So welcome also from my side. Oh, yeah, it's not working yet, but I think now it's working, yeah. I guess you all can hear me in the back, right? See you in a minute. Okay, so my entry will introduce me really great and I wanna share one thing which is my background in agile or my main focus is on well, kind of what Mary was talking about today. So like agile in a large setting and also in a distributed setting. And I'm saying this not only maybe for advertising those two books I wrote, but also for motivating what's my interest in this topic about sociocracy because whenever you're applying agile in the large, you're also dealing with the organization and having an organization that allows agility is something completely different also in terms of what does it means scaling for the organization and not only scaling in terms of the project. So my interest turned into what helps hinders an agile organization. And with that on that focus are also my two newer books which is the retrospectives for organizational change and then the other one which I wrote together with Jenna Robman on cost of delay. If you are interested in those, I've got a few copies with me. Okay, as much for advertisement here. Starting with the context of my little agenda that I brought here and the context of sociocracy is maybe a really strange term and people often think, well, this is something to do with socialism. No, it doesn't have to do anything with that. It just means socios is the companion and critique, so this is Greek and I'm not really Greek at all time, is to govern. So what it ashen means is dynamic governance and we also heard at the opening speech the run from the government talking about holocracy and maybe one or the other had heard of that. So I don't wanna go into detail here. We can talk about this in the Q and A or maybe you're in the grade. The only thing that I wanna say here is that holocracy has sociocracy at its core. So if you know holocracy and some of the things I'm sharing here, some familiar, then you know why. Okay, so that's the one thing. The other thing is what do I observe when looking at actual at the organizational level? I see different kinds of struggles and they all have to do with self-organization. Self-organization just seems to be hard for a company to allow. And it's kind of okay for a team or a project, but enabling self-organization throughout the whole company just seems to be really hard. And some of the struggles that I'm seeing is one of them is getting the full buy-in for a decision. So it starts often that it seems that some of the decisions have magically appeared and you don't know really who has decided them on or maybe you were part of the discussion, but are surprised how the decision then turned out because you thought you talked about something completely different, but often you don't even know who has decided it and what's the rationale behind that and therefore there isn't the full buy-in from everyone, from the people there. So which also goes to the direction that often decisions are not transparent. I mean the decision making isn't transparent, which again doesn't help for a buyer. If you again know why things have been decided that way, then it's not helpful for me. And the last thing is that often a hierarchy, which is how a lot of organizations are structured, is preventing self-organization and with that it's also hindering agility. So these are the struggles I've observed and I believe sociocracy provides really a great means for addressing those struggles and that's why I believe it's a super match with the agile. Okay, decision making. So full buy-in, I said already, so that the problem is often, well a decision is made and then people are not really carrying it forward and they are overwhelmed with it and they are not supporting it. And this is one of the big problems because whenever a decision is made and there's not a full buy-in, then the decision will not be implemented. And now what can be done about this rather how are decisions made? So first of all, what I think is really important is to recognize that not every decision should be or is needed to be made in the same way. So different things that are at stake can be decided, are born in different ways and that can be acknowledged. Very often we have like one way of making a decision. I'm coming back to that just in a few seconds. The other thing is that some things are not ready for our decision, which is also a big problem. We all have heard, I guess, we all have heard from Lee. So deciding on the last responsible moment but this is not always happening in organizations. Often in a company people think like, oh we really have to decide on that but maybe we don't have the information ready yet or we don't have the right people here who can help making a good decision. So these are all things that make it hard. Now in terms of how to make a decision, but what kind of decision making strategies come to your mind? Voting, dot voting, dot voting is something that's very well known, we use it a lot for example in retrospectives and what it has underneath as a strategy is actually well, decision based on maturity or also sometimes labeled as democratic decisions. So the good thing about that is that all the voices get heard and it's kind of fast, at least if you make it like dot voting to people full there, that dot's there and that's full. The bad thing is that the minority votes are lost. Often completely lost. We just go with the majority and so we don't even listen to what minority has to say about that. Anything else, any other decision making strategy which is coming to your mind? Consensus, yeah, consensus is like we all agree to what we decide on, we are all in favor for that which is the thing that creates typically absolute full buy-in. However it takes often very long because till we all agree to something it takes a while so we make that decision in a way it's okay for all of us. Then maybe at the opposite end we have automatic decisions which are like one person saying okay we are going this way which is very fast and on the other hand which often creates that biggest struggle in terms of buy-in because it's only one person who has decided it that way and maybe I agree with that decision so I'm fine but maybe I don't and nobody ever listened to me which is frustrating then. So that's another way. Then maybe