Live from the Mission Bay Conference Center in San Francisco, California. It's theCUBE at Google Cloud Platform Live. Here are your hosts, John Furrier and Jeff Frick. Okay, welcome back, everyone. We are live. This is theCUBE in San Francisco, California for Google Platform Conference Live. They're developer conference for the cloud. I'm John Furrier, the founder of Silicon Island. Jeff Frick, my co-host. We're excited to have CUBE alumni, but also man about town, talking about containers, Kubernetes. We have Craig Mclucky, product manager at Google. Name the product, Kubernetes. Welcome back. Thank you, it's great to be back on theCUBE. As I said, you're the man about town, containers with the hottest thing going on, really enabling a lot of new change, a lot of solidarity in the developer community around bringing cloud together, right? You're seeing people go, wow, containers are not a new concept. Docker has brought together the concept and made huge push. Just the ball gets moved down the field big time. And then Kubernetes kind of tying it all together. And you guys are open sourcing it. So, you know, I want to first talk about, from your perspective, what's changed since VMware, where we had a great conversation around Kubernetes. Obviously that was front and center in VMware show, which is a huge IT enterprise vote of confidence. To now, here at Google, core developers, large scale, backend network interconnect stuff going on. You almost connect the dots, right? Native developers really cranking out the apps, large scale interconnect. There's a lot in the middle there between those bookends. What's changed? So a couple of things I think have changed since I last spoke to theCUBE at VMware. The first is we've seen an amazing amount of velocity around the Kubernetes community. Not just what Google's been doing, but also what our open source community members have been contributing. And we're seeing a very fast acceleration of the overall platform. Moving quickly towards operational maturity, getting closer to production readiness, and introducing a lot of features that are really needed to both run real world applications and to go to new places, to go to a variety of new clouds. So we're seeing the reality of a very highly portable and maturing way to build container based applications. That's been very exciting. I think the other thing that's really interesting here is the way that we at Google have been introducing Kubernetes directly into the Google Cloud Platform. Today we announced a new product called Google Container Engine, which provides the quickest and easiest way to get a Kubernetes cluster up and running and manage for you on Google Cloud Platform. And we're very excited about how easy it's making our, for our customers to access this new way of building applications. Talk about this container engine, because obviously App Engine had huge success, a little bit of learning curve, but you guys have some core front end developers making that easier now, but what is a container engine? Is it a Docker engine? Is it Docker compatible? Is it a whole new animal? What is it? What is it? That's great. I'm glad you asked that question. I would start by saying this. At Google we have Google Compute Engine, which offers powerful, flexible, fast-booting VMs. And at the other end of the spectrum we've had App Engine, which offers a highly managed, very efficient way to get web applications up and running. And what we've encountered with our customers is that there is no natural way to move from one world to the other world. There's no connective tissue that exists in the middle, but let's our customers think about building applications that are running on a cloud computer rather than just running on a virtual machine. And so what Google Container Engine is, is a technology that lets our customers program at the cluster level. So Docker has provided this amazingly productive way to package up an application and deploy it into a node. So Docker has done a great job of taking a lot of technologies that existed and making them incredibly accessible to developers. But the reality and our experience is that at least 80% of our customers' cost of maintaining applications comes out of the operation space. So Kubernetes and Google Container Engine are an operationally viable way to build these distributed applications. And it really moves our customers from thinking about deploying things into individual virtual machines to instead saying, hey, I'm just going to drop this into this cluster and it will all be wired together. So I can take these little Lego building blocks of Docker containers, piece them together in ways that are intuitive and then have a very smart and effective system to run those for me on my behalf. So basically a pool of VMs could be available to a developer if I get this right. So you're saying, I'm a developer, I don't have to worry about the dependencies by VMware. By VMware versus another form factor. I just let the container deal with that. And so what we've done, yes, that's exactly right. We've created this strong separation between infrastructure operations and application operations. And so Docker has created a portable framework to take basically a binary and run it anywhere, which is an amazing capability. But that's not enough. You also need to be able to manage that with a framework that can run anywhere. And so the union of Docker and Kubernetes provides this framework where you're completely abstracted from the underlying infrastructure. You could use VMware, you could use Red Hat OpenStack deployments. You could run on another major cloud provider like Rackspace or IBM. And you can just build this application and deploy it there. And experience is very powerful. Cluster first way of building and managing that app. It's a cluster first, I haven't heard that one. It's not a cluster, you know what? It's a cluster first, it's a cloud. That trumps cloud first from Microsoft. But let's go back to Kubernetes. So you name the product. What does it mean? It's kind of a, you don't look at a tech name. You say, it's not like Alpha one, you know? So Kubernetes is the Greek word for the Helm's leadership. And so I was looking to find a name and turns out there's a lot of cluster management technologies and a lot of the obvious names are taken. And so I had the inspiration of what is this doing? It's actually the thing that's overseeing the whole of your operation and it's planning what goes where and managing it. So Kubernetes is the Helm's leadership cluster. Did you design the algorithm to stay away from icebergs? That's the key thing. You don't want to crash the system. But that's the challenge.  So that's been a cloud phenomenon, automation. Everyone's been talking about, oh, we have managed this software that automates and orchestrates cloud resources. Now, but now in a cloud environment, it's more challenging now. So talk about what Kubernetes does different than older approaches to orchestration. I think this is a very, very important consideration. When I look at the way that orchestration has been done traditionally, you tend to think about your application as being deeply tied to the underlying piece of infrastructure. So your orchestration process is provision me a basic machine, go get the packages I need, deploy my application pieces, wire it in explicitly to all the other pieces of my system. And so you have to kind of build this relatively fragile system where all the pieces are tied together and deeply coupled. What Kubernetes has done is provide a framework where you have a very principled, almost a Lego building block that you can stick together and say I want one of these things, I want it replicated six times, and I want it wired into these other pieces without actually having to know about where those other pieces are deployed, how they relate to one another. And so it really is realizing this highly decoupled, very principled way of thinking about your environment as a cluster where you just drop your packages in and they're all wired together using virtualized networking and using this cluster centric paradigm and it radically, radically reduces the cluster operations. I can just give you an example of that. In the old days of Google, before we had these technologies inside the house, it was all we could do to keep the lights on. Like every day was an adventure, it was very hard because our operations had our application pieces deeply tied into the physical infrastructure. When we introduced a system internally known as Borg, we changed the game. In less than a year, what was it called? Borg, Borg, Borg, internally known as Borg. Like connected to everything, like the Microsoft. Yeah, so it was the, I said Microsoft, but Microsoft has to be called. I don't think they're all sorts of things, but that's all right. You go ahead and continue, I just wanted to make sure we heard that right. We literally doubled the number of production services we were running within a year. It's just so much easier to run things at scale. So provisioning managing, it just makes a smoother operation, smooth sailing. You're really trying to hide provisioning managing, right? You're basically, I have an app and I just, I want to build it easily and then I want to deploy it easily and then I want it to be able to scale easily without having to go back and reconnect it to more stuff. So it's funny because I think most people think that that's what clouds have already always done, right? This basically compute a networking and storage that's just in small units, virtually available, disassembled however I want. But you say, I used to have to still assemble it and disassemble it. Now it's just, it's just plugging in. And that's the challenge. The way we've seen cloud evolving has disappointed us a little bit because it really is just a remanifestation of the same existing first generation where you're thinking about application development, application provisioning. If you challenge a lot of the fundamental assumptions, if you really step back and think about, is there a better way to do this? If I have all this incredibly fungible resource that can turn up and turn down, is there a better way to build applications? And Kubernetes is our invitation to the community to participate in defining that thing. We think it is a better way to build applications. We know it because we've been doing this for 10 years and it works really well. So talk about the open source time angle because one, Kubernetes is open source but we've recorded that live when we last chatted. Docker has huge success with their open source model and that's not well known in the main world how the nuance and developers really are engaged and motivated to play with Docker which has its own flywheel effect which is very viral and network effect. What's your strategy with Kubernetes size as a standard open source blocking and tackling? Is there things you're doing to prime the pump? Is there a magical formula that you guys are really nurturing and fostering? I'm very happy with the way that the project's been run and it's been humbling to see the amount of adoption and success we've had. And I think that this manner of operating where we build Kubernetes as an open source project with the community and then we take it and take exactly that and we turn it into a service and add a lot of high value capabilities to it is a pattern that's working very well for us. It's made us, it's massively increased our velocity because it's not just us that are actually developing the project. We have amazing contributions from people like Red Hat. They're putting a lot of time and effort into making this thing great. Our friends at CoreOS are putting a lot of effort into it and we're able to do more because it's just more people working on it. So the velocity is far higher. The second thing is that we were able to go straight to an open alpha. Normally we do these early adopter programs hidden behind the curtain, try to figure stuff out and do a lot of iteration. We didn't have to do that because the community has built the API with us. Our customers have been working directly with us to shape the API. We know it's going to work for them and that's helped you guys. So your differentiation doesn't really conflict with the community. Absolutely not. And we recognize as we've moved from a cloud that's worked mostly in the startup community and with the internet-facing companies to a cloud that's really engaging mainstream business, our customers want multi-cloud. It's critical to them. They want to be able to run a hybrid cloud. They want to have multi-cloud provider relationships. They don't want to just rely on one provider. And so a framework that works well everywhere but works especially well on Google serves our business very well. Getting some great props on CrowdChat. So thanks for coming on the queue. Always great to chat with you. You're in a hot area. I would love to pick your brain.  