Patchwork, so you can see which CI tests each patch has passed/failed at:
<a href="http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/project/dpdk/list/" target="_blank">http://dpdk.org/dev/patchwork/<wbr>project/dpdk/list/</a> (see the Success/Warning/Fail (S/W/F) columns).<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">There was interest in creating a community lab to be hosted by the Linux Foundation for independent performance testing and for identifying performance regressions.
 It was felt that results from an independent lab would have more credibility than results from vendor labs. As Heqing said, we’ll have a proposal on this after the PRC New Year holiday. If we end up not having budget for this, or don’t agree that it’s required,
 then we can explore other options such as a distributed solution.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="m_7349304858349545197__MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="m_7349304858349545197______replyseparator"></a><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> Zhu, Heqing
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 5:39 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> George Zhao &lt;<a href="mailto:George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com" target="_blank">George.Y.Zhao@huawei.com</a>&gt;; O&#39;Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;; Ed Warnicke &lt;<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com" target="_blank">hagbard@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com" target="_blank">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a>; Zhu, Heqing &lt;<a href="mailto:heqing.zhu@intel.com" target="_blank">heqing.zhu@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Subject:</b> RE: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div><div><div class="h5">
<p class="MsoNormal"><u></u> <u></u></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366">As matter of fact today, Intel helps the DPDK release validation. As Tim said, we will make a proposal after CNY.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366">DPDK is an open community, more proposals and participation are welcomed.
<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:10.5pt;font-family:&quot;Cambria&quot;,serif;color:#993366"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org" target="_blank">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.<wbr>org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>George Zhao<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> O&#39;Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;; Ed Warnicke &lt;<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com" target="_blank">hagbard@gmail.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com" target="_blank">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;;
<a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like <a href="http://fd.io" target="_blank">fd.io</a> project,  CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the
 other is like OpenDaylight where member companies open their lab to share with community.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">Do we decide which way for DPDK lab?<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">George<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #b5c4df 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif"> moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org" target="_blank">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.<wbr>org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>O&#39;Driscoll, Tim<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ed Warnicke<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">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.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">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.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d">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.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><br>
<br>
Tim<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1f497d"><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #e1e1e1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> Ed Warnicke [<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com" target="_blank">mailto:hagbard@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> O&#39;Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com" target="_blank">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;;
<a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org" target="_blank">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?  I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<span style="color:#1f497d"><u></u><u></u></span></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Ed<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O&#39;Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt; wrote:<u></u><u></u></span></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #cccccc 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O&#39;Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
The membership rates we decide on will need to strike a balance between raising budget and having a broad membership that&#39;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&#39;t maximize our budget. We need to strike a balance between the two.<br>
<br>
The next step we agreed was for Mike to identify who&#39;s interested in membership (he&#39;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.<br>
<br>
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&#39;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.<br>
<br>
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.<u></u><u></u></span></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span><u></u> <u></u></span></p>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></div>
</div>
</div>

</blockquote></div><br></div>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th
  2017-01-25 17:29         ` George Zhao
  2017-01-25 17:39           ` Zhu, Heqing
@ 2017-01-26  1:33           ` Xu, Qian Q
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Xu, Qian Q @ 2017-01-26  1:33 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: George Zhao, O'Driscoll, Tim, Ed Warnicke; +Cc: Wiles, Keith, moving

[-- 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?

George

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.


Tim

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...

Ed

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 --]

<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
	{font-family:SimSun;
	panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"Cambria Math";
	panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Calibri;
	panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
	{font-family:"\@SimSun";
	panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
	{font-family:Tahoma;
	panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
	{margin:0in;
	margin-bottom:.0001pt;
	font-size:12.0pt;
	font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:blue;
	text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
	{mso-style-priority:99;
	color:purple;
	text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle18
	{mso-style-type:personal;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
span.EmailStyle19
	{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
	font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
	color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
	{mso-style-type:export-only;
	font-size:10.0pt;}
@page WordSection1
	{size:8.5in 11.0in;
	margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
	{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">George and all,
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Do you have any preference on the 2 ways? Could you give some comments here?
<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_MailEndCompose"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></a></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> moving [mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>George Zhao<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Thursday, January 26, 2017 1:29 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;tim.odriscoll@intel.com&gt;; Ed Warnicke &lt;hagbard@gmail.com&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;keith.wiles@intel.com&gt;; moving@dpdk.org<br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">I know there are two ways normally community lab operate, one is like fd.io project,&nbsp; CSIT lab is managed by Linux Foundation, the other is like OpenDaylight
 where member companies open their lab to share with community.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">Do we decide which way for DPDK lab?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">George<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #B5C4DF 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:10.0pt;font-family:&quot;Tahoma&quot;,sans-serif"> moving [<a href="mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org">mailto:moving-bounces@dpdk.org</a>]
<b>On Behalf Of </b>O'Driscoll, Tim<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 9:10 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Ed Warnicke<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith; <a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D">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.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><br>
<br>
Tim<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif;color:#1F497D"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></span></p>
<div style="border:none;border-left:solid blue 1.5pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 4.0pt">
<div>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1 1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><a name="_____replyseparator"></a><b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif">From:</span></b><span style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:&quot;Calibri&quot;,sans-serif"> Ed Warnicke [<a href="mailto:hagbard@gmail.com">mailto:hagbard@gmail.com</a>]
<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, January 25, 2017 4:31 PM<br>
<b>To:</b> O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
<b>Cc:</b> Wiles, Keith &lt;<a href="mailto:keith.wiles@intel.com">keith.wiles@intel.com</a>&gt;;
<a href="mailto:moving@dpdk.org">moving@dpdk.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from &quot;Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation&quot; call, January 24th<o:p></o:p></span></p>
</div>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?&nbsp; I ask, because *one* rack can fill pretty quick...<span style="color:#1F497D"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Ed<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 9:16 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com" target="_blank">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt; wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC 1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in 6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-top:5.0pt;margin-right:0in;margin-bottom:5.0pt">
<p class="MsoNormal">&gt; From: Wiles, Keith<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Sent from my iPhone<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim &lt;<a href="mailto:tim.odriscoll@intel.com">tim.odriscoll@intel.com</a>&gt;<br>
&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt;<br>
&gt; &gt; Membership costs:<br>
&gt; &gt; - Discussed potential membership costs. My proposal was ~$50-100k for<br>
&gt; Gold, ~$5-$20k for Silver. Most agreed that this was a good starting<br>
&gt; point for discussions.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; I thought we were trending toward the higher $100k range as the lab was<br>
&gt; going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<br>
<br>
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.<o:p></o:p></p>
</blockquote>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>&nbsp;</o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</body>
</html>

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board
  2017-01-25 11:57 [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-01-25 15:48 ` Wiles, Keith
@ 2017-01-31 11:12 ` Thomas Monjalon
  2017-01-31 11:55   ` Vincent Jardin
                     ` (2 more replies)
  1 sibling, 3 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2017-01-31 11:12 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: O'Driscoll, Tim; +Cc: moving, techboard

2017-01-25 11:57, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> Next Meeting:
> Tuesday January 31st at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We can discuss any preliminary input that Mike has from his membership discussions, discuss the desired budget level, and hopefully get an update from the Tech Board on any changes they're planning to make.

I have provided some feedbacks from the Technical Board in the charter.
Please, could we discuss or approve them in the next meeting today?

We should also discuss about integrating the charter in the website.
I suggest creating a dedicated page dpdk.org/charter linked from
the "home" page and from the "about" page.

We also need to refresh the technical board description.
I suggest to move the section http://dpdk.org/dev#board to a dedicated page
dpdk.org/techboard linked from the "dev" page and from the "about" page.

Here is a first draft for the page dpdk.org/techboard:

-------------------------

More high level details are defined in the dpdk.org/charter.

