Mailing-List: contact dev-help@airflow.incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@airflow.incubator.apache.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CAFGbz6XNb3hvmpS+1qiwW84a1ZLmuWux1b-F2A7oqL5L5Z1JyQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAFJQMY5xHSu1PifDiYb4ZfbGYt8S0COMsZnBdwmXJS=D03ZnYw@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABYbY7dLf+NRLsYET3cdDKxt0Mha8SzbNXB710q_94m55D3zeQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <F1D26A2C-E299-4C40-92CD-6D0B4F0D993A@gmail.com> <CABekQG6iAS5iYyqQYGm7SKGsx_TWHoSZRJ4YPfxpauKQoVkCXg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHEEp7V+qVXy4+cD9wKY0jtayE-7dsiMUaTeGrQUGdRYf_xiYQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAFJQMY7bFxpbpD29vdA_nPzx-JBjRaSd4F8Qv8N+7OxehB5DxQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <08451A80-83C6-45D1-B742-BA6B2686FA49@gmail.com> <34D0E52E-6568-47A7-87E3-EA95BEB1FBB9@gmail.com>
 <CABYbY7dSA6fxK-QMv1A-4z=ozg2bnvX+Sn8MReTjL2Uwvz+d9g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKL5WoE3cuNXv34=upEVkExk0aXRREij4Ybbods9FXL_wJw=FA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAKMdtFc_63ueff9De-YvJnhhHsS8SB9zwECnDTizsCQqHoa62g@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHEEp7XmMFchpvG1Ku66poidUyF3A8r_3_nZ-K3OyyX5hwNekg@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABYbY7fZzgbeHFOXSf2BSKkzhJwnUscZ9EXYQdhNSk9+k=fFsw@mail.gmail.com>
 <3948E326-1900-4506-8BF4-911A8C22A2F9@gmail.com> <CAHEEp7U2nPgcoqTgdZC0My5KGeSHA3EuJKPaWWxZPM3vX7OEUA@mail.gmail.com>
 <CABYbY7dcOAS_LZp0GMB3C4XZWN7m_paZZPN8Fa8jRT+COq-qcQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAHEEp7W4batuEnNs97jnio6RFv1L5J+mwnAHVrqnZJ2hjkLdyw@mail.gmail.com> <CAFGbz6XNb3hvmpS+1qiwW84a1ZLmuWux1b-F2A7oqL5L5Z1JyQ@mail.gmail.com>
From: Dan Davydov <dan.davydov@airbnb.com.INVALID>
Date: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 13:43:55 -0700
Message-ID: <CABekQG7cxJcZ42q6kcQxFLWXkSc9h4NdtDbBg06xFuwomF-x=g@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Role Based Access Control for Airflow UI
To: dev@airflow.incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="001a114616fe419fa005552a66bb"
archived-at: Tue, 25 Jul 2017 20:44:56 -0000

--001a114616fe419fa005552a66bb
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Same as Alex, would be great to be able to remote in though I'm very
interested.

On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 1:37 PM, Alex Guziel <alex.guziel@airbnb.com.invali=
d
> wrote:

> Yeah, I could call in but I probably won't be able to come down that day.
>
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2017 at 1:36 PM, Maxime Beauchemin <
> maximebeauchemin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Works for me! Dan said he might confcall in. Alex?
> >
> > Max
> >
> > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:25 AM, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.or=
g
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Wednesday 8/2 is perfect. Want to do it like 3-5? I booked a room for
> 12
> > > people (and video conferencing) at WePay in this time slot. Should
> allow
> > > you to head home easily afterwards. :) That work for you guys?
> > >
> > > On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 11:01 AM, Maxime Beauchemin <
> > > maximebeauchemin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > The week of the 31st sound good. Wednesday?
> > > >
> > > > About React we may not need a frontend lib like it (or at least not
> > just
> > > > yet). We can talk about it at the meeting.
> > > >
> > > > Max
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 12:47 AM, Bolke de Bruin <bdbruin@gmail.com=
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > We avoid React for the same reasons as the ASF and use Polymer 2
> > > instead.
> > > > > Would that work?
> > > > >
> > > > > Bolke.
