As the nation continues to grapple with questions about social justice and social equality HBCU stand at the forefront of the conversation and training professionals. And the brain trust to help adjust to these to these questions here in the United States and one of the forefront leaders of that conversation is Ronald Mason. He is the president of the University of the District of Columbia, the city's flagship public institution veteran of three HBCUs. Now in rare air brother Mason and we come to you always for conversations about social justice you are a trained lawyer in this respect. You've been an aggressive spokesperson on black equity, particularly in the educational realm. But before we get into that want to talk about your illustrious institution. UDC has grown in so many ways. It's, it's a dynamic institution in that it's Community College it's a four year liberal arts institution it's a law school. It is rare. It is rare and it is much needed and there's a lot of expansion going on. Can you tell us about the latest at UDC and what makes you most proud of the expansion you've been able to lead there. Good to see you again. So, just to, in a nutshell, the best way to understand UDC is that we are a state university system for the District of Columbia. And so we do everything from workforce certification, all the way up through to PhD degrees. And we try to connect the dots, you know, where a workforce certificate can lead to an associate's degree and an associate's degree to a bachelor's and above. And then the other beauty of UDC is that because we're basically one part of one big public education system including K-12, we can actually reach down into the high schools and middle schools so that that pipeline can be as seamless as possible as early as possible. In our minds from the community all the way up through to a bachelor's degree. And so that's UDC. We've been hard at work for the last five years, sort of settling the place down and making progress. So we have a new building now on Connecticut Avenue that will be opening up as a modern learning center. We have a new facility over in Ward 8, Old Congress Heights, which would be our main workforce training site. And we're about to build an expansion for our community college. We're going to move from downtown out to a Ward 5. And so, you know, we're doing good work here and the programs are growing and we've had a hundred new faculty. Our research dollars are up to about 45 million now all from all sources. And so six years ago, we had our challenges and like any HBCU, we still have a lot of challenges, but we feel like we've come a long way in the last five and a half years. The thing about UDC that's so impressive and you talk about the challenges as a DMV native, you know, I'm aware of them having grown up on the periphery of DC. It is so quiet there now in terms of how the city council is reacting, how our local businesses reacting. Some of the things that you tried to do over your career in Mississippi and Louisiana was to try to encourage economic development with the HBCU as a flagship. And now UDC is amidst a lot of economic growth. Do you find that that is an opportunity for UDC or is it just, hey, you know, the city is growing, what can we do to keep pace with its workforce demands and economic development demands? Yeah, so let me see if I can again condense it for you. The mayor's favorite phrase is pathways to the middle class. And in the district, we are the pathway to the middle class because I'm sure you're familiar with the TAG scholarship program, which is a federal program. So half the DC high school graduates actually leave and go to school somewhere else and DC pays them to do it. And so the students we get come with a lot more challenges, but they also are very talented and just need a good path to get there. And we're it. Now, you know, the history of UDC, you're right, it's quiet because our first goal here was to make sure that we didn't get any bad press. It was a big goal for us and we haven't gotten any since we've been here. But if you think about it, since the control board days when the federal government took over the district, it also took over UDC. So back in 96 they cut the school's budget in half, then they cut it in half again. And a lot of the challenges have been just trying to get out of that hole because it caused a lot of damage. In fact, according to the head of the control board at the time, the worst cuts they made were UDC and that's the ones they regret it the most. And so the district has been slowly but surely bringing back all of its major institutions, the libraries, parks and recreation, public school facilities. We're the last one on the list. And the irony is that we're probably the key to all of it because we're the one that supplies the workforce with the entire district. And it's just a shame that, you know, we had to do all of this recovery before we could get to the building. But now we're in the building, building phrase phase. Speaking of recovery, you guys are just miles from what was a few months ago, a horrible scene for folks who are from the area, which was the scene on the Capitol. You have been talking for a long time in the vein of how we were building towards something like this to be so close to something so historically bad. What is your perception of where we are as a country now, not only just from the views of a college executive and a scholar, but just as a black man in America? Sure. So, yeah, we're uptown. That was downtown, you know. Right.  And so it was closer to us than most people realize. You know, I do this thing about the aspirational America versus the real America. And the America that we claim we want to be is not the America that we are. You know that. And as long as you have 10% of the population controlling 77% of the wealth and 90% of that 10% is white, which means that that 22% of the wealth has to be spread out among 90% of the population. You're going to have issues. And that that is the big issue. And it's a system that is designed to do exactly that. I call it the system of white supremacy, which concentrates wealth in the hands of very few people, gives day-to-day advantages to white people, and also oppresses people of color, especially black people.  And so when I look at what happened at the Capitol, in a lot of ways, while it was horrible to see, a lot of those people were just pawns in a game that they don't understand. And they were led by a leader that is playing on their ignorance and lack of understanding in ways that serve the interests of that 10% to maintain the wealth that they are growing and creating a bigger divide over time. When you first arrived at UDC, there was an instance where a brother who was a student at the school was accosted by police. And we've seen so much police violence against black men, even recently, again in Minnesota in the midst of a trial for a similar case.    And is there a situation where, other than burning the joint down, that black folks can do something more substantive, voting, and education, but it doesn't seem like we're moving fast enough? Is that an accurate perception or is it just that big of an obstacle we've got to confront? So America is a work in progress, right? And this history of slavery is deep in the bones of the country. And you don't get rid of it overnight. And every institution that we built America around is really built to perpetuate some form of that system. And so the way America sees black people, the way cops see black people, you know, the fact that they're just hardworking class white people trying to figure out why they can't actually get to that top 10%, you know, there's a lot going on there, right? But where I've settled, because you know, I've been doing this kind of work for a while, where the work has taken me is a realization that, so we have our strategic plan is called the equity imperative. And the vision of the plan is that all of our students will reach their highest levels of human potential. And then it hit me that as long as you live in a system that's built on white supremacy, that vision can never be achieved because white supremacy by definition is a rig competition. In order for a rig competition to work, you have to eliminate and suppress all of the talent before it has the ability to compete. And so where I'm at now is taking on the system of white supremacy directly. I'm in a conversation with my board about setting up an institute to help people understand it, to come up with ways to dismantle it, to put it at front and center in the conversation, to be a convening place for activists so that we can have a common mind about what the real issue is. Because there's like a thousand not-for-profits out there dealing with equity and justice and microaggressions. But if you think about it, they're all just industries built around trying to figure out how to cope with this system of white supremacy. But nobody said, look, it's like at dinner with a gorilla, and everybody's trying to teach the gorilla how to have good manners, instead of talking about how to get rid of the gorilla. And so we're going to try to put it on a table. We've got a website coming out, whatiswhitesupremacy.org. And that's going to be a primer on the system of white supremacy. And we've got some proposals out there to try to get some money. But you know, the problem is with these foundations, the people that run them are part of the system that we're trying to take on. And so it's a challenge. But I don't see how you get around it. I don't see how you deal with it unless you put it on a table, call it what it is, and deal with it directly. Do you think anybody is equipped to listen effectively? Because we've seen, particularly for HBCUs, they are now the targets of a lot of philanthropic and corporate goodwill. In light of George Floyd's murder, in light of the pandemic, you see that they're trying to reconcile, OK, we recognize we've done some wrong, and start taking some steps to try to correct things. But I guess I've grown up to be a bit of a cynic. And then I think that the moment you do that, then what are going to be the two steps we take back? And I don't know if that's, should we be cynical or should we be optimistic? Well, I'm a little older than you, so I have some perspective. And you know, I know a lot of the guys from the civil rights movement.  