Could be your Google perspective. Could be your own geeky perspective. Perimeterless, perimeterless IT, multi-cloud and mobile infrastructure. Three of the hottest areas on the planet right now. In terms of people looking at investments, retooling, trying to figure things out. Perimeterless IT. Obviously perimeter IT, perimeter based security. Kind of goes away with the cloud, right? But you still need security as perimeterless. So what does that mean? How do people understand and rock that concept? So the idea of, so I'm not sure I'm the right person to speak to perimeterless IT. But I can say that, when I think about it, I think there's a couple of things that are happening here that are really interesting. When I look at the idea of perimeterless IT, when I look at the idea of what I consider the democratization of IT, if you will. We've lived in a world where most businesses have been beholden to a specific organization that's controlled their provisioning, the policies and the set of bits they can use. Everything's been controlled. And IT hasn't been well loved by and large. We're moving into a world where it's a much more open ecosystem. Departments are far more empowered. Anyone with a corporate credit card can go and get a machine. And that's creating amazing agility and velocity for businesses. But it's introducing a lot of creativity. But it's introducing a lot of pain as well. And so the hard thing is gonna be creating a smart framework that allows empowered decentralization. Going from this world of highly controlled to decentralized empowerment. And I think that's where we're gonna see a lot of interest from folks that are operating in the enterprise space. Okay, multi-cloud. Just in general, will people move to multiple clouds? Do you see that? Uber clouds, we had Bitnami in earlier. Like, ah, people aren't really going to multiple clouds. Is that interested in moving workloads? Is that a state of the current situation or will it evolve to workloads anywhere? Multi-cloud is the relative of our worlds. There's no serious customer I've spoken to in the last six months that has not been interested in multi-cloud relationships. Sorry, it's not true. There's no enterprise customer I've spoken to in the last six months. That has not been interested in multi-cloud. And the reason is from what resource? There's a couple of reasons. One is a lot of companies want to have just a multi-provider relationship. They don't want to be able to hold into a single cloud provider. And frankly, almost every customer I speak to has a massive investment in on-premise infrastructure. They want to move away from a lot of the pain associated with managing that, but it's not going to happen overnight. And so, hybrid cloud is going to exist for quite a while. This is back to your empowered decentralization theme. And we have to provide them the tools to do that. And we have to create positive pressure that moves them from those clouds to the public. Final concept, and I've heard this a lot, kind of leads into the keynote, not necessarily through the words, but almost reeking of this concept, mobile infrastructure. I mean, mobile first, cluster first kind of enables mobile first, but mobile is obviously a form factor, whether it's an internet thing as a human or a device, it doesn't matter, it's still an endpoint in the network. It's a multitude of millions of devices. So what is mobile infrastructure? Is it different? It's the same? What's your take on it? It's an interesting question. And the reality of our world is it's a mobile world. You know, it's almost folly to do anything but think about mobile as the primary vehicle for customers, consumers, and everyone else to interface with the internet, the web. It certainly introduces an interesting set of challenges to application developers. And I think, you know, one of the things that I'm most sort of interested in cracking from a cloud providers perspective is the world of multiple devices, where you have a large set of devices in different form factors that are ultimately presenting a view of the same set of data, the same set of information, and creating a set of experiences that work well in that multi-device space. So moving away from a world where state is bound to a device to a world where state is based in your cloud, and your device is simply providing a view or a way to interface with that data. And we still have a way to go before that is fully materialized, but I think that's going to be a big sort of anchor point of a lot of mobile development in this space. So Craig, where is the locus of competition moving? If the data center just becomes a resource that's on tap, basically, and I can just get, where do the, how do the cloud providers then differentiate? So basic infrastructure is relatively undifferentiated, but when I look at the way that we run inside Google, we do some really, really scary smart things to make your application run for you. If you think about the way we run our infrastructure, it's almost like the flight controller of a modern airplane. It's going from the old wire-based control system where you move something and move it flat to a world where you have this controller that's taking in millions of signals a second and making incredibly informed decisions that is optimizing the heck out of everything you do and making very fine-grained corrections. And I think that's going to be a huge avenue of differentiation. When you take an application, you package it, and you give it to us, and you trust us to run it for you. And we're able to, it's running at a slightly higher level with the stock, we have a much higher abstraction level. We can do incredibly smart things like machine learning technologies. We can watch how your application's running. We know how it ran last time, so we can tell us who's going wrong because we have the ability to actually watch that. This is how we run our internal workloads. And it's not just about commodity infrastructure, it's going to be about smart systems that run your application for you. And that's going to be hard to run. It's really abstract above the management of the app. It's actually the management of the application and the optimization of the application that's supposed to be. There is so much more value in moving from static, dumb infrastructure to actively managed, precision managed, container-based capabilities. It's quite jarring. This was clear to me very soon after we shipped Google Compute Engine. I was able to see, we never looked inside the end, so we were able to see what level of CPU utilization the customers were getting. And we compared that to what we were able to run on our internal workloads. And our customers were only getting, there were several indigent multiples and less utilization than what they were paying for. And so we knew that something could be done. We could actually move up the abstraction there and just do a better job by actively managing and making smart decisions. And that would be very disruptive. So let's play a game. We played a game with our last guest. We'll play the game of, you and I are going to go into business together and be venture capitalists. Okay. Okay, so what's our investment thesis? Get knowing what we know. I mean, there's a lot of work that, there's a lot of entrepreneurs out there really looking at the enterprise right now. The enterprise is hard. Cloud is kind of like a process for the enterprise, but it's not like your classic enterprise. I'm a tech entrepreneur. I'm a coder. I'm an architect. I'm an OS guy. Systems guy. I could be a creative filmmaker, whatever.  Is there white space out there that you see that as an opportunity for developers that could really come in and stay claiming and build a really good business? It could be lifestyle business. It could be a home run. Where do you invest? Yeah, I mean, I think there's so much white space in this domain. We are in the very early days of getting these technologies to market. Obviously there's just bolstering the basic, sort of the fundamentals of the platform. So overlay networking, everyone's talking SDN. Obviously there's a lot of hype around that. But being able to create an abstraction that allows high levels of plugability for different network fabrics as you move between clouds is interesting. Storage and doing a better job of providing virtualized storage that is available to these containers is an area of opportunity. There's a lot of work to be done in the tuning environment. A full-on application lifecycle management continues integration. Lots of opportunity in that space. And then frankly, as we start looking at taking these technologies to market and deploying them into real businesses that are running multi-cloud, there's going to be a lot of the governance, risk management, and compliance overlay capabilities that just don't exist. We have the ability to define policy and enforce it in a very effective way, whether it's security policy, data loss prevention policy, update policy. But it has to be dynamic, right? And it has to be dynamically done and it has to be enforced at the node. And there's so much work to be done there. And there's so many opportunities to either create niche, vertically oriented capabilities that serve as a specific vertical of unique, highly valuable cross-cutting capabilities. I'm very excited about the future. So where would we get started if I was an entrepreneur like, hey, great, I saw your interview, where do I get started? Should I write app engine code? If I want to put the boat in the water and start drifting into this area, and you just mentioned, how should I navigate it? How should I vector in? A lot of it depends on where you're going to be operating in the stack. I would suggest you go and learn Go. Go is rapidly, Go lang, if you want to talk about the development environment, is rapidly emerging as the language for the new cloud. And so we're seeing a lot of work in the Go community. Docker is written in Go, Kubernetes is written in Go. So I'd start there. It's a great platform for systems development. And so I would start looking at some of the existing technologies, Docker, Kubernetes. And I'd start just assessing where the gaps are. And I would probably approach it from a systems development perspective if I was doing it. But there's also going to be a lot of value higher up the chain where you can actually. You can dance on top of the stack and around the stack. Absolutely. All right, so final question. We're going back to the old OS days and we were joking before we came on, conversational even in a way that was pretty relevant. I mean, we're seeing concepts of systems programming of the 80s kind of, but in decentralized way. Comment on that, because I think that's, I think tying a lot of things together. That's an incredibly astute observation. And I think we're moving away from a world, operating system today is a node local thing, right? So I'm operating system and it's providing an environment that abstracts me from the physical details of one piece of hardware, one machine, you know, one set of resources. And what we're starting to see now is the emergence of some of these distributed concepts where you're programming not to a specific piece of, you know, a single piece of infrastructure, so it's hardware, but you're programming to a cluster. And so I think it's very much like that. I think that's a very astute observation. And we're going to see the positive. If no one vendor owns it, it's owned by the world. And no should one. It needs to be a closet-slide ubiquitous framework that lets us get more out of these cluster-centric applications. Very organic. I mean, I love the, what's happening is a very organic development, but yet there's some kind of group dynamics going on around clustering around. Docker's a great example. Came out of the woodwork to become a de facto center. Probably the fastest de facto center that I've ever seen. I've been breathtaking how quickly that technology came out. And that's just the crowd just saying, hey, if we don't like decide, it's on something, we like these guys the best.  Whatever the dynamic is, it could be the open source, flywheel, but it's interesting. You know, certainly from Google's perspective, we noticed Docker a lot sooner than most of the world did. And we had technologies that we could have stood up as potentially competing capabilities, but we chose not to because the world is incredibly well-served by a single standard for defining and packaging applications. Now we need to continue that and we need to build the standard for the projects like distributed systems standard that people think about coding to when they're building these modern, next-gen, Cloud V2 applications. Craig, I really appreciate you spending the time. Love the conversation. Love kind of the long, windy road we took there. We knocked out some Kubernetes. We talked about Docker containers. We talked about the future of the industry. Really appreciate it. You're awesome to have on the queue. You're invited anytime. Cube Alumni, Craig McLaughlin, right on theCUBE. We'll be right back here live in San Francisco, broadcasting exclusively from Google's developer conference here, the Cloud Platform Live event from Google. We'll be right back after the short break.