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 20 Jul 2017, at 19:35, Chris Riccomini <criccomini@apache.or=
g
> >
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey Max,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Want to come down to WePay? We can set up a zoom for those that
> > want
> > > to
> > > > > > join online, and record it as well to post for the community.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Since Joy is just getting started, and it looks like there's
> going
> > to
> > > > be
> > > > > a
> > > > > > K8s discussion next week, maybe we can shoot for the week after
> > (the
> > > > week
> > > > > > of the 31st of July)? Care to float a few times that week?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > > Chris
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:31 AM, Maxime Beauchemin <
> > > > > > maximebeauchemin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Sounds awesome, count me in!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> * check out the prototype in my fork, I went far enough to hit
> > some
> > > > > >> hurdles, try different workarounds. I hooked up the Airflow
> > > Bootstrap
> > > > > >> template too so that we feel at home in this new UI
> > > > > >> * using a single `id` field is a requirement for FAB that
> airflow
> > > > > doesn't
> > > > > >> respect (composite pks), either we add the feature to support
> that
> > > in
> > > > > FAB,
> > > > > >> or we align on the Airflow side and modify the models and add =
a
> > > > > migration
> > > > > >> script. This upgrade would require downtime and might be
> annoying
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > > >> Airflow community, but could help with db performance a bit
> > (smaller
> > > > > >> index)... I probably could be convinced either way but I'm
> leaning
> > > on
> > > > > >> improving FAB
> > > > > >> * I'm a maintainer for FAB so I can help get stuff through the=
re
> > > > > >> * React is in limbo at the ASF for licensing reasons, so no
> React
> > at
> > > > > least
> > > > > >> for now
> > > > > >> * npm/webpack/ES6, javascript only in `.js` files
> > > > > >> * I vote for eslint + eslint-config-airbnb as a set of linting
> > rules
> > > > > for JS
> > > > > >> * Keep out of apache (for now), this new app ships as its own
> pypi
> > > > > package
> > > > > >> `airflow-webserver`, have a period of overlap (maintaining 2 w=
eb
> > > apps)
> > > > > >> before ripping out `airflow/www` from the core package
> > > > > >> * You need to get in touch with Marty Kausas, an intern at
> Airbnb
> > > > who's
> > > > > >> been working on a Flask blueprint for improved, more
> personalized
> > > > views
> > > > > on
> > > > > >> DAGs that we were planning on merging into the main branch
> > > eventually.
> > > > > Some
> > > > > >> of Marty's idea and code could be merged into this effort.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> These are ideas on how I would proceed personally on this but
> > > > definitely
> > > > > >> everything here is up for discussion.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Let's meet physically at either WePay or Airbnb. Folks from th=
e
> > > > > community,
> > > > > >> let us know on this thread if you want to be part of this
> effort,
> > > > we'll
> > > > > be
> > > > > >> happy to include you.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Thanks,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Max
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 7:33 PM, Joy Gao <joyg@wepay.com>
> wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>> Hey everyone,
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> I recently transferred to Data Infra team here at WePay to
> focus
> > on
> > > > > >>> Airflow-related initiatives.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Given the RBAC design is mostly hashed out, I'm happy to get
> this
> > > > > feature
> > > > > >>> off the ground for Q3, starting with converting Airflow to Fa=
b,
> > if
> > > > > there
> > > > > >>> are no objections.
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Cheers,
> > > > > >>> Joy
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> On Thu, Jun 29, 2017 at 7:32 AM, Gurer Kiratli <
> > > > > >>> gurer.kiratli@airbnb.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>> Hey all,
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> We talked about this internally. We would like to work on th=
is
> > > > feature
> > > > > >>> but
> > > > > >>>> given the immediate priorities we are not going to be workin=
g
> on
> > > it
> > > > in
> > > > > >>> Q3.
> > > > > >>>> Comes end of Q3 we will reevaluate. Likely scenario is we ca=
n
> > work
> > > > on
> > > > > >> it
> > > > > >>>> late Q4 or Q12018.
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Cheers,
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> Gurer
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>> On Tue, Jun 27, 2017 at 8:08 AM, Chris Riccomini <
> > > > > >> criccomini@apache.org>
> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>>> I think FAB sounds like the right approach. Waiting to hear
> > back
> > > > with
> > > > > >>>> notes
> > > > > >>>>> on AirBNB H2 discussion to see if they want to take this up=
.
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> @Gurer, any idea when this will happen?
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>> On Thu, Jun 22, 2017 at 1:00 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
> > > bdbruin@gmail.com
> > > > >
> > > > > >>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> One downside I see from FAB is that is does not do Busines=
s
> > Role
> > > > > >>>> mapping
> > > > > >>>>>> to FAB role. I would prefer to create groups in IPA/LDAP/A=
D
> > and
> > > > > >> have
> > > > > >>>>> those
> > > > > >>>>>> map to FAB roles instead of needing to manage that in FAB.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>> B.
