On Wed, Jul 01, 2020 at 06:17:14PM +0200, Matthieu Baerts wrote:
On 26/06/2020 02:40, Geliang Tang wrote:
> Hi Matt,
> There are several questions I didn't answer clearly in the last meeting.
> Here I try to write them down:
Thank you for the clarification!
> 1 My name pronunciation
> Geliang Tang sounds like Glenn Town.
Thank you, that's helpful!
> 2 My ideal meeting time
> Every hour from 11am to 6pm (my location time-zone) at every working day
> is fine to me to attend the meeting.
I just sent another email now that I am back to work. Did you see it?
I guess you subscribed to the ML but just in case:
The best would be to have a single meeting, once per week where everybody
can join. But it would always be difficult for people of some time zones...
I know it is very late and not in the working hours but do you think having
the meeting one hour sooner (11pm your time) would be OK for you? Maybe not
every week of course. Don't be afraid to say no!
11pm is fine to me. Hope it is not too early to other people.
> An alternative would be to organise other meetings with less people.
> But sadly, I don't see other possibilities. Feel free to share if any!
> > 3 What would you like to work on?
> > I'm interested in the BPF topic in the last meeting. But I don't have
> > any idea about this at the moment. Can you please give me more detail
> > about it and I'll spend some time to learn it.
> At the last meeting, we discussed about BPF because a new dev asked to work
> on this subject. He is for the moment looking at having the possibility to
> set in BPF some socket options per subflow.
> Maybe later, he might look at adding BPF_CGROUP_SOCKET to allow per-cgroup
> override of proto in the socket() call. More details in
> But still in BPF, it would be good to look at other stuffs like modifying
> the behaviour of the Path Manager or the Scheduler with BPF.
> Some works were done in a fork of the out-of-tree kernel, maybe it can help:
> Tessares | Belgium | Hybrid Access Solutions