EBBR is a separate document from SBBR, and it is open in the git repository. We have no plan for an EBSA. We may include some small hardware requirements in EBBR if needed, but at this time no plan for EBSA.
* DW From: arm.ebbr-discuss-boun...@arm.com <arm.ebbr-discuss-boun...@arm.com> On Behalf Of David Rusling Sent: Monday, June 11, 2018 4:53 AM To: Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com> Cc: boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org; arm.ebbr-discuss <arm.ebbr-disc...@arm.com> Subject: Re: [Arm.ebbr-discuss] EBBR - Fog, Edge and Device All, thanks. I'm pulling together a set of slides for the Linaro members meeting in July plus I'm looking to ensure that the sessions / meetings around this at YVR18 are correct. For EBBR, are you all planning equivalent documents to SBBR (that is, EBSA, etc or are you planning to broaden those documents to include embedded)? David On Tue, 22 May 2018 at 12:12 David Rusling <david.rusl...@linaro.org<mailto:david.rusl...@linaro.org>> wrote: On Tue, 22 May 2018 at 11:52 Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com<mailto:pbrobin...@gmail.com>> wrote: On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:40 AM, David Rusling <david.rusl...@linaro.org<mailto:david.rusl...@linaro.org>> wrote: > All, > I'm writing a blog on Linaro's reorganisation (sounds fascinating doesn't > it?). I'm more talking about directions than teams etc, it's not a list of > groups / SIGs etc. One area I'd like to highlight is the importance of EBBR > to LEDGE (aka Fog and Networking). Some thoughts / questions: > > [1] do others believe that EBBR is key to Fog / Edge? I'm less convinced > that Device land will see the push (their is a symbiotic link between > gateways and devices, with gateways being the 'point of security' for their > 'slave' devices). I think it's likely useful to fog/edge but not critical, it will depend a lot on the size of the device. In the arm space it'll be either EBBR or SBBR/SBSA, either way standardisation will be good. Well, people misuse the term 'gateway' wildly from tiny bridge devices to grown up things. It will be uneven, but the push will come. Weaker than the data center. > [2] EBBR et al is complex, so moving down the reference platform route makes > sense (to me at least). I know that reference platforms created a lot of > debate in Linaro in LEG, but I think that has settled down now, with > everyone understanding what they are and are not and where the value is. > > [3] I presume the best way to reference EBBR is via the git repository. Any > other information I should reference (email lists etc)? Yes, I would reference the githib pages [1], we should add things like details of the mailing list into the README/wiki there so there's one spot to reference for everything. [1] https://github.com/ARM-software/ebbr Yes, that's the hub for everything... David -- David A Rusling CTO, Linaro https://linaro.org -- David A Rusling CTO, Linaro https://linaro.org IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any medium. Thank you. _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture
