1. Cf-Dev
  2. Messages

Expanded

Topics Messages
   Date   
Re: Feature Narrative: Fine-granular & custom platform roles for Cloud Foundry

Peter Burkholder
 

This is really a promising step. cloud.gov uses "service accounts", https://cloud.gov/docs/services/cloud-gov-service-account/, which are implemented with: https://github.com/cloudfoundry-community/uaa-credentials-broker.  Usually these are used in CI/CD systems for deployments.

The service accounts are way too over-powered using the Developer role, so this is a great step to scoping deployer accounts to, well, deployments in a CD system. However, I think the Operator account is too restrictive for any real human operator, and too expansive for a CI deployer account.

I'd like to see Operator renamed to Deployer and have some further rights removed, like viewing other spaces or or other users and roles, perhaps.

Or if there's a real need for the Operator role, then maybe add yet another role for Deployers (but that seems to be getting into IAM-level scope creep).

--Peter


On Wed, Dec 2, 2020 at 11:27 AM Klevenz, Stephan <stephan.klevenz@...> wrote:

Hi CF,

 

Here is a feature narrative and it is called "Fine-granular & custom platform roles for Cloud Foundry".

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1isfsSWvF8xDU0G69k4MqB3o5c2vB0P3Vbi79W0yvqFQ/edit?usp=sharing

 

This proposal is the result of direct feedback we have received from many CF users. It addresses the problem that every space developer can delete a service. And there may be important data attached to this service. Oops.

Comments, feedback, suggestions, and questions very welcome and appreciated!

 

Regards,

Stephan

 

 



--
- 
Peter Burkholder |  cloud.gov compliance & security
please use cloud-gov-compliance@... for cloud.gov matters
Feature Narrative: Fine-granular & custom platform roles for Cloud Foundry

Klevenz, Stephan <stephan.klevenz@...>
 

Hi CF,

 

Here is a feature narrative and it is called "Fine-granular & custom platform roles for Cloud Foundry".

 

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1isfsSWvF8xDU0G69k4MqB3o5c2vB0P3Vbi79W0yvqFQ/edit?usp=sharing

 

This proposal is the result of direct feedback we have received from many CF users. It addresses the problem that every space developer can delete a service. And there may be important data attached to this service. Oops.

Comments, feedback, suggestions, and questions very welcome and appreciated!

 

Regards,

Stephan

 

 
CF Contributor Survey

Chris Clark
 

Dear Cloud Foundry community, 

If you could, please fill out this very short survey for the Cloud Foundry Foundation! This is an opportunity for you to speak your mind about the direction of Cloud Foundry, the job the CFF has been doing this year, and anything else that might be on your mind.

This is for everyone, not just CF committers, and it should just take 2-3 minutes.  
Oh, and a hearty congratulations on getting through 11 months of 2020. 

https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/ZGS7BNW 

--
Chris Clark
Technical Operations Manager
Cloud Foundry Foundation
Re-usable Concourse Tasks

Daniel Jones
 

Hi folks,

Slightly off-topic, but I know a lot of you use Concourse.

We've made a an open source repo of small, reusable, side-effect-free Concourse tasks: https://github.com/EngineerBetter/concourse-tasks

These are tested using a YAML-based spec and associated test runner called Ironbird. It has a few rough edges, but it allows folks to test simple tasks without needing to know Ginkgo, or break out a 'proper' programming language.

I got annoyed when I realised that EngineerBetter must have collectively written a 'tar the files' task about a bazillion times, often without tests because "it's just a tar task, how hard can it be?" When you're deploying critical infrastructure, that's not good enough, and I'm sure everyone on this mailing list knows how frustrating it is when a simple task fails at the end of a four-hour infrastructure pipeline.

Anyway, I thought you might find the above useful. Contributions are very welcome, and perhaps if we all contribute to the same repo, we can achieve economies of scale, make our pipelines a bit more robust, and avoid duplicated effort.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists
Re: CF Bi-Weekly Roundup

Chris Clark
 

Hi folks,

Reminder: there are a ton of great talks from CF Summit live now on YouTube.  