How far have we really come? You know, the wealth gap continues to grow. Black men continue to be marginalized and killed. And so when you look at it, you can see that these things come in cycles, right? And a lot of it is more for show than for fundamental change. So there's that. Another thing I've noticed is this, though, Jared. I remember in a conversation a few years ago when there was a group of philanthropists and some HBCU leaders who said, you know what? We can't save all of these HBCUs. We need to pick 10 or 12 and decide those are the ones we're going to invest in. And then the rest are going to be on their own, right? And, you know, when you see the same names popping up over and over again and the same money is going in the same names, you start to wonder whether, you know, somebody didn't step aside and say, OK, look, this is the plan now.  So I'm watching it. You know, UDC wasn't one of the schools that got that Mackenzie Scott money. But I've been tracking back how that those decisions were made. And a lot of it had to do with maybe that conversation that I heard, you know, five, six, seven years ago. How scary of a proposition is that?  So what can we do to try to counter what they're not going to allow us to do or what they're going to try to actively work against? So is now the time to start thinking seriously, even in an era that seems prosperous? How do you consolidate and strengthen what you got? Well, you know, I tried to have that conversation in Mississippi a few years ago. I was trying to. Well, but, you know, I'm looking at what's happening there now. And I just keep thinking, you know, you know, imagine if the biggest school in Mississippi was an HBCU.  There's not a lot to go around there. And as eight universities and as three HBCUs and as community colleges. And, you know, at some point what happened at Jackson State was we got to the point where our competition was the white schools. We just didn't have the resources to make that leap. And so, you know, I got in trouble at the end of my career there because because of the bands and the football teams, basically. But you should have had a deal. I think I was on one of these interviews back then with you, too. Right. But I don't know that I was wrong. Yeah.  And but, but, you know, you just wish that we didn't see each other so much as competitors, especially when we get into rooms with these people with money, you know. You know, I've seen I've seen my fellow presidents, you know, try to separate themselves from the pack when I think the strength is in the pack. And so, you know, I do the best I can. But, you know, there was a time when I was the young up in Cumber and now I'm sort of the old head in the group and the young guys, young men and women, very bright, very aggressive and some very, very good. And so at the end of the day, if it's going to be a competitive model, I can almost pick, you know, the ones that are going to be able to outrun the competition, either because of circumstances or because of leadership or both. Then the final question, you know, and I don't know if this period is changing in a little bit, but there was, you know, we're entering or in the midst of the front of a period where you're seeing a more diverse audience paying attention to HBCUs. More international students coming, more adult learners trying to come, more white students coming. So you're seeing, you know, HBCUs coming to the fullness of what higher education can be for a lot of people. Yes. But there's still the resource question. There is. And can, are we able to effectively serve the diversity that we're now earning without a lot of the resources, without a lot of the cultural development that we have to do to get ready for those demographics coming. Right. So, so the issue for these, these companies is talent, right? And they really do need talent. There's just a lack of it out there. But if you think about what I said before, how we live in a system that actually suppresses and kills more talent than it produces, you can understand why there's a talent shortage, right? And they're coming to HBCUs, I think, for a couple of reasons. First, they need the talent. But second, most of the talent is in the vast reserves of people that HBCUs are used to dealing with. Right. And we're very good at doing it. And we've been developing talent from those, those, those vast colored pools, pools of colored people, people of color for years. Just proportionally, we're not a whole lot of resources to work with, right? Mm hmm. So we're good at it. And so that's why they're looking at us. But the challenge is that we're still institutional reflections of black people, which means that we don't have a whole lot of wealth. And so I was on a call today with Amazon Web Services, AWS, right? And they want us to build out these pipelines. And their model is that they train for 30 hours faculty that you have to be able to teach the type of material that they want taught, right? Mm hmm. And so we tried it once a couple of years ago and it fell apart and they couldn't figure out why. But the reason was our faculty doesn't have 30 hours to put to a training program, right? They're already stretched thin. And so we had to explain to them, look, if you want us to do this, you're going to have to help us buy some faculty. We need more people to be able to do this work. And I think that's just one good example, you know, we're able to do it, we're stretched thin. And, you know, you have to, and I've been saying this for years, to NSF and everybody else, if you want us to produce the talent, you have to help us build the infrastructure that we need in order to get it done. And they all know that. The problem is that, here's the problem. They want to have their cake and eat it too. They want to keep the system they have and they also want us to produce the talent at the same time. But at the end of the day, I don't see how that works. Because you either have to say that your children are not going to be first in line for every job and every loan and every opportunity and every, every spot in every, you know, university, or you're going to have to say it's going to be a fair competition and we really are going to base it on merit and let the best man win. But you can't have it both ways. And if you don't have it the second way, you'll never get the talent you need. But can we do that? I mean, just to extend the last question, I mean, because, you know, you saw what happened with Google and five of our presidents went to meet with them to figure out why is there such a disparity between the opportunities that HBCU graduates and students have and other, you know, folks from other schools. And you come to find out that just as you talked about the infrastructure is not in place for even at the baccalaureate level for you to come in and code or come in and engineer where other people from other schools are coming in with those skills already acquired. So is that on us? Or is it do we have to work a little bit harder to get to the corporate sector to say build this here because we still have a liberal arts and we still have a training and we still have a skilling up obligation to these folks. Well, I don't look, I think we have a lot of good HBCU engineering schools. We have a lot of really good HBCU computer science programs. The only difference between ours and the big white schools is the resources. And it's generational, it's historical, but it's a fact. And so, you know, we do really, really good jobs. But with some exceptions now, some of our schools have state-of-the-art equipment, but that's not the rule, I don't think. But that's what we need. And you know, I was on a call with one of these blogs with one of the financial Wall Street financial companies, right?  Imagine the wealth they have. You have 100 in HBCUs. Divide yourselves up into groups of 10, right? 10 Fortune 1000 companies claim one HBCU. Put the resources they need to produce the talent you need.  It sounds that simple to me, right? But you can't get them to do it. And, you know, but I'm going to keep pushing it because that is the solution, I think. Did I answer your question? Absolutely. And then you scared me because I thought they'll adopt the 10 that everybody was talking about saving. Well, no, I'm saying if you divide the 1000 into 10, then that's 100 groups of 10 and 100 HBCUs. That's a good math, right?


