Dong, thanks - good plan - keep it in the EBBR and, if it gets bulky, move it out... David
On Mon, 11 Jun 2018 at 16:47 Dong Wei <dong....@arm.com> wrote: > 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> > wrote: > > On Tue, 22 May 2018 at 11:52 Peter Robinson <pbrobin...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Tue, May 22, 2018 at 11:40 AM, David Rusling > <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. > -- David A Rusling CTO, Linaro https://linaro.org _______________________________________________ boot-architecture mailing list boot-architecture@lists.linaro.org https://lists.linaro.org/mailman/listinfo/boot-architecture