Scope

The decision making process is primarily based on consensus.
However in rare cases, the Technical Board can make a decision
when consensus is not reached on the mailing list.
The scope of this body is limited to the questions directly related
to the development in the following repositories:
	- dpdk.git
	- dpdk-stable.git
	- dpdk-next-*.git
	- dpdk-ci.git
	- dpdk-web.git 

Members

The 9 current members of techboard@dpdk.org are:
	* Bruce Richardson
	* Hemant Agrawal
	* Jan Blunck
	* Jerin Jacob
	* Konstantin Ananyev
	* Olivier Matz
	* Stephen Hemminger
	* Thomas Monjalon
	* Yuanhan Liu

Renewal

Technical Board positions are held by individuals, not companies.
However, employees of a single company should not occupy more than 40% of board seats.
It can be decided to remove a member if there is an approval of 2/3 of the whole Technical Board.
It can be decided either to replace the member, or to redefine the size of the board.
There will be some renewal when it will be felt as needed.

Meetings

A short meeting happens on IRC every two weeks.
The quorum required for a meeting to proceed is a 70% majority of the Technical Board.
Any contributor can ask to add a topic in the agenda by sending an email
to techboard@dpdk.org.
The board members will add any topic of interest in the agenda.

Roles

The new project repositories must be approved by the Technical Board,
while applying the non-technical criteria defined by the Governing Board.
If a technical discussion lacks of explanation, details or evidence, it will
be asked on the mailing list.
If a patch does not receive any or enough comment, the board will help to make it
progressing on the mailing list.
If there is no consensus in a discussion, a decision can be taken by the
Technical Board and explained on the mailing list.
For a vote to be passed, a majority (> 50%) of the total Technical Board is required
(not just a majority of those in attendance at the meeting).
In the event of a deadlock the Technical Board Chair shall have the casting vote.

Feedback

Minutes are sent to dev@dpdk.org so anyone can comment.
However, the technical discussions should happen in the original thread.

-------------------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board
  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
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 15+ messages in thread
From: Vincent Jardin @ 2017-01-31 11:55 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: moving, techboard

Have you decided who from the techboard would attend to the Governing Board 
for the 1st year?

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board
  2017-01-31 11:55   ` Vincent Jardin
@ 2017-01-31 13:16     ` Thomas Monjalon
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Thomas Monjalon @ 2017-01-31 13:16 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Vincent Jardin; +Cc: moving, techboard

2017-01-31 12:55, Vincent Jardin:
> Have you decided who from the techboard would attend to the Governing Board 
> for the 1st year?

No it has not been discussed.
We don't even know when the Governing Board will be created.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board
  2017-01-31 11:12 ` [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board Thomas Monjalon
  2017-01-31 11:55   ` Vincent Jardin
@ 2017-01-31 13:40   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
  2017-02-06 12:53   ` [dpdk-moving] [dpdk-techboard] " Hemant Agrawal
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: O'Driscoll, Tim @ 2017-01-31 13:40 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon; +Cc: moving, techboard


> From: Thomas Monjalon [mailto:thomas.monjalon@6wind.com]
> 
> 2017-01-25 11:57, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> > Next Meeting:
> > Tuesday January 31st at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We can
> discuss any preliminary input that Mike has from his membership
> discussions, discuss the desired budget level, and hopefully get an
> update from the Tech Board on any changes they're planning to make.
> 
> I have provided some feedbacks from the Technical Board in the charter.
> Please, could we discuss or approve them in the next meeting today?

Yes, I think that's a good idea.

> We should also discuss about integrating the charter in the website.
> I suggest creating a dedicated page dpdk.org/charter linked from
> the "home" page and from the "about" page.

I think this makes sense too. It will help to make the charter more visible.

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

* Re: [dpdk-moving] [dpdk-techboard]  changes in the Technical Board
  2017-01-31 11:12 ` [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board Thomas Monjalon
  2017-01-31 11:55   ` Vincent Jardin
  2017-01-31 13:40   ` O'Driscoll, Tim
@ 2017-02-06 12:53   ` " Hemant Agrawal
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 15+ messages in thread
From: Hemant Agrawal @ 2017-02-06 12:53 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: Thomas Monjalon, O'Driscoll, Tim; +Cc: moving, techboard