Hello, and welcome to this presentation of the STM32L4 Single Wire Protocol Master Interface, or SWPMI. It covers the main features of this interface, which is used to connect a smart card to the microcontroller. The SWPMI integrated inside STM32 products implements a full duplex single wire communication interface, in compliance with the single wire protocol defined in the Etsy TS102-613 standard in master mode. The STM32 embeds the SWC transceiver. Applications benefit from the easy single pin connection to a smart card for full duplex communications up to 2 megabits per second. The SWPMI inside STM32 products offers 3 operating modes, with or without DMA, which are explained in detail later on. The STM32 supports both Class B and Class C supply operating voltages. The SWP is full duplex on a single wire thanks to the following principle. The S1 signal is transmitted in the voltage domain from master to slave. The S2 signal is transmitted in the current domain from slave to master. The supply voltage or class must be selected in the STM32 during software initialization. A dedicated 1.8 volt regulator inside the STM32 SWPMI IO is used to adjust the SWP voltage if VDD is 3 volts. The S1 signal is transmitted by the STM32, the master, to the smart card, the slave. A duty cycle of 25% on S1 codes a logical 0 and an idle bit, while a duty cycle of 75% on S1 codes a logical 1. The S1 signal frequency determines the transmission clock. The S2 signal is transmitted by the slave, the smart card, to the master, the STM32. The slave draws a current while S1 is high to send a logical 1. If the slave does not draw any current while S1 is high, it is a logical 0. SWP frames start with a start of frame field, coded by a 7E byte in a hexadecimal format, and ends with an end of frame field, coded by a 7F byte in a hexadecimal format. The payload contains between 1 and 30 bytes of data. The protocol also implements bit stuffing. An extra bit is inserted in case of 5 consecutive bits at 1. This guarantees that the start and end of frame fields are distinguished from the payload bytes. Data integrity is guaranteed by a 16-bit polynomial cyclic redundancy check, or CRC. The SWPMI automatically handles the start and end of frame fields, stuffing bits, and the CRC. In this way, software just has to manage payload data. Several states are defined for the SWP bus. In deactivated state, the S1 signal is at a low level. Before starting any communication, the master must raise the S1 signal to high level to set the SWP in suspended state. Once communication is no longer required, the SWP can be deactivated by the master. Now, either the master or the slave can initiate a communication by sending a resume sequence. A resume sequence by the master consists of a transition sequence and 8 idle bits, whereas a resume signal by the slave consists of drawing current until the master detects it and as a consequence starts to toggle the S1 signal to allow the slave to start transmitting data. Here is an overview of how the SWP bus states are managed by the STM32. You can refer to the reference manual for more details about the initialization and activation procedures. Here is the block diagram of the SWPMI peripheral. The kernel part is clocked either by the HSI-16 internal RC oscillator or by PCLK-1, which is the APB bus clock. The interface with the APB bus allows access to the SWPMI registers by the CPU. There are also connections to the NVIC and the DMA. The SWP transceiver is embedded in the STM32, which interfaces with the external pin through the SWPMI IO signal. Here is the default configuration using the internal transceiver. The SWPMI IO signal is available on the PB12 pin. It's also possible to connect an external transceiver using a configuration bit in the SWPMI registers. In this case, the suspend, receive and transmit signals are available on pins PB15, PB14 and PB13. Pin PB12 can then be used as a standard GPIO. Let's look at the different operating modes, starting with No Software Buffer Mode or NSB. In this mode, data is received and transmitted in polling or interrupt mode or by checking the SWPMI flags. Software intervention is required each time the received data register becomes full or when the transmitted data register becomes empty, that is to say every four data bytes in the payload. Software single buffer mode or SSB is used to transmit or receive an entire SWP frame without software intervention. A 32-byte software buffer for frame transmission is defined in RAM and the SWPMI automatically reloads the SWPMI TDR register through the DMA until the end of frame is received. For reception, a 32-byte software buffer defined in RAM for frame reception and the SWPMI RDR register content is transferred to the RAM by the DMA. The first byte in the RAM buffer is used to code the number of bytes in the frame payload. The last mode is Software Multi-Buffer Mode or SMB. This mode also uses the DMA and several SWP frames can be handled without software intervention. Let's look at this example of a transmission with four frame buffers in RAM. In this mode, 32 bytes are always reserved for each frame regardless of the payload size. The DMA must be configured in circular mode and the number of words to be transferred must be set to 32. As in SSB mode, the first byte of each buffer is used to code the frame length. This is the TFL field. Software can read the DMA counter and update each frame buffer accordingly. In this example, three frames can be transmitted without software intervention. The transmission is stopped by disabling DMA circular mode. In case you need to stop transmission before the DMA end of count, you must set the TFL field to zero. This way, the SWPMI will no longer issue any DMA requests. In SMB mode, several frames can be received without software intervention. Let's look at this example for reception with four frame buffers in RAM. In this mode, the DMA must be configured in circular mode and the number of words to be transferred must be set to 32. The frame length is available at the end of each software buffer in the 31st byte. The status of the frame stored in each software buffer is available in the 32nd byte, which contains the error, overrun, and buffer-ready flags. This way, software can check the buffer-ready flag, read the buffer, and clear the 32nd byte. Here is a summary of the events able to trigger an interrupt in the NVIC controller. Transmit and receive buffers, transmit and receive registers, errors, CRC, overrun and underrun, and resume by slave. DMA requests are generated by the SWPMI for transmission and reception. They must be enabled when working in SSB and SMB modes. All SWPMI interrupts can wake up the device from sleep mode. If the device is put in stop mode, only a resume by slave event can wake up the device. This is a list of peripherals related to the single-wire protocol master interface. Please refer to these peripheral trainings for more information if needed.