Is this one of the most challenging parts of the conference where we challenged the leaders of each of our sessions to present two days worth of discussions in two minutes to present a summary of the findings of each of their workshops. This is the fourth year that I've been picked to volunteer to host this session. It never quite goes the way I expect but we always get there on the end Ond rwyf i'r pryd oeddwn ni wedi gweld byddai'n gen i ddweud dwyr i'r pryd a ddweud hyn yn ei haf iawn yn iawn yn cael ei gafodd cael sefydlu'n ddweud a yna'r tyfu'r cyddiad yn ni'n rhwng Mae'n gofio. Rwy'n dim yn yw'n gwneud ymgrifetig. Yr unrhyw yng Nghyrch yn gwahanol Adym, rydw i'n deithasio dros y cyddiadeth? Rwy'n gallu'n dechrau ddiadeth ffiannwch Felly, mae'n gweithio o'i hanfodol yma i fod y Trustun Charity for how to get a solution. We use this template, which is a business model canvas adapted, to try to help us look at the different aspects that might need to come together to make a sensible kind of strategy. It's thinking that we're going to have to pitch things kind of as a business model in some sense internally. And we all found it was very problematic but it's full of people in here and we found the mess was totally more workable. So what we're going to do about this, the big problem really was that there's so many interrelationships that seem to emerge in terms of the different stakeholders, the different value propositions to them, very hard to tease these apart. So we seem to come with kind of two conclusions. One was if it was going to be a strategic response it would be very focused on a particular area like some type of tension or league tables and then everything else would happen around that very narrow in a sense. Or maybe that we shouldn't have a quotes learning analytics strategy at all. And then we should think about putting in place some of the changes to information management, to governance, privacy, all those kind of things that would help a more emergent and organic process by which people could use some idea of learning analytics and have the framework in which they could take action without a lot of problems and questions being asked. This was a session organised in collaboration with the LACE project. I have put all of the information about using the business model canvas and the photographs of our group work available via our URL. I welcome you to take a look and it is the learning analytics community exchange. Please get in touch with us and make comments if you have anything to say. We will be very interested to carry on the discussion about a learning analytics strategy for a higher education institution. Last one minute, 35 seconds. Well done Adam, well done. Next up, we have Phil. We will be talking about learning resource metadata. What do we have here? A group of us metadata fans got together with David Curnahan to discuss this question. Just to give you a little bit of background as to the metadata that we have been involved with in the past, there is a certain hardcore element to it, not just doubling core, but hardcore element which gave rise to the movement which was created in counter distinction to the eduponk movement you might remember a few years ago called eduprog to describe some of our beautifully crafted but rather barock creations of educational metadata. LRMI is different to that. LRMI is not just of the web, LRMI is in the web. It's in the web, it's in the pointy brackets of web pages and that makes it different. For one thing, it means that it's somewhat more free form. If you've got thousands of people creating metadata in the same way that they create web pages, you might get something that's called a little bit of a mess, but I prefer to call it free form, like free jazz there. But also, most importantly, it is targeted towards what teachers actually want to do when they're trying to find resources and how they find those resources, we think. The end of the session, I think even David agreed that this seemed a little bit more sensible than previous approaches. Well done, do you think I can do better than this one? Okay, so next up we have open education, a new world order, who is going to be presented with this? I know it was me wrong in the session, Hugh, or Hugh? So we had two very interesting talks in the first part of our morning afternoon, sorry. We had Audrey Watt's talk to us and presented a picture of MOOCs as a teaching machine, the boys toys, is that fair? Rather like the Google self-driving car, it's an interesting thing to do and you do it because it's an interesting thing to do. As opposed to Amy Woodgate from Edinburgh, who gave a different view of MOOCs as a fantastic fun experiment that we were doing. That's a kind of interesting way of looking at these things, but the experiment is interesting and Amy, as you know about Edinburgh, Edinburgh have done now, they're aiming for 30 MOOCs and that's a lot of MOOCs and they're kind of now pulling back a bit and saying why have we done all this, what have we learned from it, would we go on doing more, are we going to move on and we are going to use this to integrate into our mainstream teaching, how are we going to use this, so the experimental stage is kind of coming to an end she says and I think Southampton, we agree that we're a bit behind them, we're a year behind them, but I think in a year's time we'll be doing the same thing, standing back and saying why did we do all that, then we did a bit of this business model canvas stuff and then we all broke the rules and didn't put the right things in the right places, but we did come up with something, we played the game from the point of view of a research-led university, a teaching-focused university and a new market entrant, probably Pearson, and the research-focused one, I don't think we really had loads of money but there was enough money in the system to do it, whereas the teaching-focused people had to be much more... Go, go, go. All right, this session was a very small selection, Brian and myself, with three other noble participants. Brian explained a lot about Wikipedia and I focused on questions of the culture and governance. Now you might be familiar with Wikipedia's five pillars and I was concerned with the fourth pillar in particular about being nice to each other generally. It's not cool that this is being nice to each other. Because we had such a small select group, we were able to have a wide and free-ranging discussion covering the interests of the participants and one member will quote, it fired my enthusiasm for the whole thing, which we were all very grateful for. Now let's spend a little bit more time on the conclusions if there were any conclusions. I was very interested actually by what we did come up with because I'm not a Wikipedia expert at all myself, Brian, so I'm a Wikipedia expert.  There's a danger of shock when people actually suddenly realise that it's not all sweetness and light there. That needs looking at, needs a bit of remedy. We need some gentle enculturation if that word sits nicely with you. Dissociate from the negative cultures and the technology and the language which harks back to nasty things and flame wars and stuff. Bring in new cultures, groups of people together. Make the editing process more transparent and then bring the e-learning community. This is where it really comes down to our interests. Bring the e-learning community into Wikipedia. Update and maintain the key articles. This is Brian's hobby course. Learn from the process of doing that and address the inevitable tensions. Build our culture of doing things, playing nice and it's a job to do and there's a lot more to do than I anticipated there was, so it's really worth looking at this whole area. Thanks. Okay, who's next? Scott, sorry. I lost your black back, I'm sorry. You're going to have to wait. That's very depressing because we're the IT service management crowd and we have to be different as a project with the e-learning stuff. So, Phil gave us this challenge or our allies challenged yesterday about applicant to alumni or prospect to alumni and how we can respond to that. So, we looked at that problem first from the perspective of our IT services groups and how we manage our portfolio of technologies and then a bit of roleplay from the perspective of all the other groups in the university where we all have to do this very embarrassing exercise that was actually a lot of fun. From the first point of view, from IT service management, we've got real problems in terms of managing the IT estate. We've got real difficulties in how we procure solutions that cross these boundaries between services and software and