let's say one more which is magic or random so we can throw a dice. Well sometimes that's good enough, right? And the way in sociopathy how we are making decisions is based on consent which is another way of making a decision. It has nothing to do with, well nothing is maybe too strong but it doesn't have much to do with consensus because the question here is not do we all agree are we all in favor for that thing that we are deciding upon but we are asking if we believe, if we go this way, if our bigger goal is put at risk. So it's more a question about can we tolerate that decision and not so much can we favor? Are we in favor for that decision? Which is at least to me a completely different question and the really good thing about this it's making obvious what kind of decisions we are really making in everyday. So often we believe when we make a decision especially in a team of a crew we think we have to come up with the best decision. However, that's not possible. And actually we will never know only in hindsight if this was the best decision. We will never know in advance and therefore because we wanna make the best decision and we can't know in advance we keep discussing forever and ever. So what's really more appropriate is looking for a decision that's good enough for now and asking that question can we, is this in my range of tolerance and is that decision putting our joint goal at risk opens up completely different possibilities at least that's what I'm seeing when I'm applying it. So this is what a consent decision is about turning that question the other way around. The other thing with how it operates and I know I don't have a lot of time to speed up already the way it operates is if you are in a crew you are asking every single person and you are asking so you're going around and asking every single person do you object or actually the real question is do you have any paramount recent objection to that decision? And paramount and recent means I will say what my objection is so it's not only that I say well I don't like it, it's not a beto I have to provide a reason for it and paramount means the thing that I mentioned before is it putting our joint goal at risk so it's not so much about my preference well whatever I would love something else better it's that decision good enough for now can we get started with this so look more at it more like an experiment so is it ready to experiment with this and maybe one last thing about this no matter if you use consent decisions now maybe you heard more about this or if you use a different kind of decision what I find extremely helpful which I also learned from sociocracy is always put a time stamp on a decision so it doesn't hurt you much saying oh can we live with that decision maybe for the next three months and then we look back if it's helpful or not and put it at stake again this often also simplifies to not having a discussion about the best ever possible decision that we are making but just good enough for now I'll take a little bit more application of it maybe already in your mind ideas are spinning where you can use it well you can use it with your team even in a small setting like a retrospective but you can really apply it anywhere however from the sociocratic point of view what we say here is consent is governing decision making so you can also make a consent decision by saying we decide on that framework or in an orthopedic decision because we know you are the expert on that so we trust you you will check that out and then come up with a good decision because we trust you here so it's not that it means all decisions are made by consent but that we agree how we make a decision on a specific thing that's maybe also an important thing okay, votes and hierarchies uh, okay, I'll call it after a little bit of time ah, right, so votes and hierarchies another typical thing that I see is that often in organizations people are putting into positions and I often wonder how come that that person is now fulfilling that role I would have thought somebody else is way more capable for fulfilling that role and so this is another decision actually that has been made and it's also an transparent decision that's often made here and so I wanna offer another way of coming up with a decision regarding um, yeah, roles, functions and tasks and the example I wanna use is one which is a little bit adapted from one way where I did this actually which fits very nice here so it's um, it has been used for a conference as well now we are all at the conference so these conferences work in different ways one way is for example looking for people who are hosting the conference and the conference I'm talking about right now it's called the retrospective facilitators gathering it's a very, very small conference 20, 30 people only, so not as big as this one and the way it works is that we are looking every year for who will host it next year and the way this happened in the past was well, there was kind of a hidden cabal so four, five people talking to each other and saying, oh, we think like you will be good so we go to you and ask you oh, maybe it would be interesting hosting it next year and you probably feel very odd that you've got asked and said yes but nobody really knows how this is working and why have you been chosen so it's similar to what we see in organizations so as you see also in the actual work we do often repeat the same mistakes so um, this year at the retrospective gathering I offered that, so it's a pretty election and the way it works, we are, the people who are involved they all start writing up a proposal and the proposal is just like that so I, Yuta, so I say who am I, who should touch it here nominate whoever I'm nominating so, and it could be easy like that so a post-it note, so I nominate him and so we go around, everyone writes that down and then offers the proposal to the facilitator by the way, if the facilitator is also one of the persons who is involved then the facilitator will as well come up with the proposal okay, so we have a list of proposals so this is a small group here and we have different names here so this has been collected in writing and we've written it up on a picture and now the next thing is we go around in the, in the group, in the circle and ask everyone providing a rationale why did you suggest, well why did I suggest Tom and why did