Hello, everyone. Welcome. Thank you for joining the session today. I'll be providing an introduction to the Integrated Cloud Native Blueprint, also known as ICN. Brief introduction to me. My name is Todd Malisbury. I'm an engineer at Intel. I began my career about 20 years ago working in embedded systems. Since then, I've slowly been working my way up the stack, and I joined this project a little over a year ago. All right. What is ICN exactly? Let's break it down a little bit. ICN is a blueprint focused on meeting the needs of cloud-native edge use cases. What is a blueprint? A blueprint describes the complete stack needed to realize those use cases. This includes all of the hardware, all of the software, and all of the tools for deploying it. Also very important here is that the blueprint is tested on real hardware. ICN testing, for example, starts with bare metal servers, installs and configures all the software, and validates that the use cases are working properly. The ICN blueprint, along with many others, lives inside the Acreno LF Edge project. Acreno provides a home for ICN and other blueprints. Next, let's take a look at some of the goals of the project. We'll take a closer look at the whys of these goals in a minute, but for now, this will serve as a brief overview of some of the functionality ICN includes. Zero touch provisioning. We want to automate as much as possible. Once configured for the target environment, it should be as simple as a single button click or command to deploy the stack. Coexistence of VNFs, CNFs, VMs and containers. We want all of these workloads to work together under one orchestrator, Kubernetes. Advanced networking support. With Kubernetes, we want to be able to place our workloads on multiple networks, automate the creation of the routes and VLANs needed, and have a programmable CNI to enable service function chaining. Multitenancy. We want to support different quality of service per tenant, multiple VLANs, and per slice network functions, or per slice configuration of shared network functions. We also want to support varying levels of trust for tenant workloads, from soft to strict multi-tenancy. Multisite scheduler. We need mechanisms to automatically register the edges and distribute our services across them. Service mesh acceleration. We want to maximize the service mesh performance by taking advantage of, for example, hardware accelerators and BPF. Security orchestration. The combination of multiple tenants and multiple sites requires orchestration of the credentials needed. And finally, as mentioned earlier, all of the above will be tested and validated on real hardware. Why these goals? Recall that the intention of the ICM Blueprint is to address the needs of the edge use cases. Today, Kubernetes clusters are not meant for network functions in telcos. Let's take a closer look at a traditional enterprise deployment and see what's needed for a telco-grade platform. This slide shows a typical environment with the user working with a few bare-metal private cloud clusters on the left and a few public cloud clusters on the right. Some points worth mentioning here. The number of clusters is typically small. Installation and upgrades are mostly done independently in each location. Similarly, deployment of applications is also mostly done independently in each location. The clusters are used for normal applications while the network and security functions are deployed outside of the clusters as physical or virtual appliances. What do we need to turn this into a telco-grade platform? We already have a rough idea from the goals of the ICM Blueprint. Let's look at the needs in detail. Support for large number of clusters. The most obvious addition in edge use cases is, of course, the edges. From a handful of clusters earlier, we now have potentially hundreds or more of clusters. It's no longer effective to individually manage the installation and upgrade of the clusters and applications in each location. ICN's answer to this problem is to simplify the cluster management by introducing infrastructure orchestration. With this, the provisioning of clusters becomes similar to the deploying of applications. In order to do this, we use cluster API, Metal Cubed, and Ironic. A quick side note, the use of cluster API is in the roadmap, not complete yet. ICN is currently using its own controller for Kubernetes provisioning. This shows another important feature of ICN. Reuse rather than re-implement. Whenever possible, ICN reuses existing projects to meet its goals. The value of ICN here is in the integration and validation of the entire stack necessary to enable the use cases. Let's take a closer look at ICN's infrastructure orchestration, beginning with the high-level view of the components. There are three main pieces. First, the compute clusters themselves. Each location contains a variable number of compute clusters which will be running the application workloads. Second, the infra-local controller. One at each location, this controller does the actual work of provisioning and upgrading the compute clusters. It runs inside a bootstrap or management cluster at each location. Bringing it up is a part of bootstrapping a location. Last, the infra-global controller. Centrally located, this controller communicates with the local controllers to orchestrate the provisioning. It provides centralized configuration and provisioning of compute clusters at each location, i.e. a single pane of glass for managing edge location infrastructure. Note that the infra-local controller can be run without the infra-global controller in place. The infra-global controller is on the ICN roadmap. Now, let's look at the infra-local controller in detail. The left-hand side of the diagram shows the components of the infra-local controller in the dashed box. The right-hand side shows provisioned clusters. The steps for provisioning are, first, install an OS into the node. This is the job of MetalCube's bare-metal operator. It reconciles the state, the OS to be installed in any cloud-init data, of the bare-metal host custom resource describing a node, using Ironic, the IPMI network, and the provisioning network. Second, install Kubernetes into the set of nodes composing the cluster. This is the job of the binary provisioning agent, or BPA operator. It reconciles the state of the provisioning custom resource describing a cluster. Using the Kubernetes deployment, KUD, from the multi-cloud Kubernetes plugin of ONAP, it installs Kubernetes and additional ICN components into the cluster. The user, by specifying only the details needed in the bare-metal host and provisioning resources, then ends with a fully functional Kubernetes cluster. One last note. These steps, as described, are the current ICN implementation. The use of cluster API will augment and or replace these components. Geodistributed application lifecycle management. Now that we have a solution for the orchestration of the infrastructure, what about the orchestration of the applications and services themselves? As with the infrastructure, it's no longer effective to individually manage the installations and upgrades in each location. There are simply too many. ICN's solution is to include the EDGE multi-cluster orchestrator, or MCO project. MCO operates at a higher level than Kubernetes. Instead of creating individual deployments at each location, the operator or subscriber creates a deployment intent to describe the deployment across multiple clusters. In the diagram here, we can see MCO acting as the central orchestrator using the deployment intents to automate the deployment across the multiple private, public, and EDGE clusters. I'd like the next look at the MCO logical cloud feature. MCO provides other multi-cluster controllers in addition to this one, but this one is particularly relevant to the need at hand. From top to bottom, we see the users, the central MCO orchestrator, and the clusters. The users on the top left would like to deploy some microservices to EDGE 1 and EDGE 2, and the users on the top right would like to deploy some other microservices to EDGE 2 and EDGE 3. In order to accomplish this, the EDGE clusters are registered to MCO with labels, X, Y, Z, and A by ABC when they are created. The users can now define a logical cloud composed of the labeled clusters. For example, logical cloud 1 is composed of clusters labeled XYZ, i.e. EDGE 1 and EDGE 2. Logical cloud 2 is composed of the clusters labeled ABC, i.e. EDGE 2 and EDGE 3. Now, the users specify in a deployment intent which logical cloud to place the microservices in. MCO's distributed cloud manager DCM takes care of the rest, creating the needed users, access controls, and namespaces in each cluster of the logical cloud, and finally installing the microservices into each cluster. I do want to emphasize that this only scratches the surface of what MCO can do. I will include a link at the end of this talk to the MCO project for anyone curious to learn more. Cloud Native Network Functions The transition to a fully cloud native platform brings some unique requirements for cloud