From the Last Few Weeks:

 

Notable Releases:

  • CF-deployment v15.0.0, with breaking changes

    • re-generation of NATS certificates

  • Stratos v4.3.0 - more here

    • Numerous improvements to features and UI

  • BOSH-bootloader, aka "bbl", v8.4.2


Dates To Remember (All times US Pacific):

  • CAB call - 8:00 AM on November 18

  • CF Extensions PMC meeting - 11:00 AM on November 23

  • CF for Kubernetes SIG meeting - 8:30 AM on November 24

  • Bi-Weekly CF App Runtime PMC meeting - 10:30 AM on November 24

  • Office Hours: Logging and Metrics - 11:00 AM on November 24

Check the community calendar for updates and meeting details!


Ecosystem and General News:


Community Updates:

  • Have a question for the staff at Cloud Foundry Foundation? Want to stay current with updates for the Foundation? Join the #cff-forum channel on the community Slack.

  • Looking for a job? Check out the jobs board and the #jobs channel in our community slack; folks are sharing the job openings in our community.  

(And if you are hiring, please do share the info in that channel.)
CFF Technical Governance Working Group - Call for participation

Chip Childers <cchilders@...>
 

Hello CF community!

Earlier in the year, the CFF's board of directors asked a small group of past and current technical community contributors to do an assessment of how our open source community was operating and to make recommendations for improvements to the governance process. That group has been meeting for a couple of months, and saw an opportunity to build a healthier and more dynamic open governance environment for the projects by rethinking the PMC Council / PMC / Project structure, and approaching governance closer to the Kubernetes, Istio and KNative community models.

The time has come to take the small group's initial ideas and open up the discussion to anyone in the community that cares to participate. You can find the work here: https://github.com/cloudfoundry/community

There are two ways that anyone can get involved in this effort:
  • The work is centered in GitHub, so feel free to review everything, comment on PRs and issues, propose your own PRs, open issues, etc... as the work continues to progress.
  • We welcome anyone with an interest in helping to evolve the CF community's project level decision making to join a weekly call on Friday's at 4PM GMT (11 AM US Eastern, 8 AM US Pacific). I have put the meeting on the CFF community calendar, and you can join us for the first call on Friday, December 4th!
We're looking forward to hearing from all of you or seeing you during the calls.

Thanks!

Chip Childers
Executive Director
Cloud Foundry Foundation

Re: Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Daniel Jones
 

Thanks for the clarifications! I think in my narrow perspective I forgot that y'all probably have a lot of other things to manage, so you really do get economies of scale from internal Kubernetes knowledge.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists


On Mon, 16 Nov 2020 at 07:58, Simon D Moser <smoser@...> wrote:
+1 to what Bernd wrote - this exactly echoes my thinking as well on the points made

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards

Simon Moser

Senior Technical Staff Member / IBM Master Inventor
Bluemix Application Platform Lead Architect
Dept. C727, IBM Research & Development Boeblingen

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Schoenaicher Str. 220
71032 Boeblingen
Phone: +49-7031-16-4304
Fax: +49-7031-16-4890
E-Mail: smoser@...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Gregor Pillen
Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294

*******

ITIL has led people to think in siloes ("go fix change management").
Project Management has led people to think in finite units of work instead of streams of product.
Both are fundamental dysfunctions of the framework model, not failures of execution.
⁃ Rob England



From:        "Krannich, Bernd" <bernd.krannich@...>
To:        "cf-dev@..." <cf-dev@...>
Date:        16/11/2020 08:15
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [cf-dev] Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases
Sent by:        cf-dev@...



Hi Daniel, Thank you very much for your additional questions....                                                                                                                                                                                      
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.

Hi Daniel,

 

Thank you very much for your additional questions. Let me try and answer some of them from my perspective (this is me talking, not necessarily the “official voice” of my employer):

 

> It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it?

