Meeting minutes
Publication
Lagally: I've look into all the checks and warnings from the automatic checker
… it seems that we are not using the latest version
… we need input from kaz
… I hope to conclude the editorial changes for end of the week
PR
add service migration #186
Cristiano: update title, added two vertical use cases, add reference to WNIG
McCool: title might ok, it is just inconsistent
<Mizushima> https://
Cristiano: add a monitoring a bridge scenario
Lagally: what happens when handover fails
Cristiano: yeah good point, we laverage on the tool used for migration.
… the migration is a transaction
… either it succeed or it fails
McCool: I think it would be better to have names for those sections
Carlo: yes totally
… in the second use case there's an ECG device that monitor a worker
… that moves in a industrial plan
McCool: is there any distinct features of these two use cases
Carlo: pretty similar use cases
Cristiano: true but the first one is cloud-edge and the second one is edge to edge
McCool: got it
… they are indeed different, mostly because of the triggering conditions
Carlo: indeed in two there's a mobile component
McCool: there's also the issue of measuring the conditions
Carlo: true
… you may have different parameters to optimize
Lagally: depending on the event model you run in to potential troubles
Cristiano: we had some experiments with events but they were just prototypes
Lagally: in the profile spec there's an async action model
… when the action is pending you should block the migration
Cristiano: good point it depends about the situation you can do different techniques
Carlo: with our solution you can migrate the whole state
McCool: it is also something about requirements
… we are working on this in WNIG
… also security is something that should be taken into account
… you can put this as a Gap
Lagally: why don't we call this use case Thing Container migration ?
… you have defined an interface
… for handling migration
… do you think it is worth having those as a standar API?
Cristiano: yeah I would say it would help reducing the fragmentation
Lagally: do you think this can be model as a Thing
Cristiano: yes, we did like that
McCool: the Edge Worker implements something similar
… migration can be Application aware or transparent
… not sure if this is captured in the document
Cristiano: yeah we handling this
McCool: containers are not only way of doing this, we can use wasm too
Lagally: should we introduce managment things?
McCool: it might be too premature
Lagally: just a terminology
McCool: managment API is happing also in scripting API
Cristiano: +1
McCool: is that a thing or not really?
… does it have network interfaces?
Lagally: do we have a better title now?
McCool: I am ok for merging
… I just have minor comments
… I would use just migration
Lagally: between platforms
McCool: I would vote either for Migration or Thing Migration
Lagally: ok we can merge it
… is a good contribution
… it triggers new discussion points
McCool: I'm working a lot in this problem too
Cristiano: when and where will the TD for Edge Workers be published?
McCool: I don't have it yet, we are looking for requirements
… finger printing, packages, binaries
… alibaba is working there
… we are working on getting Microsoft, Google on board too
Lagally: it is really difficult to consistently migrate microservices
McCool: live migration is really challenging
… application migration is way easier
Lagally: ok going back to the PR I'm ok for merging
… merged
… aob ?
minutes
Cristiano: just a minor typo about Carlo's name
ACTION: Kaz, please fix Carlo's name in the call notes of last call and publish aftwewards. https://
Lagally: minutes approved
… aob?
[adjourned]