native network functions. A traditional pod will contain only a single network interface to the pod network. The network function brings with it the need to support multiple virtual and provider or external networks in a cluster, and the corresponding need for multiple high-performance interfaces inside the pod. Also, support for service function chaining becomes important when network functions are introduced. The ICN solution is to include the notice project to support the creation of multiple networks and service function chains. To support multiple nicks inside a pod, the multis project is included. And finally, support for high-performance SRIOV-capable nicks is provided via the SRIOV-CNI. In this slide, I'm going to show an example of what cloud native network functions look like when using notice. I'll show how the traffic flows through the service function chain to reach the application microservices. The diagram shows a corporate network on the left-hand side, a Kubernetes cluster running the microservices in the middle, and connectivity to the internet on the right-hand side. Inside the Kubernetes cluster, the microservices are sitting behind an ingress gateway. The microservices are communicating with the gateway and each other over the default pod network. Below the default pod network are the network functions. A load balancer, a firewall, and the SD-WAN-CNF. Note that the network functions are connected to the default pod network above and also the provider and additional virtual networks below. Each network function contains multiple network interfaces. Let's look at some of the packet flows next. A packet from the internet to a microservice is first routed into the SD-WAN-CNF via provider network 2. It then flows to the firewall via virtual network 2, load balancer via virtual network 1, ingress gateway via the default pod network, and finally the application microservice. A similar path exists from the corporate network to a microservice. The packet enters via provider network 1, then to the load balancer and to the ingress gateway, and finally to the application microservice. Lastly, a path between the internal network and the internet flows through the network functions without reaching into the default pod network. This is all possible when using declarative configuration with the notice controller. CNF and VNF coexistence. Not all network functions will be immediately available with a cloud native implementation. During this transition we will need to support legacy VNFs together with the CNFs. This presents an orchestration problem. We do not want to support one orchestrator for VNFs and a different additional orchestrator for CNFs. To solve this in ICN, the KubeVirt project is included. KubeVirt allows us to manage virtual machine deployments as Kubernetes resources, similar to Kubernetes deployments and pods. This solves the orchestration problem at the cluster level. We are now using one orchestrator, Kubernetes, to manage both containerized and virtual workloads. And at the multi-cluster level, MCO can be used. Additionally, the features needed for cloud native network functions are also accessible to KubeVirt. This brings us complete support for the coexistence of VNFs and CNFs in ICN. High performance applications. In the cloud native setting, careful management of shared resources may be required for deterministic performance, high throughput, and reduced tail latency, particularly for the performance-sensitive network functions. Included in ICN are topology management for NUMA aware placement, CPU manager for Kubernetes, or CMK, for CPU pinning and isolation, and Intel QuickAssist technology, or QAT, for hardware acceleration of cryptographic algorithms. Additionally, the ICN roadmap includes support of Intel Resource Director Technology, or RDT, for control of cache allocation and memory bandwidth. Connect edge locations securely. With the addition of multiple geo-distributed edge clusters, comes the need to connect the edge locations securely. With that comes some challenges. The cost of assigning a public IP to all of the edge devices may be too expensive. Low bandwidth links need to be accounted for and overlay network support. ICN's solution is to provide a robust, software-defined WAN network function. Built upon open WRT, the SDE WAN CNF provides declarative configuration, support of SDE WAN hubs for traffic sanitation and gateways to private networks, centralized control of WAN and security policies, firewall, NAT, deep packet inspection, IPsec, and load balancing functionality. The advantage of this approach is that no changes are needed to existing application microservices or edge configurations. Let's walk through how the edge locations are connected securely for inter-application traffic. The first step is the edge initialization. The edges will connect to the central secure WAN hub through an IPsec tunnel. The edge may have a public IP or be assigned an overlay IP address. In this diagram, edges 2, 4, 5, and 6 will register with edge 1. Next, the edges will use the public or overlay IPs assigned to create IPsec tunnels within the clusters. In this diagram, edges 4, 5, and 6 will then create tunnels to edge 2 to register with MCO. Then the same edges may create tunnels between themselves to securely send inter-application traffic. Note that in some cases, edges may need to traverse the hub to communicate with each other. Strict multi-tenancy. An edge service provider may assign varying degrees of trust to a tenant's applications running in a cluster. The soft multi-tenancy provided by existing Kubernetes mechanisms does not provide protections against kernel exploits. And the hard multi-tenancy provided by giving each tenant an isolated cluster or node is expensive to implement. ICN provides a third solution, strict multi-tenancy. In this scenario, the CADA Secure Container Runtime is used in place of Docker for untrusted applications. CADA uses the same images as the non-CADA case, but uses hardware virtualization and a dedicated kernel to provide isolation. Note, CADA support is part of the multi-tenant Secure Cloud Native Platform Blueprint, a member of the ICN Blueprint family. A blueprint family is a set of related blueprints. In this case, blueprints built upon ICN. Putting it all together. Now, let's take a look at the complete stack provided by ICN. On the right, we have infrastructure orchestration provisioning clusters. On the left, we have the centralized controller for application orchestration and SD-EWAN control. The rest of the diagram shows the individual clusters in public, private and edge locations, containing all the components necessary to meet the needs of the telco-grade platform. Cubert for VNF and CNF coexistence. Notice and the network microservices for cloud-native network functions. Platform microservices for high-performance applications. The CADA Secure Container Runtime for untrusted applications. And finally, the SD-EWAN CNF and traffic hubs for securely connecting the edge locations. Creating an edge platform from a multitude of various open-source ingredients is not easy. It requires costly development resources to identify and assemble the components, check that the components interoperate correctly, and stay on top of upstream bug and security fixes. ICN is built with clearly defined components and versions, ensuring that the components work together via the CI-CD test lab and that the integrated solution works for many edge use cases. Edge service providers can take ICN, deploy it, and provide services to their customers to bring their customers' own CNFs, VNFs, and applications to life. It provides similar ease of use and flexibility to a cloud service provider. In short, ICN provides a great starting point for a cloud-native telco-grade platform. Before I end the presentation, I'd like to give just a quick overview of some of the upcoming roadmap items for ICN. For persistent storage, we'll be including the OpenEBS project with a choice of storage engines, CSTOR, EVA, MayaSTOR. For infrastructure orchestration, we'll be replacing ICN's binary provisioning agent with cluster API's bootstrap provider. And with that change, we'll be looking at enabling multi-site infrastructure orchestration via EMCO. We continue to integrate additional device plugins for high-performance applications and network functions. A few items on the notice roadmap are also worth mentioning. Network policy support using OVN ACLs, using the OVN load balancer in place of cube proxy for higher performance, and IPv6 support. Lastly, the SD-EWAN roadmap includes centralized control of overlay networks, improved performance through the use of the Intel QuickAssist technology in AES hardware acceleration, and improved security through the use of Intel Software Guard extensions. Thank you everyone for taking the time to listen. I hope you found it valuable. I encourage anyone who's interested in exploring further to take a look at some of the links on this slide, and definitely feel free to reach out and contact me with any follow-up questions. Thanks again.


