From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mail-qt0-f177.google.com (mail-qt0-f177.google.com [209.85.216.177]) by dpdk.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 085BB1023 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 17:30:33 +0100 (CET) Received: by mail-qt0-f177.google.com with SMTP id l7so25306575qtd.1 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:30:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=TNHOFRwM3gnBthdhKgFwL7s5o5LIRFlr6m3s1cGVmfw=; b=BgT4LY8Cyu+lCA8RLAhRibiv2LR2H7a8kzvJQPDaBhCwqjHMQKW4nA8uDHp9DEhL7m 7ZpcumCuCVna3hBmh/xhNlqvDfuY79DLkdXULAUwiyt1O/IUtV+zbNuRWUAU9YULGLnI a27BTtWtyQDq4VrBWK6vN59BsIQh0Q6XOaf5qNDxp2EwqgkKQR53RErteYBCRQh6h8TR Oo3jzl6mvppcAXPdRjkQJ5kx7eGzuz5cuf4AFdiEFLv/Vg0c/CV7UdQ5yieUfZ3fAX20 xdssABq2z5bxH6Sqxss3Dm+TT5kMuOOlOZ3ArSRJPOtNpuNXxophn+3bURxjltJvPZwx UsNQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=TNHOFRwM3gnBthdhKgFwL7s5o5LIRFlr6m3s1cGVmfw=; b=tc7ot6SZUUIISo7XifDEiW7DjYOz+wQZcQLbw9NQNDQG3KYz/pTIrDBGX3VP5bcmvc IMk6Bl5jiKbtfFKaYhVvwH8jSdAdTTa6p3n1VP6lmpen9YMSD+ZTmG58UXCs2xuXERXV DFMk5rSOKcu0mAP6VJ+bLIHH+WGmD34pFH0pWfviAMhGjLvcvy4ezkzZJl7ATbtCY+p/ UdndeLgwr6B9z99c7iAh0Xw2ScarFXk8ZYyr2Tm6ELNYc+Kt207ReRBUs41vr84uHTXO vMvZvlbz9jfYYYpjDuC+nDqt0HcKu1DC9b+STS0ZgGSZruz1sp1ofdZjA2WgS5hFfbC/ GPXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXKcoqX/OtCaNQ+HVJTvLRS8R+qdlQsDzKsiIPpOLPZ5+trhkgEUtTnIWb3MjhIt8rRO5Aimxj0US3G9Eg== X-Received: by 10.55.209.203 with SMTP id o72mr34561066qkl.281.1485361833239; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:30:33 -0800 (PST) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.200.53.225 with HTTP; Wed, 25 Jan 2017 08:30:32 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA722AFEEA@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> References: <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA722AFB94@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> <19609074-037C-410D-8C49-9D47C366F5D2@intel.com> <26FA93C7ED1EAA44AB77D62FBE1D27BA722AFEEA@IRSMSX108.ger.corp.intel.com> From: Ed Warnicke Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 09:30:32 -0700 Message-ID: To: "O'Driscoll, Tim" Cc: "Wiles, Keith" , "moving@dpdk.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a1149b0a46ef9000546edc0cd Subject: Re: [dpdk-moving] Minutes from "Moving DPDK to Linux Foundation" call, January 24th X-BeenThere: moving@dpdk.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: DPDK community structure changes List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2017 16:30:34 -0000 --001a1149b0a46ef9000546edc0cd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 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 wrote: > > From: Wiles, Keith > > > > Sent from my iPhone > > > > > On Jan 25, 2017, at 4:57 AM, O'Driscoll, Tim > > 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. > --001a1149b0a46ef9000546edc0cd Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Question... are you only pricing for *one* rack?=C2=A0 I a= sk, 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, Ke= ith
>
> 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 wa= s
> going cost a fair bit am I wrong here?

The membership rates we decide on will need to strike a balance betw= een raising budget and having a broad membership that's representative = of the breadth of DPDK contributions/usage. If we choose a high figure it w= ill 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 b= etween the two.

The next step we agreed was for Mike to identify who's interested in me= mbership (he's already posted on the moving list asking for contacts) a= nd begin to have individual discussions with them. Feedback on membership r= ates 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 men= tioned based on FD.io, but from the beginning of these discussions we'v= e 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 wi= ll help us to reach a conclusion on this.

--001a1149b0a46ef9000546edc0cd--