across open and closed solutions. It is still an issue and it's a distributed problem across the organisation and when we have stuff, we don't really have good prices for managing them or moving them on and we know that a lot of decisions are made in a way that doesn't really work properly for our advantage. From the perspective of other staff in the organisation, it's basically whatever. They just care that stuff works. So, the whole problem isn't their problem. So, we need some good tools to be able to address that because we're not going to get a great deal of support from colleagues as long as things work they're happy. One of the tools we did find really useful maybe for some work on this model of identifying strategic and mission critical technologies and strategic upshift and downshift because this seems to be something that's particularly broken in organisations in that we tend to buy systems or procure them depending on which people or on which committees rather than which ones are actually strategic or which ones are actually mission critical and that says we've got a governance issue that we need to fix. Thank you very much. Well done. Next, oh sorry, I beg your private, I thought it was all from education, yeah, it's ebooks next actually. Who's doing ebooks? Sorry, Mariki. So, next up we have Wilbert telling us about ebooks. Indeed, that was the question that we asked ourselves. But before, you know, ebooks in principle you can stick almost anything into that. So, why not make it into a complete VLE?  So, we kind of brainstormed about what those requirements were and then compared it to the kinds of solutions that were out there. Now, I'm not going to go through all of them, but the immediate one that always pops up for e-text books is testing. Just having a formative test at the end of the chapter for the student to make sure that they've actually understood what they were supposed to be learning. And that immediately opens the question, is that going to be online or is that going to be offline? And some solutions go for online, others encompass both online and offline. But it still is a bit of a question of, well, hang on, where does the web end and where does the ebook start? It's an unresolved one to some extent. The same kind of distinction pops up in the creation side, because slightly more unexpectedly, because the effort required to create an ebook is that much less. You can actually start to make some really interesting things with remixing and reuse and cloning and so on. And in that sense, ebooks actually start to, I think, show a real advantage over the web itself, because they're editable. And that allows you to tailor a textbook to the requirements of a particular course and a particular module. And I think that there's quite a bit of mileage in there. But there's lots more. Well, that impact very much, everything contains that from the nails. I'm slightly disturbed at the mention of cloning. I didn't realise it was cloning going on in these sessions. Next up, we have open education from perhaps policy and money. So I was in the session open education from open practice to open policy. And here we have a picture of the lovely Suzanne presenting and a quote from the OER programme, many people, many practices, one community. So the premise of the session was that there was imaginary country and in this country we had to decide whether we were going to have an open policy or not. And we had six different political ministers who would argue the case for or against for doing that. So we had David Cernhan, Paul Richardson, Joe Wilson, Suzanne Hardy, Paul Booth and Torrey Hull who will argue the case. So basically it was a discussion on open policy in different institutions and whether it's working, how it's working, what exactly policy it is. So here are some of our musings, which are just some of the things that we came up with in the session. So the idea of people sustaining open education not policy. So it's much driven by individuals, driven by people and actions that are going on by people out there. That practice is more powerful than policy but policy legitimises that practice. That was actually a quote from Simon Thompson and just the idea of making a bit of a driver there coming from both different directions from the bottom and the top as well. The policy itself can be burdensome sometimes. There can be issues around that and it doesn't necessarily, it isn't always conducive to practice itself. We also had some good discussions around ownership who owns content in universities, licensing, even got onto areas like formats and the whole concept of OER and breaking OERs down. Then we talked a little bit about the gap between policy and practice, what people are actually doing, how long policy takes to come through in Russell Group universities. Just the whole getting things put in place can be a nightmare. But I think one of the sort of decisions that we made at the end is really about building capacity, making sure that people understand what they're doing. Some of the stuff we talked around was about how open education can filter into other areas like schools, so about how people can reuse resources. Thank you. Thank you very much, Marie-Kie. That was a real challenge, that one. We covered so much ground in that session. Finally, our last summary. Brian Kelly is going to be telling us about building an accessible digital institution. Okay, I facilitated this session and there are only five people here, so it's kind of interesting that a majority of people go into other sessions. So some reflections, there was a broad agreement about when we're building this digital institution, this digital environment, we need to ensure that that caters for the needs of people with disabilities. Now I'm sure that everybody knows about the way with our guideline and that's got a very high profile across the sector, but it is flawed. But if you look across the sector on accessibility policies, you have vague policies, we will aspire to do WCAG. We'll aspire to be good people and do WCAG. Although they were very specific, but don't reflect reality. All university web pages will conform with WCAG AA. They're actually blunt statements like this, which actually don't reflect reality. So if you think about the PDFs in institutional repositories, the images won't have all tags, the researchers did that, they want to do that. Or if you think about the lecture capture, who's going to do all the annotations and captioning for those type of things? So there are problems with the vague or the specific, which isn't actually implemented. So going back to what Phil Richard was saying yesterday about the need for pragmatic, that use of pragmatic standards. That's of course something that Cetus and Yukon have been arguing for donkey's years. We have codefests in order to prove the standards. It's not just a standard in isolation. Within an accessibility context, the BS8878 provides that achievable policy. So challenges? Do people care? Or do people care enough to make any decisions? Or is it just lip service? Is the WCAG policy statement sufficient? There are political contexts to this. The drastic 70% reductions in the disability support allowance. So next step, it was really great when Paul was saying, yes, we need Cetus needs to work to welcome this area. Welcome to Cetus, and we'll be going on in those areas. Thank you. No.


New Commissioner of Police Kaduna States Command Musa Yusuf Garba has assured residents of the security of life and properties and tackling the insecurity bedeviling the state. Garba gave the assurance on resumption to office as the 41st States Commissioner of Police following the approval of the Inspector General of Police I.G.P. Alkali Baba Usman. I want them to be reassured that the security of life and properties is going to improve and I want them to continue to give the place the usual cooperation because without their cooperation there is no way we can perform. We need their support, we need their cooperation so that we can work together with them in harmony. It warned his entire subordinates to desist from any form to undermine security and ensure that professionalism is their watchword, stressing the need for synergy amongst all the security architectures in the state. I want to assure the residents of Kaduna State that very soon they are going to see drastic change in terms of security.  Unlike maybe what is happening before, I will make sure that within short period of time people will appreciate that we have security apparatus in Kaduna State working. And don't forget to hit the notification button so you get notified about fresh news updates.