It's The Cube. Here is your host, Jeff Crick. Hi, Jeff Crick here. We're on the ground at Node Summit 2015 in San Francisco at the Mission Bay Conference Center. I think this is the third year they've had Node Summit. It's growing. We weren't here, or the last time we were here was 2012, so a long time ago we're excited to come out and see what's going on. We're joined by our next guest, Scott Hammond, president and CEO of Joint. Welcome. Well, thanks, Jeff. Thanks for having me on the show. Absolutely. We were here a long time ago, 2012. A lot has changed in the world since 2012 in terms of mobile, cloud, very, very different times. Yeah, it's a great time to be in tech. There's so many new changes, new technologies, and new applications, and one of the great things, one of the great trends in technology is you see it becoming more accessible to a broader audience of people, and that means that there's new innovations and brand new areas. We keep pushing the boundaries and pushing the edges, whether it's from the data center out to mobile, to web, to Internet of Things, to robotics, it's still a great time to be in tech. So that said, why did you come to Joint?  There's a lot of opportunities out there. What about this particular opportunity that was attractive to you? Yeah, well, a couple of things. Great question. So, first of all, this whole expansion and proliferation of technology, joint has been the steward of Node.js for the last five years now, and Node has really pushed the boundaries and helped to bring in new set of developers, new innovations, new applications. So, I really wanted to be part of Node. The other part is what we're doing in our core technology stack. We were talking a little earlier about containers. Joint's been a big user of containers in production at scale in our public cloud software, in our on-prem cloud software, letting people deploy containers securely at scale with bare metal performance. When I looked at what Joint was doing, and I thought that for the last 15 years, virtual machines have really been dominated the abstraction for data centers for the last 15 years. It's about time that there was a new innovation there, and I think containers is it. Containers is going to disrupt virtual machines. Much more efficient use of resources, much faster, supports the DevOps and microservices trend. So, we've been one of the early pioneers of containers, running them at scale, and I think that's the future. So, to me, it was a big bet on containers in the future as the new abstraction. So many places we can go. So, let's talk a little about hybrid cloud, because Joint was early in the hybrid cloud. Pat Gelsinger from VMware at VMworld said, hybrid is really the answer. And then, of course, we had Larry at Oracle OpenWorld, basically validating cloud is good, so now everybody's off to the races. Those two guys actually agreed on something. Absolutely. That's amazing. But you guys are early on. How do you define hybrid cloud? And, you know, everyone always talks about hybrid, private, and public. How do you see kind of the adoption out in your customer base? So, you know, another great question. So, we've seen public cloud has been getting a lot of interest. Huge growth, AWS, Google, Amazon, Microsoft, they've had great services out there for a while in very competitive space. It's got a lot of attention because it's a new way to sort of consume your data center services as a service, so that's been really convenient for developers. But that is a pretty small percentage of the overall IT spend. The IT spend is still in the data center, on-prem, running not only legacy apps but all kinds of new applications that just, some just have to be on-prem. So, we believe that the public cloud is here to stay and on-prem solutions are here to stay. So, if you're an enterprise and you're trying to find a new model to deploy your solutions, you often want to deploy your applications in both. And so, what's happened historically is the private cloud vendors have tried to find a way to do some stuff on-prem. The on-prem providers have tried to take their stack and tried to find a way to connect up to the public cloud, but it's been pretty cumbersome for the user. So, a couple of big things here that are happening. One is that our perspective has been we started in the public cloud and we took our software that does all the management and the orchestration, the automation, the billing, the user management, everything that runs our public cloud. We shrink it down into memory sticks, you can plug it into a rack of computers and at two hours later, like, poof, that whole rack of computers is now a private cloud with the same tech stack, same APIs, same, it looks identical. You have no idea that it's not your public cloud. So, it's just another availability zone for your cloud. So, we have that complete consistency for processes and skill sets and applications and APIs. So, that's been kind of a new innovative way for us to go approach this that our customers love. So, they can run some on-prem and then some off-prem and get the benefits of both. Interesting. So, then another big thing is open source, right? And Linux, obviously, has been around a long time. Open source has been around a long time. You know, there's always been the Node.js project as an open source project, but you guys have taken the open source medicine one degree further, right? So, talk a bit about that announcement and how you guys decided to open source more of your stuff. Yeah, as you say, we've been stewards of Node.js now for a while. That's been our primary open source project that we've been involved with. We have a couple other projects that have been open source, but most of our software historically has been sort of proprietary or closed source software. And we believe so firmly in open source as a model. And when you really get to know the different communities in open source, there's such a powerful, entitled group of people who feel such ownership around what they're building. And so to be able to take the power of community and wrap it into your software and have them help you build, develop, fix, extend, add on to your software and be part of the core development, it's extremely powerful and lets us innovate faster. So it's a big, big incentive for us. And then we also see most companies now have kind of an open source first policy where they want to see that the code is supported by a large public community. They want to see that there's rapid innovation. They want to see an easy way for them to support the software and have other people help them support it. And it's an easy way for them to adopt it, get support on it and then experiment, learn it, try it, evaluate it, prove it and then scale it out. So it's very beneficial to us for additional development cycles. And it's really beneficial for the customers who see that as a really sort of the new way, sort of the standard way that they're now starting to adopt technology. So last kind of category is really mobile. And we talk a lot about, we cover a lot of shows, the consumerization of IT and really how the better IT has been available for the consumer via some of these big guys like Amazon and Google. And the expected behavior and the way applications interact with me, the availability of those things and the ease of which they act has been really interesting. So talk a little bit about this really mobile impact. Many of the keynotes, they're talking about milliseconds response time. It's really all driven by mobile, isn't it? Yeah, mobile is kind of the new thing. It's the new frontier, mobile, social, new ways to interact with customers and suppliers and then devices for the whole IoT phenomenon. So now there's so much more data and so many more transactions and interactions that are outside of the four walls of the enterprise that it's driving new innovation, new interaction points. And mobile devices are it. And so that's a great innovation area. And then as you say, if you pull up your iPhone or your Android device and the applications there, they're a lot easier to use. It's really personalized. It's localized. It's interactive. It's a much richer experience than most people are used to from their corporate applications. So it's driving this sort of consumerization of IT that's starting to get rolled back into applications that are built inside the four walls. But mobile is huge. There's how many four billion devices out there now. So growing astronomically. So that's the new frontier. So last question, what are kind of your priorities for 2015? What are you guys working on that you're excited about? So a couple of things. So one is we just announced a foundation. We're working with a group of organizations for a foundation for Node.js. So I think that's going to be a real positive push to support this rapid adoption and acceleration we're getting around Node. Second thing for us is we talked about Docker earlier. I see Docker as a very important construct through development. And now enterprises are trying to understand what the best run time platform is to run that, whether it's on bare metal or run it on a virtualization platform. So our stack, we were talking about earlier, it's based on containers. So you can run these containers securely on bare metal. That's a big push for us for an on-prem solution. And then also, the third point would be also rolling that out into our public cloud service. So really delivering a bare metal, secure container run time solution both in public and private cloud. You're going to be busy this year.  Exciting, very energizing innovations in technology. Awesome. Well, Scott, thanks for stopping by. I'm Jeff Frick. We're at the Node Summit 2015. Hopefully, it won't be three years before we get back again. So Scott Hammett from Joyant. He's got a busy guy. I'm Jeff Frick. You're watching theCUBE. Thanks for watching.


