Hi Folks,

It seems we at Kong came to the same conclusion (Kong may be beneficial to 
ONAP) but I seem to have approached this problem from the wrong direction.

Being unfamiliar with ONAP at first I attended an ExtAPI meeting to pitch Kong 
as being a project that would be mutually beneficial to become utilized by ONAP 
( https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2019-12-18+%5BExtAPI%5D+Meeting+notes ) ( 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2019-12-18+%5BExtAPI%5D+Meeting+notes ). From 
there we presented at an ARC meeting ( 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2020-03-31+ONAP+Architecture+Meeting ) ( 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2020-03-31+ONAP+Architecture+Meeting )

I think if you have the bandwidth watching the ARC meeting recording would be 
beneficial. One thing that was touched on within that meeting is our Kuma mesh 
which is built on top of Envoy and integrates with Kong. I think it'd be great 
to have a meeting to see if we could collaborate on if adopting Kong would be 
of benefit.

Sincerely,

Colin Hutchinson

Kong

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#20889): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/20889
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26443378/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to