interest of trying to stay on time, which we've been relatively good at so far, I'm going to introduce our next speaker, Gene Crock, who works on the North American IPv6 task force, and today we'll be giving you your IPv6 primer. Take it away, Gene. Yay! All right, first of all, I'd like to say that anybody who's here and expecting advanced IPv6 stuff, you're at the wrong presentation. It's just going to be a I am going to be covering some more advanced stuff next year, but for right now this is just a quick overview and some of the more interesting things I found security-wise with IPv6. This better? There we go. All right. So anyway, I'm Gene Crock, ISSAP, CISSP, read the slide. YIPv6, in 1992, the IETF decided that we're starting to run out of IPv4 addresses, so they put out a request for comments. In 1993, RFC 1550 was created and then in 1995 it was ratified. IPv6 was chosen as the next generation internet. In comparison with IPv4, IPv4 only has 32 bits of address space, so you have roughly 4.3 billion IP addresses. You got to remember a lot of those are reserved, a lot of those are not used. IPv6 has 128-bit addressing, 3.4 times 10 to the 38 addresses, 340 undecillion for anybody who's interested. What that boils down to is 64 billion IPs for every square centimeter on earth. In continuing on with the comparisons, IPv4 was invented 20-some-odd years ago. It's a great protocol for the time, but we've just outgrown it. There's been several band-aids that have been applied to IPv4 and some of them have actually been back-ported from IPv6. IPsec being one of the major ones. IPv6 integrates them, basically tells us all the mistakes that were made with IPv4 for the most part are fixed in IPv6. It still doesn't mean it's totally secure, though. Stateless auto-configuration, it's kind of like getting a 169 address on Windows. As soon as you boot the computer, if it's IPv6 enabled, you end up with an address. Quality of service was built into IPv6. It's required. Encryption, IPsec, all of it's built into IPv6, and a lot of times it was back-ported to IPv4. This is one of the major ones. I keep hearing that we have these longer addresses and everything else, so it's going to tax the routers. Actually, it's not because it uses a hierarchical routing. Currently, on the backbones, there's 113,000, well, okay, not currently, but as of last year, there's 113,000 routes with IPv6 the most you're ever going to see in the default free zone is A192. Here's a quick graph to see how the routing table has gotten nasty. Roaming becomes a heck of a lot easier. You can use mobile IPv6 in any cast, and your cell phone can actually automatically identify its new router information and just pick up and go. The beauty of this is the fact that you can keep the same IP address. This is one of the major ones. This is going to reestablish end-to-end connectivity. Now, for all you people that think that route is, or excuse me, that NAT is the fix to your security issue, it's not. And as a matter of fact, with NAT, if you're actually trying to do something along the lines of voice over IP, something like that, you have to pull some pretty nasty tricks to make sure that it works. With IPv6, you just be able to contact your endpoint and be good to go. Okay, your current connectivity, 6 bone, which is actually being phased out at the moment, although it's probably going to stay around for quite a few more years, they are trying to get rid of it. It's an experimental IPv6 beta network. IPv6 islands are connected via IPv4 tunnels. Connectivity is either native or via tunnel broker or other tunneling mechanisms. The number of networks just continues to grow. And this website here actually has the status of current connectivity. Global adoption, the earliest adopters have been Japan and China. Japan and China both expect a full conversion to IPv6 by 2005. European Union has been right on their heels.  Well, it's not as hard as you think. As far as new developments, although this isn't so new because this was last year, DOD has mandated that all their new infrastructure stuff has to be dual stacked. That was in October of last year. They expect a full conversion by 2008. As far as who's providing IPv6 in the United States, NTT Burrio, Speakeasy is planning on it. They've been talking about it for about a year now. I'm not sure if they're actually going to go through with it or not. And Hurricane Electric. And then the MoonV6 project, which the North American IPv6 Task Force is a good portion of, has also been making great strides to make sure that hardware, software, et cetera, is compliant with IPv6. Here's an IPv6 address. For all of you that like to memorize IPv4 addresses, this might make it a little harder. Each block of the address represents 16 bits. Two words of an IPv6 address are going to cover the entire V4 internet. First word defines the type of address. 3FFE is a six bone address. It's going to be depreciated in lieu of a 2001 address. FE80 is the link local. When you boot up, you're going to have an FE80 address. Colon, colon one. That's going to be local host. And then colon, colon is usually used in your config scripts, whatever. It's equivalent of <IP_ADDRESS>.0. EUI 64, this is how, for the most part, it's determined what your FE80 address is. It's mostly based on your MAC address. And FFFE is inserted in between the third and fourth bytes in the MAC. And 0.0.0B3CF422CE becomes this. Using the MAC address for your IP address has been considered a privacy issue. It's not addressed in the RFC, so they came out with another RFC that addresses the privacy issues and actually randomizes the IPv6 address. 2001 is for production globally routable IP addresses. Hurricane Electric makes a pretty good use of it. 2002 is used for 64 tunneling, which I'm going to get to in a minute. FEC0 is equivalent to your 192.168 addresses, or your 10.1 or 172.16. It is being depreciated in lieu of FC00. FFO1, FFO2, FFO5 are multicast. OS support, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD, OSX, which is based on FreeBSD, and BSDI are using the COMI project. It's available at COMI.net. IPv6 is enabled by default on these operating systems. The 2.4 kernel has, it's not a bad implementation. It is kind of buggy though, and it can actually be augmented by USagi. 2.6 kernel actually includes USagi patches by default. Solaris 8 and above has native support, and Novell Network 6 and above has native support using the BSDSock.NLM. Kind of makes you wonder where they got their IPv6 implementation from. Windows 98, 95, ME, there's no Microsoft-supported IPv6 capabilities, but you can get third-party plug-ins for it via Hitachi and Trumpet. NT4 has a very early, ugly IPv6 stack. You actually have to go download a patch for it and install it, et cetera, et cetera. Windows 2000, the stack is a little bit better, but not much. XP and Windows 2003, the IPv6 stacks are built in, and simply typing IPv6 install will go ahead and enable it. One of the main things with Windows XP and Windows 2003 is the fact that, yes, you can get IPv6 IPsack, but it's no encryption. It kind of made me scratch my head a bit. NetSah actually controls IPv6 from the command line. You're top North American IPv6 providers, which I kind of covered in an earlier slide. NTT Vario, FreeNet 6, Hurricane Electric, and possibly Speak Easy, although they still have been dragging their feet. NTT Vario supplies tunneling in areas where they don't provide true IPv6 end-to-end to their customers. Hurricane Electric and FreeNet 6 are tunnel brokers. Anyone with an IPv4 address can tunnel via v6, and you can hit these websites if you're curious about it. Other tunnel brokers are available worldwide, and most only require an online registration. You're tunneling and transitioning mechanisms. You've got to remember that IPv6 and IPv4 are two completely different protocols, but they were designed to work together. So you have an ISATAP, you have tunnel brokers, 64, Torito and Soulproad, some of my personal favorites, NATPT bumping the stack, bumping the API, dual stack transitioning mechanism, or DSTM, Translate Relay Trant, yeah. Transport Relay Translator. Transport and belligerent. How about drunk and belligerent? Many of these use IPv4 as the transport. Here's a quick overview of ISATAP. Quite honestly, I haven't used this that much. It's used mostly for IPv6 connectivity between hosts on land, VLAN or LAN. It requires a 64 gateway for packets that leave the local land. If you want to be able to talk to Google.com, you're going to need some kind of translation mechanism for it. It can be used as an IPv6 NAT, although IPv6 and NAT shouldn't be used in the same sentence. Addresses include the IPv4 address and you can see it here. Okay, tunnel broker is one of the more popular ways to connect to IPv6. It requires IP protocol 41. If you have a Wingsys router, odds are this is not going to work. It doesn't work with NAT at IPv4 hosts, unless it's a one-to-one NAT. Even then, you could see some issues. Personally, I just use a free BSD box. Most tunnel brokers are going to give 48 or 64 and you can see the numbers here for the number of IP addresses that you're going to get for your local network. It's pretty easy to set up and change. It's frequently used as an attack vector since tunnels can be set up in different countries. 6x.NET has a 64 proxy that shows only the IPv6 source address. If you bounce through France for your tunnel broker and then bounce through these guys, odds are they're not going to track you. 64 auto tunneling, also fairly easy to set up. You take your IPv4 address, convert it to hacks and put a 2002 in front of it. It automatically gives you a slash 48. If you want to do automatic, you set your default route to <IP_ADDRESS>. The main problem with this is, okay, I'm from Jacksonville, Florida and the first router that I picked up was in Japan. Personally, I just stay away from the anycast and set your default route manually. It uses BGP to find a near 64 router and connect to the IPv6 Internet. Security is questionable, especially on the automatic 64 because you don't have a choice on where your traffic is going. Now, with the Windows XP thing, I found this kind of interesting. I went over to a friend's house and he's using cable modem, plug into the Internet. I automatically got a routable IPv4 address and I went in and looked and it automatically set up an IPv6 tunnel for me. To me, that's a bit of a security concern. It's not included with OpenBSD, Theo considered it a security risk and honestly, I agree with him. Tirito, one of my personal favorites, allows IPv6 tunneling over UDP. How many people are actually monitoring UDP traffic on their network? If you are, then congrats. Ports can be changed. They use 3544 by default, but let's just say I change it to the DNS port or the Ike port. Microsoft, Linux, they all have implementations, but Microsoft is the only one that has a client. The servers are FreeBSD and Linux. Could very easily be used as an attack factor. Let's just, you know, write a back door into our operating system. Oh, wait, Microsoft already does that.  It uses 3FFE, 81 or 83 1F, only, and it doesn't allow tunneling through restricted mats. Silk Road. Silk Road is basically a tunnel broker over UDP. It uses 5188. There are no implementations for it. Again, just like Tirito, it could very easily be used as an attack factor. Allows any address range to be used. It's a very new draft.  