Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Project proposal: Istio Service Mesh #70

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Conversation

nilesh32
Copy link

@nilesh32 nilesh32 commented Nov 16, 2017

As requested during the November 7th, 2017 CNCF TOC meeting, we submit Istio for consideration to be included in a CNCF project.

Signed-off-by: Shriram Rajagopalan <shriram@us.ibm.com>
@nilesh32 nilesh32 changed the title Istio service mesh CNCF proposal Project proposal: Istio Service Mesh Nov 16, 2017
@nilesh32
Copy link
Author

Signed-off-by: Shriram Rajagopalan shriram@us.ibm.com
Signed-off-by: Nilesh Patel pateln@us.ibm.com

@debianmaster
Copy link

+1

@jessfraz
Copy link

jessfraz commented Dec 6, 2017

In my opinion projects should have adoption before being added. This project is so new. Why do you need to be in CNCF? Is it just for status? Foundations, imho, are not for marketing.

Copy link
Contributor

@sdake sdake left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Couple changes recommended including changing the incubation level to inception as per requirements set forth https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/graduation_criteria.adoc


* https://github.com/istio/istio[https://github.com/istio/istio] +
* https://github.com/istio/api[https://github.com/istio/api] +
* https://github.com/istio/proxy[https://github.com/istio/proxy] +
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

with the monorepo merge, these repos are no longer accurate.

* Yahoo!
* Apprenda
* Concur
* AT&T
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

not sure if it matters, however, the contributor list is much larger.

platform-independent way to connect, manage, and secure microservices. +

*Sponsor / Advisor from TOC*: Brian Grant +
*Preferred maturity level*: incubating +
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

The incubation stage requires three real deployments of suitable scope: Reference: https://github.com/cncf/toc/blob/master/process/graduation_criteria.adoc

Might consider the inception stage? I suspect after 1.0 is released, incubation will be a nobrainer.

@ddysher
Copy link
Contributor

ddysher commented Dec 14, 2017

Thanks for the write up. We've been evaluating istio in v0.2 release, there're two major concerns for us to use istio in production.

  • Control plane is single point of failure. While envoy is battle tested, failure of istio pods can cause problem to the mesh
  • Latency is a bit higher than expected, seems every request will be sent to control plane

This makes me wonder what is the scalability limit of istio? I believe v0.3 has improvement around performance and stability (like request is cached in mixer), but I didn't find a published documentation around this.

@monadic
Copy link
Contributor

monadic commented Dec 14, 2017

@jessfraz the primary reason projects have inception status (applicable for early stage) is to promote collaboration. As you imply this could generate marketing, but is that so bad that inception should be blocked?

@nilesh32 nilesh32 closed this Dec 15, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

6 participants