 

We actually approach the topic from a different angle: We have much more to manage than „just“ CF – but many other services – and so the question for us is which common layers we establish as basis for our offering. One decision SAP has taken (and I hear that VMware, IBM, and Suse aren’t maybe that much different) is to use Kubernetes as one such layer. And taking that decision at our scale means a huge task in managing many clusters anyways. Our answer for this is Gardener (shameless advertisement for an SAP-initiated Open Source project: https://gardener.cloud/), but YMMV.

 

> Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

> […]

> I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existing users.

 

I believe I referred to this topic during our CF Summit panel discussion: I think there’s more than one group of end-users to consider:

  • People using CF today that are happy with it: I think they are in the “let me continue to `cf push` my apps” camp and I believe they require feature parity to the BOSH-managed world to continue doing what they do. I also think they don’t care about Kubernetes as an underlay similar to how they didn’t care about BOSH managing CF’s lifecycle before.
  • People that tried using CF but couldn’t build their scenarios. Some of these people have what I would call a “mixed workload”: Things that could run on CF and things that can’t. For them, the question is if they want a “hybrid” model where they `cf push` their stateless apps to one system and `kubectl apply` the other parts of their workload to a different system or if they – once they have taken on the more difficult part of learning Kubernetes anyways – also move over their stateless workloads to Kubernetes directly. For this group of people, I feel, a value prop of “just having the CF API next to kubectl” as an access point to their cluster is a good thing. That’s also part of the reason why I’m suggesting to remove as much of the CF control plane from the “workload cluster” in my document. It’s their cluster and probably they want to do non-CF stuff with it as well.
  • People that approach the topic coming from a Kubernetes background: Here, we keep seeing projects over projects essentially re-inventing PaaS (some of them with an added Git-Ops flavor on top). Things that are non-Kubernetes or things that can be deployed on Kubernetes but “feel” non-K8s-native will not get them engaged. Which is why a Cloud Foundry on Kubernetes will need to feel K8s-native to be successful with this – probably very big – group.
 

> The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads?

 

Not for us, because it would still leave us with both BOSH-based deployments as well as having to manage a huge fleet of K8s-clusters, so all of the work with none of the benefits.

 

Regards,

Bernd

 

From: cf-dev@... <cf-dev@...>
Date: Friday, 13. November 2020 at 10:26
To: Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system overall. <cf-dev@...>
Subject: Re: [cf-dev] Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Hey all!

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Bernd.

 

It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it? Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

 

The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads? This would be exactly the same as running Eirini on cf-for-VMs (which VMware published as an offering), except there'd be the option for one-Kubernetes-per-tenant.

 

As an aside, I do sincerely hope that the large CF vendors are intending to heavily market CF as the easy mode for Kubernetes. I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existingusers.

 

Regards,

Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO

+44 (0)79 8000 9153

@DanielJonesEB

EngineerBetterLtd- More than cloud platform specialists

 

 

On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 17:34, Wayne E. Seguin <wayneeseguin@...> wrote:

Bernd,

 

Fantastic! I'm looking forward to reading it over, thank you for putting your thoughts down!

Thanks,

 

  ~Wayne

 

Wayne E. Seguin

CTO, Stark & Wayne LLC

wayneeseguin@...

 

 

 

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:37 AM Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...> wrote:

Hello all,

 

With cf-for-k8s turning 1.0, I started putting my thoughts around “what’s next after what’s next for cf-for-k8s?” in writing.

 

I wanted to share the resulting document with the community to get feedback, additional perspectives and maybe even to inspire thinking around the topics I collected:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hk19MkUOGQmP_dkoCwkogRQqlBwGE0Bpgr2U96JhW3I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Bernd

 

Bernd Krannich

SAP Cloud Platform

SAP SE

Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany

 

E bernd.krannich@...

 

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum

 

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re: Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Simon D Moser
 

+1 to what Bernd wrote - this exactly echoes my thinking as well on the points made

Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards

Simon Moser

Senior Technical Staff Member / IBM Master Inventor
Bluemix Application Platform Lead Architect
Dept. C727, IBM Research & Development Boeblingen

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH
Schoenaicher Str. 220
71032 Boeblingen
Phone: +49-7031-16-4304
Fax: +49-7031-16-4890
E-Mail: smoser@...
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrats: Gregor Pillen
Geschäftsführung: Dirk Wittkopp
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen
Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, HRB 243294

*******

ITIL has led people to think in siloes ("go fix change management").
Project Management has led people to think in finite units of work instead of streams of product.
Both are fundamental dysfunctions of the framework model, not failures of execution.
⁃ Rob England



From:        "Krannich, Bernd" <bernd.krannich@...>
To:        "cf-dev@..." <cf-dev@...>
Date:        16/11/2020 08:15
Subject:        [EXTERNAL] Re: [cf-dev] Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases
Sent by:        cf-dev@...



Hi Daniel, Thank you very much for your additional questions....                                                                                                                                                                                      
This Message Is From an External Sender
This message came from outside your organization.

Hi Daniel,

 

Thank you very much for your additional questions. Let me try and answer some of them from my perspective (this is me talking, not necessarily the “official voice” of my employer):

 

> It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it?

 

We actually approach the topic from a different angle: We have much more to manage than „just“ CF – but many other services – and so the question for us is which common layers we establish as basis for our offering. One decision SAP has taken (and I hear that VMware, IBM, and Suse aren’t maybe that much different) is to use Kubernetes as one such layer. And taking that decision at our scale means a huge task in managing many clusters anyways. Our answer for this is Gardener (shameless advertisement for an SAP-initiated Open Source project: https://gardener.cloud/), but YMMV.

 

> Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

> […]

> I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existing users.

 

I believe I referred to this topic during our CF Summit panel discussion: I think there’s more than one group of end-users to consider:

  • People using CF today that are happy with it: I think they are in the “let me continue to `cf push` my apps” camp and I believe they require feature parity to the BOSH-managed world to continue doing what they do. I also think they don’t care about Kubernetes as an underlay similar to how they didn’t care about BOSH managing CF’s lifecycle before.
  • People that tried using CF but couldn’t build their scenarios. Some of these people have what I would call a “mixed workload”: Things that could run on CF and things that can’t. For them, the question is if they want a “hybrid” model where they `cf push` their stateless apps to one system and `kubectl apply` the other parts of their workload to a different system or if they – once they have taken on the more difficult part of learning Kubernetes anyways – also move over their stateless workloads to Kubernetes directly. For this group of people, I feel, a value prop of “just having the CF API next to kubectl” as an access point to their cluster is a good thing. That’s also part of the reason why I’m suggesting to remove as much of the CF control plane from the “workload cluster” in my document. It’s their cluster and probably they want to do non-CF stuff with it as well.
  • People that approach the topic coming from a Kubernetes background: Here, we keep seeing projects over projects essentially re-inventing PaaS (some of them with an added Git-Ops flavor on top). Things that are non-Kubernetes or things that can be deployed on Kubernetes but “feel” non-K8s-native will not get them engaged. Which is why a Cloud Foundry on Kubernetes will need to feel K8s-native to be successful with this – probably very big – group.
 

> The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads?

 

Not for us, because it would still leave us with both BOSH-based deployments as well as having to manage a huge fleet of K8s-clusters, so all of the work with none of the benefits.

 

Regards,

Bernd

 

From: cf-dev@... <cf-dev@...>
Date: Friday, 13. November 2020 at 10:26
To: Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system overall. <cf-dev@...>
Subject: Re: [cf-dev] Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Hey all!

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Bernd.

 

It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it? Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

 

The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads? This would be exactly the same as running Eirini on cf-for-VMs (which VMware published as an offering), except there'd be the option for one-Kubernetes-per-tenant.

 

As an aside, I do sincerely hope that the large CF vendors are intending to heavily market CF as the easy mode for Kubernetes. I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existingusers.