Okay, thank you very much Collins and James for your presentation. Given the focus, well I should perhaps start off by noting that James talked a lot about relationships and the importance of relationships. I'm going to focus on government-to-government relationships in the form of free trade agreements which are international treaties containing legally bound commitments and agreed rules. Now what has certainly impressed me over the years is you have this reflected, these set of commitments and rules in an international treaty and that's what everyone agrees on the rules and the commitments they're bound to. But they're also, it gives you a framework for engaging with other countries. So there are issues and things that are not actually written down in a treaty, but you discuss and it gives you a mechanism through the institutional arrangements you establish through the free trade agreements and the negotiation of them, then their implementation that gives you a form for engaging with other countries and to discuss issues of interest and concern. So there are actually things not written down that you also address and cover. It gives you another framework and another avenue to pursue your interests. But just given the focus of today's program on the South East Asia, my presentation will cover briefly six key areas. Firstly, to provide an overview of ASEAN's and Australia's participation in regional economic architecture as context for our trading relationships and FTA agenda in the South East Asian region. Second, secondly to briefly outline the existing Australian FTA is the four flag single two in particular, the ASEAN Australian New Zealand FTA, ANSFTA, and then the Malaysia Australia FTA NAFTA. In the final part of my presentation I would like to address our recent FTA negotiations involving South East Asian countries, the Indonesia-Australia Comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement, negotiations and finally our current regional FTA negotiations, the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership and also the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations. This is a thin diagram. Some people like it, others don't. I find it useful. But before getting into it, I just observed that since the late 1990s there has been an increase in regional trend towards the saturation of free trade agreements. This trend has been particularly marked in East Asia, sometimes described as a new Asia-Pacific regionalism. Characteristics include new countries becoming involved in FTAs, for example China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Countries negotiating many agreements simultaneously. Countries making agreements with others that are not close neighbors and an increasingly broader FTA agenda beyond goods. This thin diagram uses a series of overlapping and intersecting circles to demonstrate the relationships and overlapping memberships of the various East Asian and Asian Pacific regional groupings. The diagram seeks to illustrate the context for Australia's trade engagement in the region. It does not show Australia's bilateral FTAs. But let me take you briefly through it from left to right. Firstly, ASEAN. The Association of Southeast Asian Nations was established in 1967 to accelerate economic growth and social progress in Southeast Asia and to promote regional peace and stability. The 10 ASEAN member states as James has already detailed and shown in the circle, the ASEAN circle. Second, ANSWITA, that shows you the agreement establishing the ASEAN Australia regional free trade area, comprising the 10 ASEAN member states Australia and New Zealand. Third, you move up to the ASEAN plus three. And that's a forum that functions as a coordinator of cooperation between ASEAN and China, Japan and the Republic of Korea. Fourth, ASEP, the Regional Commerce and Economic Partnership negotiations, which involved the 10 ASEAN member states and ASEAN 6 FTA partners. ASEAN has FTAs with China, Japan, Korea, India and Australia and New Zealand. So all those countries are now participating in ASEAN negotiations. With note also, East Asia Summit is a regional cleaners forum for strategic dialogue and cooperation on key challenges facing the East Asian region. Membership of the EAS comprises the ASEAN countries plus the United States and Russia. The US and Russia do not have an FTA with ASEAN at the moment. However, the US is involved in the Trans-Pacific Partnership agreement negotiations, which is seeking to build on the so-called P4 agreement between Brunei, Chile, New Zealand and Singapore, which entered into force in 2006. The P4 negotiations now include the original P4 parties and seven other countries. I suggest that I stop there for our current purposes, but apart from just noting that the VED diagram also shows APEC, PASA Plus involving the Pacific Islands, and it also shows those regional countries who are members of the G20. Very briefly, in looking at Australia's existing FTAs, just to note we've concluded seven FTAs to date, six bilateral and one regional. Four of the seven FTAs cover Southeast Asian countries, the three bilateral FTAs, Singapore, which entered into force in July 2003, Thailand entered into force on January 1, 2005, and the Chinese already noted Malaysia entered into force on January 1, this year, and in the regional ASEAN Australia, New Zealand FTA, which entered into force on January 1, 2010. The 13 countries covered by our seven included FTAs collectively accounted for 27% of Australia's total two-way trade in goods and services in 2011-2012. New Zealand 3.5%, United States 9%, Chile 0.3%, and ASEAN 14.4%. Next now, just a very briefly, an answer to that. This was signed on 27 February 2009 and entered into force for eight of the 12 signatories on 1 January 2010, including Australia and Malaysia. Thailand became a party in March 2010, Cambodia and Laos in January 2011, and then from 10 January last year all 12 signatories were party when Indonesia became a party to the agreement. Australia is the largest FTA that Australia has concluded in the most comprehensive FTA concluded by ASEAN. It covers goods, services, investment, intellectual property, e-commerce, temporary movement of business people, competition and economic cooperation. It is most substantial in goods reflecting the fact that ASEAN has done internal integration on goods and in the non-goods areas. It contains a substantial tariff outcome. The deal will provide tariff-free treatment on 96% of Australia's current exports to ASEAN nations by 2020. Prior to Ansover's entry into force, 67% of Australia's exports to the region were tariff-free. The agreement provides a strong framework to strengthen services and investment outcomes over time. It also contains some useful commitments on trade-related areas such as intellectual property and economic cooperation to promote technical assistance and capacity building to assist developing ASEAN in countries in implementation. Ansover was the first time that Australia included economic cooperation in a trade agreement implemented through the Ansover Economic Cooperation Support Programme. The agreement is forward-looking with substantial built-in agendas and review mechanisms in areas such as non-tariff measures, rules of origin, services and investment, which are aimed at having Ansover's commitments expand and deepen over time with development of an ASEAN economic community. As James noted earlier, it's important I think to view Ansover as a platform for Australia's ongoing economic engagement with other ASEAN members and it also provides a benchmark for both bilateral FTAs with individual ASEAN countries and broader ASEAN-centred regional developments like the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership. This graph just illustrates the tariff commitments of Australia, Indonesia and Malaysia under Ansover. I've just selected those countries because of what we're in Australia and where Australia is here. And Indonesia and Malaysia, because these two destinations do figure prominently in Victoria Government's South East Asia Supertrade mission. So just to give a sense of what is legally bound under the agreement by way of tariff commitments. 