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> On 22 Jun 2017, at 09:36, Bolke de Bruin <
> bdbruin@gmail.com>
> > > > > >>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Hi Guys,
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Thanks for putting the thinking in! It is about time that
> we
> > > get
> > > > > >>> this
> > > > > >>>>>> moving.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> The design looks pretty sound. One can argue about the
> > > different
> > > > > >>>> roles
> > > > > >>>>>> that are required, but that will be situation dependent I
> > guess.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Implementation wise I would argue together with Max that
> FAB
> > > is a
> > > > > >>>>> better
> > > > > >>>>>> or best fit. The ER model that is being described is prett=
y
> > > much a
> > > > > >>> copy
> > > > > >>>>> of
> > > > > >>>>>> a normal security model. So a reimplementation of that is =
1)
> > > > > >>>> significant
> > > > > >>>>>> duplication of effort and 2) bound to have bugs that have
> been
> > > > > >> solved
> > > > > >>>> in
> > > > > >>>>>> the other framework. Moreover, FAB does have integration o=
ut
> > of
> > > > the
> > > > > >>> box
> > > > > >>>>>> with some enterprisey systems like IPA, ActiveDirectory, a=
nd
> > > LDAP.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> So while you argue that using FAB would increase the scop=
e
> of
> > > the
> > > > > >>>>>> proposal significantly, but I think that is not true. Usin=
g
> > FAB
> > > > > >> would
> > > > > >>>>> allow
> > > > > >>>>>> you to focus on what kind of out-of-the-box permission set=
s
> > and
> > > > > >> roles
> > > > > >>>> we
> > > > > >>>>>> would need and maybe address some issues that FAB lacks
> (maybe
> > > how
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >>>>> deal
> > > > > >>>>>> with non web access - ie. in DAGs, maybe Kerberos, probabl=
y
> > how
> > > to
> > > > > >>> deal
> > > > > >>>>>> with API calls that are not CRUD). Implementation wise it
> > > probably
> > > > > >>>>>> simplifies what we need to do. Maybe - using Max=E2=80=99s=
 early POC
> > as
> > > an
> > > > > >>>>> example
> > > > > >>>>>> - we can slowly move over?
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> On a side note: Im planning to hire 2-3 ppl to work on
> > Airflow
> > > > > >>> coming
> > > > > >>>>>> year. Improvement of Security, Enterprise Integration,
> Revamp
> > UI
> > > > > >> are
> > > > > >>> on
> > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>> todo list. However, this is not confirmed yet as business
> > > > > >> priorities
> > > > > >>>>> might
> > > > > >>>>>> change.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>> Bolke.
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> On 15 Jun 2017, at 21:45, kalpesh dharwadkar <
> > > > > >>>>>> kalpeshdharwadkar@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> @Dan:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks for your feedback. I will remove the REFRESH_DAG
> > > > > >>> permission.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> @Max:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Thanks for your response.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> The scope of my proposal was just to add RBAC security
> > feature
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >>>>>> Airflow
> > > > > >>>>>>>> without replacing any existing frameworks.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> I understand that adopting FAB would serve Airflow bette=
r
> > > moving
> > > > > >>>>>> forward,
> > > > > >>>>>>>> however porting Airflow to using FAB significantly
> increases
> > > the
> > > > > >>>> scope
> > > > > >>>>>> of
> > > > > >>>>>>>> the proposal and I don't have the time and expertise to
> > carry
> > > > > >> out
> > > > > >>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>> tasks
> > > > > >>>>>>>> in the extended scope.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> Hence, I'm curious to know if there's a plan for Airflow
> to
> > > > > >>> migrate
> > > > > >>>> to
> > > > > >>>>>> FAB
> > > > > >>>>>>>> this year?
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> - Kalpesh
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 6:16 PM, Maxime Beauchemin <
> > > > > >>>>>>>> maximebeauchemin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> It would be nice to go with a framework for this. I did
> > some
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> experimentation using FlaskAppBuilder to go in this
> > > direction.
> > > > > >> It
> > > > > >>>>>> provides
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> auth on different authentication backends out of the bo=
x
> > > > > >> (oauth,
> > > > > >>>>>> openid,
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> ldap, registration, ...), generates perms for each view
> > that
> > > > > >> has
> > > > > >>> an
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> @has_access decorator, generates at set of perms for ea=
ch
> > ORM
> > > > > >>> model
> > > > > >>>>>> (show,
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> edit, delete, add, ...) and enforces it in the CRUD vie=
ws
> > as
> > > > > >> well
> > > > > >>>> as
> > > > > >>>>>> in the
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> generated REST api that you get for free as a byprdoduc=
t
> of
> > > > > >>>> deriving
> > > > > >>>>>> FAB's
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> models (essentially it's SqlAlchemy with a layer on top=
).