 

Regards,

Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO

+44 (0)79 8000 9153

@DanielJonesEB

EngineerBetterLtd- More than cloud platform specialists

 

 

On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 17:34, Wayne E. Seguin <wayneeseguin@...> wrote:

Bernd,

 

Fantastic! I'm looking forward to reading it over, thank you for putting your thoughts down!

Thanks,

 

  ~Wayne

 

Wayne E. Seguin

CTO, Stark & Wayne LLC

wayneeseguin@...

 

 

 

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:37 AM Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...> wrote:

Hello all,

 

With cf-for-k8s turning 1.0, I started putting my thoughts around “what’s next after what’s next for cf-for-k8s?” in writing.

 

I wanted to share the resulting document with the community to get feedback, additional perspectives and maybe even to inspire thinking around the topics I collected:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hk19MkUOGQmP_dkoCwkogRQqlBwGE0Bpgr2U96JhW3I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Bernd

 

Bernd Krannich

SAP Cloud Platform

SAP SE

Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany

 

E bernd.krannich@...

 

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum

 

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re: Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Krannich, Bernd
 

Hi Daniel,

 

Thank you very much for your additional questions. Let me try and answer some of them from my perspective (this is me talking, not necessarily the “official voice” of my employer):

 

> It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it?

 

We actually approach the topic from a different angle: We have much more to manage than „just“ CF – but many other services – and so the question for us is which common layers we establish as basis for our offering. One decision SAP has taken (and I hear that VMware, IBM, and Suse aren’t maybe that much different) is to use Kubernetes as one such layer. And taking that decision at our scale means a huge task in managing many clusters anyways. Our answer for this is Gardener (shameless advertisement for an SAP-initiated Open Source project: https://gardener.cloud/), but YMMV.

 

> Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

> […]

> I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existing users.

 

I believe I referred to this topic during our CF Summit panel discussion: I think there’s more than one group of end-users to consider:

  • People using CF today that are happy with it: I think they are in the “let me continue to `cf push` my apps” camp and I believe they require feature parity to the BOSH-managed world to continue doing what they do. I also think they don’t care about Kubernetes as an underlay similar to how they didn’t care about BOSH managing CF’s lifecycle before.
  • People that tried using CF but couldn’t build their scenarios. Some of these people have what I would call a “mixed workload”: Things that could run on CF and things that can’t. For them, the question is if they want a “hybrid” model where they `cf push` their stateless apps to one system and `kubectl apply` the other parts of their workload to a different system or if they – once they have taken on the more difficult part of learning Kubernetes anyways – also move over their stateless workloads to Kubernetes directly. For this group of people, I feel, a value prop of “just having the CF API next to kubectl” as an access point to their cluster is a good thing. That’s also part of the reason why I’m suggesting to remove as much of the CF control plane from the “workload cluster” in my document. It’s their cluster and probably they want to do non-CF stuff with it as well.
  • People that approach the topic coming from a Kubernetes background: Here, we keep seeing projects over projects essentially re-inventing PaaS (some of them with an added Git-Ops flavor on top). Things that are non-Kubernetes or things that can be deployed on Kubernetes but “feel” non-K8s-native will not get them engaged. Which is why a Cloud Foundry on Kubernetes will need to feel K8s-native to be successful with this – probably very big – group.

 

> The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads?

 

Not for us, because it would still leave us with both BOSH-based deployments as well as having to manage a huge fleet of K8s-clusters, so all of the work with none of the benefits.

 

Regards,

Bernd

 

From: cf-dev@... <cf-dev@...>
Date: Friday, 13. November 2020 at 10:26
To: Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system overall. <cf-dev@...>
Subject: Re: [cf-dev] Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Hey all!

 

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Bernd.

 

It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it? Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

 

The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads? This would be exactly the same as running Eirini on cf-for-VMs (which VMware published as an offering), except there'd be the option for one-Kubernetes-per-tenant.

 

As an aside, I do sincerely hope that the large CF vendors are intending to heavily market CF as the easy mode for Kubernetes. I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existing users.

 

Regards,

Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO

+44 (0)79 8000 9153

EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists

 

 

On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 17:34, Wayne E. Seguin <wayneeseguin@...> wrote:

Bernd,

 

Fantastic! I'm looking forward to reading it over, thank you for putting your thoughts down!