2005, what that reflects basically WTO commitments under the World Trade Organization Agreement. So in the case of Australia, about 47.6% of our tariffs were bound at zero. In 2005, we've committed on entering the course of Ansover to go to 96.4% and then eventually 100% by 2020. Indonesia, 2005, bound rate about 21% of its tariffs are bound at zero. Under Ansover this year, it's 1 January 85% of the Indonesia's tariffs are zero. That's why it's so significant having Indonesia become a part of this last year and then increasing to 93.2% by 2025. Malaysia under Ansover, around 67% bound at zero in 2010 and increasing to 96% by 2020. MAFTA, this agreement was signed 22 May last year in Kuala Lumpur and came into force on 1 January this year. This bilateral FTA improves upon Australian and Malaysian commitments made in Ansover. Upon the entry into force of MAFTA this year, Australia eliminated all tariffs on goods imported from Malaysia. That is 100% tariff elimination from 1 January 2013 compared with our commitments under Ansover of complete tariff elimination on 1 January 2020 and we brought that forward in the bilateral. Malaysia under MAFTA, bound tariff free access on 97.6% of recent Malaysian imports from Australia from entry into force which will increase to 98.9% in 2016 and 99% in 2017. Key outcomes and detail in fact sheets available on the DEVAC website and I just, I won't go into it now given the time constraint but I would note in respect of services as James noted Malaysia has committed to giving Australian entities the right to acquire majority ownership in companies supplying services in Malaysia not all services sectors but in very discrete areas for example 70% ownership in higher education services increasing up to 100% in 2015 70% ownership in direct insurance services 70% ownership in telecommunication network services and facility providers Malaysia also, sorry MAFTA also includes measures which assist Australian companies doing business in Malaysia including business-rending rules of origin provisions Australian exporters do not need to supply certificate of origin but rather a simpler declaration of origin more Australian business executives and senior managers are permitted to work in Malaysia and to stay for longer periods easier access to visas for spouses and dependents of Australians working in Malaysia establishment of a framework for mutual recognition qualifications and licensing for professionals and stronger protection of Australian trademarks and copyright so MAFTA is delivering for Australian businesses and will help Australian businesses looking to expand To mention Indonesia now the first round of all negotiations opened in Jakarta in late September last year and concluded last month the negotiating teams finalised guiding principles for the negotiations and agreed a forward work programme to the end of next year and the second round has been scheduled to be held in Australia in June or July In 2011-12 Indonesia was Australia's 12 largest two-way trading partner accounting for 2.4% of Australia's total trading and there's a lot of strong political leadership provided wanting to take these negotiations to a successful conclusion Really the negotiations cover trade, investment and economic cooperation issues which are aimed at building a higher level and more mutually beneficial economic partnership between Indonesia and Australia The economic cooperation pillar sets this idea separate from any other trade agreement that either country has negotiated The negotiations build on the ANSFTA which was the first trade agreement in which Australia included an economic cooperation chapter and a separate economic cooperation work programme I should also note a new development in the ANSFTA experience has been the Indonesia-Australian business partnership group on the bilateral trade and investment relationship which was the group comprising the two chambers of commerce in both countries the Australian Chamber of Commerce in industry and the Indonesian counterpart, Cahin as well as the two bilateral business councils got together and submitted a joint position paper to both governments for their consideration and this is the first time in Australia's experience that our industry groups have worked with their counterparts in our negotiating partner to submit a joint report for both governments to consider and the IA, sorry full of acronyms the Indonesia-Australian business partnership group put forward a set of 53 recommendations many of which are ambitious for the governments to consider and both the Australian Indonesian governments are still working their way through the report to consider how we could address some of the issues raised and we're keen to engage further with the business partnership group as well as other stakeholders including the Victorian state government on how we can progress in our negotiations Finally, let me address current regional FTA negotiations Australia and Malaysia are both involved in the ASEP and the TPP negotiations Indonesia is involved in ASEP but is not involved in TPP ASEP is an ASEAN-centred approach to a regional free trade area which seeks to build on the existing FTAs that ASEAN has included with its countries in the region These negotiations were launched by leaders last November and associated with that launch were a set of agreed guidance principles and objectives endorsed by the leaders The first round will commence in May 2013 and the aim is to complete the negotiations by the end of 2015 The TPP represents another strategic opportunity to shape emerging regional economic architecture and increase immigration and liberalisation of the Asia Pacific region with the US involved In addition to the current 11 TPP negotiating countries on 15 March last month Japan's Prime Minister Abe announced that Japan would seek TPP membership So that's currently under consideration and TPP has been going for a while since 2010 The negotiations commenced in March 2010 and there have been 16 rounds today Final point I'd just like to conclude on is three things One that we have a full FTA agenda in South East Asia The existing FTAs are there to utilise and our ongoing negotiations have potential to present further opportunities for Australian business in future seeking to expand operations in the region and a full further information is available on the DFAT website I should also note that after we conclude our session this morning I'll be here for a while if anyone has other questions or issues I'm available, so please grab me before I leave Thanks very much