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> I started a POC on FAB here a while ago:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> https://github.com/mistercrunch/airflow_webserver at th=
e
> > > time
> > > > > >> my
> > > > > >>>>> main
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> motivation was the free/instantaneous REST api.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> I think FAB is a decent fit as the porting should be
> fairly
> > > > > >>>>>> straightforward
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> (moving the flask views over and deprecating Flask-Admi=
n
> in
> > > > > >> favor
> > > > > >>>> of
> > > > > >>>>>> FAB's
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> crud) though there was a few blockers. From memory I
> think
> > > FAB
> > > > > >>>> didn't
> > > > > >>>>>> like
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> the compound PKs we use in some of the Airflow models.
> We'd
> > > > > >> have
> > > > > >>> to
> > > > > >>>>>> either
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> write a db migration script on the Airflow side, or add
> > > support
> > > > > >>> for
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> compound keys to FAB (I recently became a maintainer of
> the
> > > > > >>>> project,
> > > > > >>>>>> so I
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> could help with that)
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> The only downside of FAB is that it's not as mature as
> > > > > >> something
> > > > > >>>> like
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Django, but porting to Django would surely be much more
> > work.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Then there's the flask-security suite, but that looks
> like
> > a
> > > > > >> bit
> > > > > >>>> of a
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> patchwork to me, I guess we can pick and choose which w=
e
> > want
> > > > > >> to
> > > > > >>>> use.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Max
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Dan Davydov <
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> dan.davydov@airbnb.com.invalid> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> Looks good to me in general, thanks for putting this
> > > together!
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I think the ability to integrate with external RBAC
> > systems
> > > > > >> like
> > > > > >>>>> LDAP
> > > > > >>>>>> is
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> important (i.e. the Airflow DB should not be decoupled
> > with
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >>>> RBAC
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> database wherever possible).
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I wouldn't be too worried about the permissions about
> > > > > >> refreshing
> > > > > >>>>>> DAGs, as
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> far as I know this functionality is no longer required
> > with
> > > > > >> the
> > > > > >>>> new
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> webservers which reload state periodically, and will
> > > certainly
> > > > > >>> be
> > > > > >>>>>> removed
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> when we have a better DAG consistency story.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> I think it would also be good to think about this
> > > > > >>>>>> proposal/implementation
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> and how it applied in the API-driven world (e.g. when
> > > > > >> webserver
> > > > > >>>> hits
> > > > > >>>>>> APIs
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> like /clear on behalf of users instead of running
> commands
> > > > > >>> against
> > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> database directly).
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Jun 12, 2017 at 11:12 AM, Bolke de Bruin <
> > > > > >>>> bdbruin@gmail.com
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Will respond but im traveling at the moment. Give me =
a
> > few
> > > > > >>> days.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPhone
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On 12 Jun 2017, at 13:39, Chris Riccomini <
> > > > > >>>> criccomini@apache.org>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Hey all,
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Checking in on this. We spent a good chunk of time
> > > thinking
> > > > > >>>> about
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> this,
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> and
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> want to move forward with it, but want to make sure
> > we're
> > > > > >> all
> > > > > >>> on
> > > > > >>>>> the
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> same
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> page.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Max? Bolke? Dan? Jeremiah?
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers,
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> Chris
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:49 PM, kalpesh dharwadkar <
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>> kalpeshdharwadkar@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello everyone,
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> As you all know, currently Airflow doesn=E2=80=99t =
have a
> > > built-in
> > > > > >>> Role
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> Based
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Access Control(RBAC) capability.  It does provide
> very
> > > > > >>> limited
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> authorization capability by providing admin,
> > > data_profiler,
> > > > > >>> and
> > > > > >>>>>> user
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> roles.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> However, associating these roles to authenticated
> > > > > >> identities
> > > > > >>> is
> > > > > >>>>> not
> > > > > >>>>>>>>> a
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> simple effort.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> To address this issue, I have created a design
> proposal
> > > for
> > > > > >>>>>> building
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>> RBAC
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> into Airflow and simplifying user access management
> via
> > > the
> > > > > >>>>> Airflow
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>> UI.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> The design proposal is located at
> > > > > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> confluence/display/AIRFLOW/Airflow+RBAC+proposal
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Any comments/questions/feedback are much appreciate=
d.
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>> Kalpesh
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>>
> > > > > >>>>>
> > > > > >>>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> --
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Joy Gao
> > > > > >>> Software Engineer
> > > > > >>> 350 Convention Way, Suite 200
> > > > > >>> Redwood City, CA 94063
> > > > > >>> Mobile:  669-224-9305
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>> Payments partner to the platform economy
> > > > > >>>
> > > > > >>
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

--001a114616fe419fa005552a66bb--