Thanks,

 

  ~Wayne

 

Wayne E. Seguin

CTO, Stark & Wayne LLC

 

 

 

On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:37 AM Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...> wrote:

Hello all,

 

With cf-for-k8s turning 1.0, I started putting my thoughts around “what’s next after what’s next for cf-for-k8s?” in writing.

 

I wanted to share the resulting document with the community to get feedback, additional perspectives and maybe even to inspire thinking around the topics I collected:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hk19MkUOGQmP_dkoCwkogRQqlBwGE0Bpgr2U96JhW3I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Bernd

 

Bernd Krannich

SAP Cloud Platform

SAP SE

Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany

 

E bernd.krannich@...

 

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum

 

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re: Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Daniel Jones
 

Hey all!

Thanks for sharing your thoughts, Bernd.

It sounds like there are a lot of overheads for SAP in adopting cf-for-k8s. More operational complexity managing many clusters, and then the effort of migrating from cf-for-VMs to the new world. Is this all worth it? Are end-users clamouring to be able to deploy things to Kubernetes alongside their CF apps?

The notion of specifying different target runtime environments per isolation segment is intriguing. If this were possible, would it be simpler to stick with cf-for-VMs, and have a Kubernetes cluster for each tenant that runs apps and user workloads? This would be exactly the same as running Eirini on cf-for-VMs (which VMware published as an offering), except there'd be the option for one-Kubernetes-per-tenant.

As an aside, I do sincerely hope that the large CF vendors are intending to heavily market CF as the easy mode for Kubernetes. I wonder if all the migration efforts required to adopt cf-for-k8s are worthwhile to existing users.

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists


On Thu, 12 Nov 2020 at 17:34, Wayne E. Seguin <wayneeseguin@...> wrote:
Bernd,

Fantastic! I'm looking forward to reading it over, thank you for putting your thoughts down!

Thanks,

  ~Wayne

Wayne E. Seguin
CTO, Stark & Wayne LLC



On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:37 AM Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...> wrote:

Hello all,

 

With cf-for-k8s turning 1.0, I started putting my thoughts around “what’s next after what’s next for cf-for-k8s?” in writing.

 

I wanted to share the resulting document with the community to get feedback, additional perspectives and maybe even to inspire thinking around the topics I collected:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hk19MkUOGQmP_dkoCwkogRQqlBwGE0Bpgr2U96JhW3I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Bernd

 

Bernd Krannich

SAP Cloud Platform

SAP SE

Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany

 

E bernd.krannich@...

 

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum

 

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Re: Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Wayne E. Seguin
 

Bernd,

Fantastic! I'm looking forward to reading it over, thank you for putting your thoughts down!

Thanks,

  ~Wayne

Wayne E. Seguin
CTO, Stark & Wayne LLC



On Thu, Nov 12, 2020 at 11:37 AM Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...> wrote:

Hello all,

 

With cf-for-k8s turning 1.0, I started putting my thoughts around “what’s next after what’s next for cf-for-k8s?” in writing.

 

I wanted to share the resulting document with the community to get feedback, additional perspectives and maybe even to inspire thinking around the topics I collected:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hk19MkUOGQmP_dkoCwkogRQqlBwGE0Bpgr2U96JhW3I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Bernd

 

Bernd Krannich

SAP Cloud Platform

SAP SE

Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany

 

E bernd.krannich@...

 

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum

 

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Thoughts on cf-for-k8s Use Cases

Krannich, Bernd
 

Hello all,

 

With cf-for-k8s turning 1.0, I started putting my thoughts around “what’s next after what’s next for cf-for-k8s?” in writing.

 

I wanted to share the resulting document with the community to get feedback, additional perspectives and maybe even to inspire thinking around the topics I collected:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Hk19MkUOGQmP_dkoCwkogRQqlBwGE0Bpgr2U96JhW3I/edit?usp=sharing

 

Thanks,

Bernd

 

Bernd Krannich

SAP Cloud Platform

SAP SE

Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany

 

E bernd.krannich@...