NATPT. It's part of RFC 2766. IPv6 hosts on a network, send requests to dual stack gateway. The gateway decides whether the packet is v6 or v4, converts to v4 if need be, or just leaves it as v6. Cisco currently has the only major production of it. There are some other ones for previous D and Linux, but a lot of them are very old. I haven't been updated since 2001. It's similar to use an IPX, SPX, only on your network and still being able to go out and surf websites. Bump in the stack, bump in the API. RFC numbers are here. It's used on dual stack hosts to proxy other programs. Security is nasty on this one. XP in 2003 include port proxy. Port proxy can also be used for v4 to v4.  It's based on dynamic IPv4 over IPv6 tunnels, which at this stage in the game is kind of reverse what we're looking at. But it does allow IPv4 apps to run in an IPv6 environment. The main problem with this is the fact that you still need IPv4 IP addresses. It is multi-platform. There's clients forward on Linux, Windows, NBSD, but it does minimize the need for IPv4 addresses. Transport relay translator. Works as a DNS proxy. TRT takes an address, kind of converts it a bit. There's BSD and Linux implementations. This mostly acts as a server. It's based on TotD and FaithD on BSD or PTRTD on Linux. There's your RFC number. This is actually something I was trying to do on the wireless network here, but I just didn't have time. Too much drinking. Router advertising. It allows your IPv6 border router to broadcast its existence and pass out IP addresses. It's similar to DHCP, but it's not. Because all it can broadcast is default router and address prefixes. It can assign DNS wins, blah, blah, blah, et cetera, et cetera, ad nauseam. Your router advertiser server is available on just about every IPv6 capable operating system. DHCP v6 actually combines the functionality of a router advertiser and DHCP v4. It's currently in alpha stages and most implementations are a couple out there. Cisco's DHCP v6 stack is probably the only one that's considered production quality. Side note, I do not work for Cisco. It provides prefixed delegation and facilitates the distribution of IPs and fault routes and everything else you'd get on v4. Firewalling for IPv6. Pretty much the same on the UNIXs, IPFWPF, IP6 state, IP6 tables for Linux. There's a built-in firewall for XP. It actually runs as a service. If you decide to write a little virus that might stop the service and go ahead and install IPv6, more power to you. There is no IPv6 firewall on Windows 2K3. Damn. Okay, wait a minute. I hosed up this slide. Windows 2003, there is IPv6 support, but there's no support for the firewall. XP, before the advanced networking pack, there was no firewall at all, same as 2K3. One of the major things with your firewall applications, if you feel safe running zone alarm, don't, because most host based intrusion detection systems might pick up 64 to traffic, but they don't defend against native. As far as securing it, well, if you're not using IPv6, block 41 at your border router, and run a scanner, for example, like Etherreal, to make sure that there's no router advertisement and there's no IPv6 traffic on your network. And as always, if you're not using the protocol, don't enable it. DNS records, they're not too much different. You actually have two of them. I just brought up one of them here. You have a Quad-A record, and then you have an A6 record. Not too much different from each other. It's just a matter of saying, okay, this host points to this IP address. Applications, a lot of times, they have to be patched or recompiled, except for the BSDs and a lot of the most current Linux distributions. They can be proxied, as I was saying, with BISBIA. IPv4 only applications can be made to understand IPv6. They do have to be able to handle a colon in the address. And if you're writing an app these days, it should be dual stack capable. Sample code, I'm just going to let y'all take a look. The main differences between IPv4 and IPv6 are the AFINET. AFINET is an IPv4 only call. And then here's a dual stack. If you do PF on specified, protocol family on specified, then it's going to look to the DNS servers for an IPv6 host first. And then if there is no IPv6 host, then it's going to drop back to IPv4. For example, if you're running Apache 1.3, you can get IPv6 support, but you have to patch Apache. Go figure. In Apache 2.0, they build in IPv6 support by default. All you have to do is tell it to listen on any interface on port 80 or port 43. SSHD is kind of similar. Still listen on port 22. This is how I have my SSHD setup personally. Protocol 2. Set up the listen address as colon colon. And here's your 12 steps for overcoming NAT addiction. And I'll just pause for a few minutes and let y'all check out the slides. Okay, are we good to switch to the next one? I'm going to start whistling a theme from Jeopardy. Okay, so are we good now? Here's the other six. By the way, those was ripped completely off the AAA site, or the AA site. I don't know about any of you, but seeing the 12 step program brought back some nasty memories for me. Feel free to laugh if you think it's funny. Okay. I guess it wasn't that funny. Alrighty, so here's some links, and I know I ran through this real quick. Quite honestly, I'm nervous as hell, so let's go ahead and kick into Q&A.  Okay, the question was, what are some things we can do to transition from IPv4 to IPv6? A lot of this is going to depend on what applications you're running currently. Are your applications IPv4 primarily?  Okay, next. Blue shirt. I think you said can you talk about any problems from mapping addresses from the v4 to the v6 space? Is that what you said? The reverse. Okay. The reverse of what I said. You know, there's always going to be problems in any kind of conversion that you do. We're all human. Anybody who writes code, sorry, you're not perfect. There are going to be security issues with it. Actually, can you catch up with me after the presentation? One second. Is there a way to what? Okay, the question was, is there a way to get provider independent space? Is there a way to get IPv4 independent space? No, I'm asking you that. How's that? Yeah, well, Aaron's taking care of the IPv6 space as well. Okay, the guy that was standing up before. I hate to ask this, but can you come up? The air conditioning is blowing right over this way. I believe FreeSwan has been ported to 6. Raccoon was actually written for IPv6 originally and it was back ported. Well, I know the 2.6 kernel and Linux, they actually prefer Raccoon over FreeSwan. It's a user space program, kind of like FreeSwan is. Yes. Okay, the question was, how can you find out if your ISP is v6 capable? Call them and ask them. Yes, most of them aren't clueless. Right now, there's only several providers that are providing v6 out of space. The ones I listed for the most part, NTT Vario, is about the only one in North America that's v6 capable.  Okay, the question was, can you summarize the state of IPv6 firewalling? State or stateful? Sorry. Little firewalls out there. Goodunk dunk. From you, Gene?  Can you summarize? Can you catch me afterwards? Yes. That's security through obscurity. Okay, let me repeat this because this is a big deal. Okay, the question was, a lot of people are using NAT basically as a security mechanism to stop intrusions. Sucks to be them. Well, yeah.  It's kind of the same deal as NAT. Can you step up, please? Yeah, we can't hear. Well, the thing is, if somebody's on your local network, you're kind of screwed anyway. Okay, yeah, I can see that scenario, but for what IPv6 is as opposed to what it breaks, I personally feel that IPv6 is a better solution. If you're writing good firewall rules, and obviously after v6 is implemented, there's going to be some better firewalling techniques. If you're writing good firewall rules to begin with, you shouldn't have to worry about it. The problem is a lot of the people implementing stuff really don't know what they're doing, and that's basically why the search for information is so important. Sorry, I spent a lot of time drinking. So, basically what you were saying in the follow-up question was, if you're already using firewalling to protect your network, then really what's changed? Well, if you've implemented the schemes already, then obviously you're going to have to do some better filtering. If you're not using v6 totally, like me personally, I'm not using v6 at home, so I block the protocol. All together. You'd have to have a v6-enabled product. Well, no, I mean FreeBSD, you have IPFW, you have PF, Linux, you have IPv6 tables, or IP6 tables, Microsoft as usual, as usual is behind. Yeah. Okay, the question was would you be better off using, if you had v6 addresses, public v6 addresses, would you be better off giving them to all your hosts on the local network or using something like an FEC0? Okay, part of this ties into what exactly are you using it for? Well, for example, on my local area network at my house, I run public v6 addresses and then just make sure they're firewalled at the border router. Again, it depends on what scenario you're trying to attack. Okay, the question was what's the common use for the FEC0 addresses if you're not running that stuff? If you have a network that's not addressing the internet, if you have a network that is not connected to the internet at all and they just need to talk to each other and that's it. That's basically what your FEC0 is. The question was could you use the FE80 address? I don't see why you couldn't use it. Actually, if your network is not tied to the internet at all and it doesn't have any routable IPs or anything like that, you can use whatever address scheme you want. Same thing with v4 actually. Go ahead. The question was are there any network appliances that would you say establish tunnels for you automatically? I don't know. Would you consider Windows XP an appliance? What's that? Like elixus router or something? Yeah, right. About the only one currently is a production grade Cisco router. I've got two 2507s at my house. And using those, even though you have to enable IPv6 routing just a second. Thanks. Even though you have to enable IPv6 routing on them, I mean as far as your consumer grade, no, there's not. They're strictly IPv4. Go ahead. There wasn't necessarily a question. It was a comment and actually a very good one. The comment was the WRT54G, the Linksys. There are a lot of projects that are out there that are trying to hack it. And actually, yes, you're right. Because they have done hacks for getting IPv6 and IPsec in those commercial consumer grades. Yes. Can you come up? This air conditioning they have the comfort. Right. How does IPv6 address? How does IPv6 address portability? Is that correct? It's not all portable. Like the FE80 addresses, obviously not portable because it just points to a specific host that's not even routable. As far as being able to take your IP addresses and go to another internet provider, you can do that. What's that? Your 2001 is your globally routable IP addresses. Go ahead. You said you're doing what through Sprint? You said you have a tunnel that you broke at home and it goes through Sprint and you said 6-Bone is going away. What's the prefix? 3FFE or 2001? That is going away. 3FFE is the prefix for 6-Bone. We can take a couple more questions. You have about five more minutes. Can you comment on address spoofing without these six? The question was can you comment on address spoofing in IPv6? I'm guessing here. I don't know off the top of my head but I'm guessing that odds are it would be just as easy to spoof IPv6 as it would IPv4. Any more questions?  The question was, that was a very quick answer. I feel useless up here. The question was can you comment on anything from IPv9 out of China? Basically what the deal is, there were some scientists in China that were working on IPv9 but it never really went anywhere. Okay, we can take one more question. One more. Lucky. Also, not nobody wants to answer a question. Good. That means I can go take a leak. Red shirt in the back. Never mind. Thank you very much.