HI Thomas,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: techboard [mailto:techboard-bounces@dpdk.org] On Behalf Of
> Thomas Monjalon
> Sent: Tuesday, January 31, 2017 4:43 PM
> To: O'Driscoll, Tim <tim.odriscoll@intel.com>
> Cc: moving@dpdk.org; techboard@dpdk.org
> Subject: Re: [dpdk-techboard] [dpdk-moving] changes in the Technical Board
> 
> 2017-01-25 11:57, O'Driscoll, Tim:
> > Next Meeting:
> > Tuesday January 31st at 3pm GMT, 4pm CET, 10am EST, 7am PST. We can
> discuss any preliminary input that Mike has from his membership
> discussions, discuss the desired budget level, and hopefully get an update
> from the Tech Board on any changes they're planning to make.
> 
> I have provided some feedbacks from the Technical Board in the charter.
> Please, could we discuss or approve them in the next meeting today?
> 
> We should also discuss about integrating the charter in the website.
> I suggest creating a dedicated page dpdk.org/charter linked from the "home"
> page and from the "about" page.
> 
> We also need to refresh the technical board description.
> I suggest to move the section http://dpdk.org/dev#board to a dedicated
> page dpdk.org/techboard linked from the "dev" page and from the "about"
> page.
> 
> Here is a first draft for the page dpdk.org/techboard:
> 

[Hemant]  I could not find details about the Technical Board Chair,  you may add some details about it as well e.g.

Technical Board Chair

How he will be elected? E.g. The Technical Board Chair will elected by the process of nomination/election within the technical board. 
Term ?  The term of technical board will be for 1 years. There are no restrictions,  the current Technical Board Chair can be re-elected for next term.
Governing Board Rep? He will be the representative of the Technical Board in Governing Board. He may choose to nominate another Technical Board Member to attend Governing Board meetings. 

> -------------------------
> 
> More high level details are defined in the dpdk.org/charter.
> 
> Scope
> 
> The decision making process is primarily based on consensus.
> However in rare cases, the Technical Board can make a decision when
> consensus is not reached on the mailing list.
> The scope of this body is limited to the questions directly related to the
> development in the following repositories:
> 	- dpdk.git
> 	- dpdk-stable.git
> 	- dpdk-next-*.git
> 	- dpdk-ci.git
> 	- dpdk-web.git
> 
> Members
> 
> The 9 current members of techboard@dpdk.org are:
> 	* Bruce Richardson
> 	* Hemant Agrawal
> 	* Jan Blunck
> 	* Jerin Jacob
> 	* Konstantin Ananyev
> 	* Olivier Matz
> 	* Stephen Hemminger
> 	* Thomas Monjalon
> 	* Yuanhan Liu
> 
> Renewal
> 
> Technical Board positions are held by individuals, not companies.
> However, employees of a single company should not occupy more than 40%
> of board seats.
> It can be decided to remove a member if there is an approval of 2/3 of the
> whole Technical Board.
> It can be decided either to replace the member, or to redefine the size of the
> board.
> There will be some renewal when it will be felt as needed.
> 
> Meetings
> 
> A short meeting happens on IRC every two weeks.
> The quorum required for a meeting to proceed is a 70% majority of the
> Technical Board.
> Any contributor can ask to add a topic in the agenda by sending an email to
> techboard@dpdk.org.
> The board members will add any topic of interest in the agenda.
> 
> Roles
> 
> The new project repositories must be approved by the Technical Board,
> while applying the non-technical criteria defined by the Governing Board.
> If a technical discussion lacks of explanation, details or evidence, it will be
> asked on the mailing list.
> If a patch does not receive any or enough comment, the board will help to
> make it progressing on the mailing list.
> If there is no consensus in a discussion, a decision can be taken by the
> Technical Board and explained on the mailing list.
> For a vote to be passed, a majority (> 50%) of the total Technical Board is
> required (not just a majority of those in attendance at the meeting).
> In the event of a deadlock the Technical Board Chair shall have the casting
> vote.
> 
> Feedback
> 
> Minutes are sent to dev@dpdk.org so anyone can comment.
> However, the technical discussions should happen in the original thread.
> 
> -------------------------

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 15+ messages in thread

end of thread, back to index

Thread overview: 15+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2017-01-25 11:57 [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th 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
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

DPDK community structure changes

Archives are clonable:
	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 \
		moving@dpdk.org
	public-inbox-index moving


Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.dpdk.org/inbox.dpdk.moving


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