 

Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum

 

Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.

 

This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation.
Stratos 4.3.0

Richard Cox
 

Hi All,

It gives me great pleasure to announce the release of Stratos 4.3.0.

This release contains a small treasure trove of improvements and bug fixes.

Highlights include...
  • User selected list filters are now more obvious
  • Improved visual differences between helm charts from Artifact Hub and user added repositories
  • Improved helm chart repository filter
  • Values in password style input fields can now be made visible
  • Fixed an issue regarding upgrade when using Postgres
  • Improved how Stratos displays Helm install error messages
  • Improved loading behaviour of font based icons

We welcome your feedback, comments and bug reports. Please feel free to raise them in github (https://github.com/cloudfoundry/stratos) or reach out directly to us in slack (#stratos)

Regards,

Richard Cox
on behalf of the Stratos team
[Feedback] CAPI V3 Services #services #cf

fmartini@...
 

Hi all,

We are now closer to having most of the SAPI functionality migrated into v3 and would like to make sure that there is no critical use case that we are missing.
We have appreciated all your previous feedback on our proposals and it would be great if you can find time to give us some feedback on what is implemented via this form: https://forms.gle/RYcsz2AdLDznrmMCA .

Ideally, we are looking for feedback in the next few weeks to allow us to prioritise any missed use cases.

Thanks,
Services Enablement 
can i ask you to how to upgrade cf-deployment?

il Kwon <il.kwon@...>
 

Hello

i'm wondering how to upgrade cf-deployment.

If i use cf-deployment v9.5 and want to use v12.5.0, how can i upgrade cf deployment version?

Do i have to v12.5.0 one copy more?

and backup the ccdb, uaadb, blobstore of v9.5 and recovery to v12.5.0?
(like dump old db and import to new db and backup all old blobstore and import to new blobstore)
 
If you have guide or i can have any information, can you tell me the guide?

Thanks in advance

--
Bionic is here!

dlemos@...
 

Hi,

The BOSH team is introducing a new Stemcell line based on Ubuntu 18.04 LTS (Bionic Beaver). The new Stemcell can be found on https://bosh.io/.

We will support Xenial Stemcells on bosh.io until April 2021, when Ubuntu 16.04 Xenial Xerus will reach end-of-life as per Canonical's official support lifecycle policy.

Bionic Stemcells are currently beta and we invite the community to share feedback on the #bosh-bionic Slack channel, raise issues on Github or engage with us using the community resources available.

Marco Völz & Diego Lemos
CF Bi-Weekly Roundup

Chris Clark
 

Hi all! Thank you for making CF EU Summit a success!

I missed seeing you all in person, and dearly hope that can happen again soon. In the meantime, I suppose we’ll have to be content with virtual perks like wearing sweat pants to meetings, perpetual access to coffee brewed to your liking, and live-streamed alpacas.

Videos from Summit are up on YouTube! Here’s the 32 video playlist from the event. There are a lot of great talks here, so when you’ve got some time, dig in. 

Notable Releases:

  • CF-for-K8s hit v1.0.0! Blog post here. Congratulations to everyone who has worked towards this milestone! 
  • Stratos v4.2.0, with new Helm and Kubernetes extensions! Blog post here. More here. 
  • KubeCF v2.6.1

From the Last Few Weeks:

  • Last week’s CAB call video is up here. Nice demo of Stark & Wayne’s very cool new cf-protect project.
  • Julz Friedman is stepping down as project lead for Eirini, and there is a call for nominations. IBM has nominated Julian Skupnjak for the lead. More here. 
  • Cloudfoundry.org got a nice facelift, with slick new pages for cf-for-k8s, KubeCF, and more.  
  • SUSE Cloud Application Platform announced v2.1 – blog post here.
  • Docker announced the Docker Open Source Program, which grants Cloud Foundry and other OSS projects exemptions from some new policy changes. More on that here.

Community Updates:

  • Have a question for the staff at Cloud Foundry Foundation? Want to stay current with updates for the Foundation? Join the #cff-forum channel on the community Slack.
  • Looking for a job? Don’t hesitate to check out the jobs board and the #jobs channel in our community slack; folks are sharing the job openings in our community.  

(And if you are hiring, please do share the info in that channel.)

Dates To Remember (All times US Pacific):

  • CF for Kubernetes SIG meeting – 8:30 AM on November 10
  • Bi-Weekly CF App Runtime PMC meeting – 10:30 AM on November 10
  • Cloud Foundry Membership-at-large meeting – 8:00 AM on November 11
  • AMA Monthly Call – 8:00 AM on November 17
  • CAB call – 8:00 AM on November 18
  • CF Extensions PMC meeting – 11:00 AM on November 23

Check the community calendar for updates and meeting details here: https://www.cloudfoundry.org/community-calendar/

Ecosystem and General News:


--
Chris Clark
Technical Operations Manager
Cloud Foundry Foundation
IMPORTANT NOTICE: [php-buildpack] End of Support for PHP versions 7.2.x after 2020-12-02

Kashyap Vedurmudi <kvedurmudi@...>
 

The first release of the PHP buildpack after December 2, 2020 will no longer include PHP versions 7.2.x. These PHP versions will no longer be supported upstream.[1] Please migrate your PHP apps to supported versions of PHP before that time.


Note: As 7.2.x is the current default version of PHP in the buildpack, the default PHP version will be updated to 7.4.x as a part of this removal. If you’d like to use a different PHP version, please configure your application to select that version[2].


As always, the buildpacks team is happy to answer questions you may have about this deprecation in the #buildpacks Slack channel.


[1] - https://www.php.net/supported-versions.php 

[2] - https://docs.cloudfoundry.org/buildpacks/php/gsg-php-config.html 


Thanks,

Kashyap Vedurmudi, Buildpacks PM
Upcoming DockerHub policy changes

Chris Clark
 

DockerHub has been planning a few policy changes they’ll be implementing Nov 1st, some of which might impact various Cloud Foundry projects:

  • Pull Rate Limits: announced here. These are based on the puller, not the repository, and if you are a member of a paid plan, you will not be subject to this.
  • Image Retention Limits: *HAS BEEN POSTPONED TO MID 2021*
  • Some legacy plans are to be deprecated soon, including the one we are currently on. DockerHub is currently working on new open source plans though, and the CFF will move likely forward with that once they’ve been announced. In the meantime we should be unaffected by the changes listed above.

 

In short, if you need to be added to the cloudfoundry DockerHub org to avoid pull rate limiting, please email contributors@.... All other changes are not happening in the immediate future.

 

One last thing to mention: some projects have been using the new GitHub Container Registry, I believe with some success. 


--
Chris Clark
Technical Operations Manager
Cloud Foundry Foundation
Re: Farewell

Eric Malm
 

Dieu,

Thank you for everything you've done for the CFF community over the past 6+ years, and for how much you've championed engagement and inclusivity in the community. We'll miss your presence here immensely, but we're glad to know you're not going too far away. Please stay in touch with all of us!

Thanks again,
Eric


From: cf-dev@... <cf-dev@...> on behalf of Daniel Jones via lists.cloudfoundry.org <daniel.jones=engineerbetter.com@...>
Sent: Thursday, October 29, 2020 9:13 AM
To: Discussions about Cloud Foundry projects and the system overall. <cf-dev@...>
Subject: Re: [cf-dev] Farewell
 
Dieu,

Thanks for being awesome. You'll be missed, and I hope you enjoy what you do next. Stay in touch!

Regards,
Daniel 'Deejay' Jones - CEO
+44 (0)79 8000 9153
EngineerBetter Ltd - More than cloud platform specialists


On Wed, 28 Oct 2020 at 19:22, Troy Topnik <troy.topnik@...> wrote:
Thank you so much for everything you've done. 

We will definitely miss you.

TT
 
221 - 240 of 9441