What is powder metallurgy? Powder metallurgy is a branch of metallurgy dealing with the metal and non-metal powders and then using them for economical manufacturing of high-precision components. Powder metallurgy consists of the following six basic steps, namely A. Powder production, B. Powder conditioning, C. Powder compacting or pressing, D. Sintering, E. Sizing or impregnation, and F. Testing and inspection. First comes powder production in which the metal or non-metal undergoes various mechanical processes like machining, crushing, milling, shorting, graining and atomization to produce powder in the form of small chips, fillings, break-offs, etc. For the volatile metals and carbonyls, physical processes like condensation and thermal decomposition are used to carry out powder production. The powder produced through these processes are mainly spherical in shape. These processes are usually carried out in closed containers to avoid formation of metal oxides. For metals in their oxide-oxalate format or halide states, reduction principle is used where reducing agents like carbon, hydrogen, ammonia and carbon monoxide are used for economical and flexible powder production of irregular shape. For metals in their active solution or few salts, electrochemical processes are used. They ensure perfect control of powder size and type by varying parameters like high current, low metal ion concentration, low temperature and thus can obtain highly pure crystalline shape. Second comes powder conditioning which makes use of heat treatment, sieving and blending to reduce impurities and oxide content, obtain desired powder size and obtain a homogeneous mixture of powders. Third comes powder compacting which is a process of pressing and imparting shape to the powder mix using a dye and punch arrangement. The powder mix is fed in through a vibrating hopper and feeder which allows smooth flow of powder and dye. Pressure is then applied on the powder mix through the upper punch. After sufficient time and pressure application, the upper punch is lifted and the compact powder mix, called as green compact, is ejected out with the help of bottom punch. The density of this compact depends on pressure applied. Next comes centering process which makes use of heat and soaking to help the compact crystal undergo neck formation, neck growth and pore rounding resulting in increased strength and hardness of compact. Next comes sizing or impregnation which is a process of rectifying the centered compact to the final required dimensions. Sizing is done by placing the compact in a master dye and applying pressure. Last comes testing and inspection which tests the components after centering and sizing for compressive strength, tensile strength, porosity, density, hardness, microstructure etc. Processes of powder metallurgical components depend largely on the properties of loose metals from which they are made. They are hence tested under three main groups. First are basic properties which test the chemical composition, shape, size, porosity and specific surface of the material. Second comes compacting properties like apparent density defined as the mass per unit volume of loose and packed powder, compressibility defined as the ability of the powder to undergo compression under applied pressure, green strength defined as the mechanical strength of a green compact and green spring defined as the expansion of compact under ejection. Last comes centering properties which consists of dimensional changes during centering calculated by the ratio of change in the length to centred length. Centering density calculated again as the ratio of density of solid material to that of the censored component and microstructure examination which is usually done by etching the sample followed by visual observation through microscope. Advantages of powder metallurgy include special characteristics due to mixing of both metallic and non-metallic powders and high purity components with a drawback of high equipment cost, limited size of production and storage issues. Applications of powder metallurgy, first self lubricating bearings. These are the bearings which do not require any external lubrication during its function working. Small amount of graphite is used for increasing porosity in which oil is impregnated with the help of high pressure or vacuum. These bearings work due to the temperature rise caused by friction from rotating shaft inducing a reduction in the viscosity of oil here by increasing its flow rate. Hence the oil is pulled out from the pores and starts to circulate rapidly. Second, cermets. Cermet is a combination of two words sir from ceramics and metes from metals. Ceramics have high temperature strength and hardness whereas metal powders have good shock resisting ability and cermets have both these properties and are combined using approximately 20 to 40 percent ratio of metallic binders. Cermets are used in flame holders and nozzles of jet propulsion. Third comes center metal friction materials. These materials are used in clutches, brakes and places where controlled friction are necessary. Fourth, production of refactory materials. Used in filament of electric bulbs, electrical contacts, high temperature furnaces and rocket nozzles, these materials during casting or forging react with the environment and hence powder metallurgy is used in their production. Hence comes the end of the quick revision of joining process. Finally, it's time for this episode's question. What is atomization? Also, it's time to answer our last episode's question. What do you mean by coalescence? In engineering, coalescence means to bond pieces of metal into a continuous hole by liquefying parts of each piece, bringing the liquids into contact and then allowing the combined liquid to solidify. So like, subscribe and comment with your feedback to help us make better videos. Thanks for watching. In the next episode of Mechanical Engineering Insiders, find out how molding of polymers is done.


Sup guys, thank you first and foremost for clicking on this video. Secondly, this video is proudly sponsored by none other than these guys, NordVPN. VPN stands for Virtual Private Network, a service that protects your internet connection and privacy online. Why might you want or need a VPN? You can mask your location and browse in complete privacy. It hides your IP address so depending on what your profession is, you can't get traced or tracked. With the ability to connect to servers all over the world, you'll never be geo-restricted again. If you're in New Zealand, like me, you can watch US TV shows and vice versa. If you're in the States, you can even watch good old Kiwiana. But not only that, Netflix, YouTube, live sports events and social media networks. Whatever it is, whatever the country, you can access it. You can bypass annoying cookies and escape ad campaigns that won't leave you alone. The technology works by creating a network tunnel. Each and every time you surf the web, securing the data sent between you and your destination. They have a complete range of plans from one month to two years, whatever suits. They've always got new promotions running. At the moment, a two-year plan at 69% off works out to be $3.67 per month. That's just over 10 cents per day, guys. Go down into the description box below, click the link, check them out, support the channel, happy days. Thanks, guys, and enjoy the video. I'm out. What's up, you guys? And welcome back to another episode of Rugby Player Reacts. I am your host, Jacob McDonald, and it's my absolute pleasure to bring you a Cleveland Browns player. An absolute beast.  I'm not sure about mentally. But I'm hoping in this video we might actually put the pieces together and hear, you know, how he performs mentally. I know he had a bit of a brain snap, you could say, in the previous season. But we won't go there. We'll give him the benefit of the doubt. We'll say that that was a one-off and we'll just marvel at what he is capable of on that football field. Guys, his name is Miles Garrett. My name is Jacob McDonald. Thank you for being here. It's time we roll the intro and crack into it. Now, for anyone wondering, there really is no reason for me to have my hood up. It's basically just something different. I mean, when you have to make a hundred videos and you're trying to put a unique spin on every single one, you do what you gotta do and today the hood is indeed up. First person we're gonna hear from is David and Joku. He's a Browns tight end, which means he is the man on the opposite side of the ball for the same team as Miles Garrett. Miles Garrett takes down tight ends. David and Joku tries to get past defensive ends and also tries to hold them up so they can't get to the quarterback. Clear as mud? Well, let's start then. Yeah, yeah, that brings me back to a pretty embarrassing moment myself actually. There wasn't five million people watching. There was only five.  And that was by a man who was no bigger than me, but he certainly felt like it through technique and power. And a guy who has both of those in spades is Miles Garrett. One thing I haven't been able to get over in this video series so far, seeing as he has been involved in a lot of the interviews, is the width of his shoulders, but not only that, the thickness of his arms. We're talking Dwight Howard's shoulders and we're talking Mr. Olympia arms, plus running back speed, plus power lifter strength. Need I say more? Miles Garrett, man. Freak. Freakin' nature. Freak. Absolute freak. He's an incredible player. He's got every tool that you look for on a pass rusher. Me. Bless him. He does what he wants. When he puts his hand in the ground, he's coming after me. When you get to see Miles Garrett's ability up close and personal, you either hate it or you love it. Oh, he's an A&M guy, so I gotta love that.  I only think I set it up. I just looked and I was like, I'm just gonna run about you. It seems nothing can stop him getting from point A to point B. And he makes no exceptions for A&M. Tana Hill couldn't move. He was paralyzed as he just couldn't get out of there. Grab that waist. I started slinging him down. I was like, hey, I love you. I love you, but I can't be left with no sex on my return. That's just what it is. So that must have been his return game against the Titans after a suspension due to a bit of a brain snap. If I had that body and all that stuff. His speed, his strength, his quickness, his flexibility. That's incredible. He's well like 275 to 8. I'm out. I thought Chase Young was impressive. I thought Tristan Werff's was impressive, but I ain't seen nothing like that. Jumping like that? Oh lord. I'm in disbelief. We have to watch that again. The girl in the background is like, what did I just witness? There is no way you expect a guy who's this big to fly like that. Alright, let's watch this. Oh my gosh. There is some ridiculous power in those legs. That's incredible. He's well like 275 to 8. Jumping like that? I wish I could do that. Come to think of it. I think I have seen Miles Garrett do a windmill dunk. And he's no surprises. There he is. That guy that can just take over a game. If you're not double teaming him, if you're not sliding to protect. Can you imagine being a quarterback standing in the pocket with Miles Garrett coming at you? You better hope your tackles do their job. There's only a few tackles. I'm going to say it right here, right now. Having looked at a fair few tackles stats and looking at how many sacks they allow or how many hits on the quarterback they allow and some allow a few. Some allow basically hardly any. You're going to want either one of those shutout tackles or you're going to want them to play a career best game. When you're going up against this fella. See who's that? That's a shot at him. And none of them are able to pick him up. I've been watching them in this offseason and he's been playing a lot of basketball. I reckon I might have seen one of those clips. Not that one. He was running the other way. But it was just as impressive. Is that Shack or is that Miles Garrett? He's a big guy, upside guy too. With that speed, the power that you can't stop that. You just can't. That boy, he terrorizing people. Do you know The Muffin Man? Don't tell me you don't feel him. That's what you're like. The Muffin Man? The Muffin Man. Do you know The Muffin Man? Yeah, yeah, yeah. The Muffin. He had a strip sack and recovered his strip sack, you know, all in one play. Sack lunch, right here. Sack lunch. To be parallel from the ground running full speed. Pull, pull, pull. He's out of this world. As soon as I- How on earth did that happen? Sorry guys, got something in my eye. That happens just at the wrong time.  Parallel from the ground running full speed. Pull, pull, pull. He's out of this world. What? Who kicked that up? The ball got fumbled, it hit the ground. He spun the quarterback around. In that motion, the quarterback somehow kicked it up and Miles Garrett gets credited with a strip 360 spin sack. As soon as I got about two steps forward, I'm just bending the edge. The big hit really kind of, he has the ball ready for me. Strip 360 spin sack. And the fact that he doesn't go for a kill shot on the quarterback, his first instinct is to always go for the football. What do you say, number one defensive end? Hm? Right. Sub titles? Hm? No. What? Number one... Sorry. Sorry, sorry, sorry. I'll get this. I'm gonna have to put my foot up to the... Okay, it could quite possibly be the number one edge guy. Hm? Number one edge guy. Me? Yeah. Silly question. We deciphered it. The number one edge guy. Is it him?  You're not gonna get this, you're not gonna get that combination of genetic traits very often. In fact, you know, hardly ever I would say. But what we have here is the, you know, epitome of God-given genetics, a combination of God-given genetics. But not only that, you know, those genetics were recognized. He played the sport of football, and now he's at the top of it. And before we go, I'd be doing you guys a real disservice, if we didn't at least read through what his measurables are. He's six foot four, he's 275 pounds. He was the first overall pick in the 2017 draft.   He runs a four six four on the 40 yard dash. He's got an arm length of over 35 inches, which is, I'm gonna say, the longest we've seen. A hand size of 10 and a quarter inches, which is up there with the biggest, the biggest hands currently in the league, the biggest hands of all time, are owned by DeForest Buckner. He has a hand span of 11 and three-quarters of an inch. So, he's up there. A 41 inch vertical jump, which we saw before, a 10 foot eight inch board jump, 33 reps on the bench press. And he's got brains too. He's got a wonderlicks score of 31. So, as we scroll down, the Cleveland Browns selected Garret with the first overall pick. He became the highest draft pick from Texas A&M in history. On May 19, 2017, he signed a fully guaranteed four-year, $30.41 million contract, which is extremely good for a rookie deal. He was named a defensive captain for the 2018 season and was ranked number 49 on the 2019 version of this Top 100 list. So, 2019 was, you know, a tumultuous year, you could say. He didn't start it off well at all. On September 28, he was fined a combined $52,639 for 3,000, a face mask hit, as well as two roughing the passerfals. In week 10, sorry, week 11, was the hit on Steeler's quarterback Mason Rudolph. Garret pulled Steeler's quarterback Mason Rudolph to the ground after an admittedly late hit. Rudolph grabbed and tried to pull off Garret's helmet and was held there after Rudolph threw a screen pass to running back Trey Edmonds. After getting back up, Garret forcibly removed Rudolph's helmet. Can you imagine that? Can you imagine Miles Garret with the size and strength that he has? Forcibly removing a helmet from a quarterback.  Rudolph gets up, goes towards Garret, and what I'm led to believe happens is Garret at this point has Rudolph's helmet in his hand. Rudolph goes back up to him. Garret goes, you know what? No, this ain't happening. And slams Rudolph's own helmet down on his own head. Now, I know what it's like when a contact sport gets heated, all right? I'm not gonna say I've done this, but I have witnessed brain snaps in the world of rugby and American football. And this was one of those. Following the strike, a fight did ensue, and, you know, the rest is history. I think the Browns quarterback Baker Mayfield called Garret's action inexcusable, which absolutely sucks for the locker room. While then Brown's head coach, Freddie Kitchens, expressed embarrassment. Garret later apologised for his actions, which he described as foolish and out of character, while at the same time thanking those players who backed him up. The next day, the NFL suspended Garret indefinitely. He eventually missed the remainder of the 2019 season. And he was also fined an additional $45,623. And, you know, if nothing else, I don't know where they get these totals from. Garret appealed his suspension on November 20th, but it was rejected. Months later, before his reinstatement hearing, Garret alleged for the first time publicly that Rudolph directed a racial slur at him. And guys, with that, we call it quits. Now, what I really wanted to know was not about that. In fact, I apologise for spending so much time on it. I wanted to know just what a genetic freak in the NFL like this. The first overall pick of the 2017 draft. And it seems he is indeed a $100 million man. $125 million, in fact. He signed a five-year, $125 million contract extension with the team on July 15th, 2020. And that, my friends, brings us to the end of another video. And to be honest, as I attempt to sum up all of what we've just seen, I kind of feel like Jarvis Landry did, and I feel a little bit speechless. There's really nothing I can say. I mean, to see this man in action, in person, would be a dream. For now, all I can offer is a Josh Cribbs jersey. I hope all my Cleveland Browns fans out there, you know, appreciate the comradery. They appreciate Miles Garret. And they appreciate the effort I'm putting into this video series. So guys, if you are in either of those three categories, hit that like button, subscribe, share this video with your friends, and I'll see you in the next one. Thank you and good night.


Israeli strikes on the northern Syrian city of Aleppo killed more than 40 people including six members of Lebanese armed group Hezbollah, two security sources said. The deadliest attacks so far in an intensified Israeli campaign against Iran's allies in Syria, the attacks targeted several areas in Aleppo's countryside, Syria's Ministry of Defense said. It did not provide casualty figures, only saying a number of civilians and military personnel were killed and property was damaged after Israel and unnamed armed groups carried out the strikes, according to Syria's state news agency Sanadot-Britain-based Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said in posts on X that Israeli strikes hit a weapons depot near Aleppo International Airport, resulting in a series of large explosions.at least 36 Syrian soldiers were killed, it said, adding that Hezbollah. Weapons depots were located in the area. Israel, which has vowed to stop Iranian entrenchment in its northern neighbor, has carried out hundreds of strikes on targets in government-controlled parts of Syria in recent years, but it rarely acknowledges them. The frequency of these strikes has increased since Israel's war with Hamas and Gaza began following the October 7 attacks. Hezbollah has had an armed presence in Syria since it joined the country's conflict fighting alongside government forces, Aleppo, Syria's largest city and once its commercial center, has come under such attacks in the past that led to the closure of its international airport. Four people were killed and seven were hurt when a man went on a stabbing rampage across multiple locations in a northern Illinois community. A 15-year-old girl, a 63-year-old woman, a 49-year-old man, and a 22-year-old man were killed in the incident and five others who were injured were transported to local hospitals with serious injuries. The Rockford Police Department said in a news release point five people were injured in the city of Rockford and two people were injured in the jurisdiction of Winnebago County. Rockford Police spokesperson Michelle Marcom told, A man, 22, has been arrested and is being questioned by police. Police said the motive for the attacks remained unclear. The home invasion occurred on Florence Street but the attacks unfolded at multiple locations. Police say Winnebago Country Sheriff Gary Caruana said a young woman had sustained stabbed wounds to her hands and face after being seen running away from the suspect. Rockford Police Chief Carla Redd said that not all of the victims had been stabbed, but added that none had suffered gunshot wounds. She said police did not believe there were any other suspects at large, not all of the victims found at multiple addresses in the city had stabbed wounds and none were shot, according to Redd. Redd said residents in the area were being asked to review their home surveillance camera footage for anything related to the attacks.