somebody else propose Ben and so on and so we provide a rationale why we think well that person is really capable for that task and one interesting thing that's happening here already is that everyone is very much engaged into that discussion and it's often also surprising for the people to hear how other people think they can handle a specific task so that's the interesting thing here okay, so we have been going around have heard all the rationales for that we still have that list of different names here so what we do now is going for another round and ask for a possible change so everyone who is involved, we ask again now that you have heard the rationale the people have given, do you still wanna propose the same person you had proposed before and maybe yes, or do you wanna change your mind because you've heard something else which is more convincing to you than what you have thought at first yourself so there's a change round and now we see here some people change their mind and some people stick with the same ideas and just whatever and then again, the same thing by this round asking do you change your mind we also ask and for what reason so we have as well the rationale so I think well that person is maybe really capable because of blah blah blah so now comes maybe the weird thing at least I thought it's a weird thing because well I've been to facilitator school and so on and you will realize probably why I think it's weird now the thing is the facilitator makes the step forward and makes a proposal makes a suggestion having heard all those different proposals but the rationales, I go forward and propose now I don't remember whom I'm proposing here so I propose Ella I think she would be the best candidate for posting that conference next year and the thing again is keeping in mind we are not looking for the best ever decision we are looking for somebody we feel is capable for doing that job and so this is the proposal and if I'm the facilitator I make that proposal and then we are going round again and this is now asking for the consent and we have been talking about this before so it's asking if somebody has a paramount recent objection against that and again the weird thing for me was like okay as a facilitator if I'm the one I should make that proposal I have heard that the facilitator is neutral yeah it's not interfering with what's going on here now here they're saying well the facilitator is more like a mediator listening to stuff and summarizing it up and then making that step forward in order also to move forward because we don't need to discuss things right or we really want to make progress and that's the point for it so making that proposal going round having a consent on this and now the one last thing I believe I'm missing here is which is also very interesting the person who is asked about his her consent is the one that has been proposed which might sound also a bit strange but we are going round and asking everyone if they consent to it or if they have common recent objection and then assuming you would be Ellen I would ask you as the last person going round and one of the reasons is that it's so convincing and confirming if you hear the consent from everyone else with beforehand and it's not really kind of pulling you over but it's also more like increasing the trust in yourself that you are the right person who can handle that and then what I have experienced is well at least kind of often that person is saying well but I'm not sure because I have blah blah blah and then so for example I don't have enough time because I have this and that on my desk I always, always experienced that then the whole crew is helping solving that issue for example maybe next step forward oh I can support you with this so maybe you can delegate this to me or something like that so everyone is so much into it because it's a transparent decision everyone knows the reasons behind that and the rationale and the last thing is I believe almost always we came up with a person for a function and task where that person later on told me in private oh well often not in private told later on I would have never volunteered for that and that's another thing which I find really powerful and I guess you all have experienced that too that often if you are looking for a person fulfilling a specific function and task then it's if you are asking for a volunteer you always get the names of the same people and also if you have like a small crew but people talk to each other and say well who could be qualified for that then again always the same people are coming up and coming to the mind and with this approach really completely different names come up at least that's my experience with that and that's why I find this very powerful as well now for so that's again that's a summary what we've done so the most important thing I forgot is how we start first we clarify what kind of function task we are looking for so we know what kind of capabilities and skills we are looking for then we have the proposal round and writing then we collect those proposals we have the rationale given we have a change round then we have a summary by the facilitator by making that proposal then a consent round and then we start a break we end up with that decision okay application for that actually again all kinds of so it's a good thing you could use throughout the whole company well maybe you cannot influence the whole company but you can influence some things for example you can influence who will be the representative in a community of practice that's a perfect thing of finding somebody you might not have on your list right away but it's really something that can be used for all kinds of functions and tasks but the thing like yeah representatives for something I think for that it's very powerful and that's something where you can start also on the team level so I'm hoping that this is then something that people will recognize and will copy at other places in the organization and oh right I have brought a quote or copy from the scrum guide and I guess all of you most of you know the scrum guide describing what scrum is about and how it should be and there are these three responsibilities amongst a lot of other things that we expect the scrum master will do now the problem that I'm seeing is well I've never seen a scrum master who was able to do that or was unable to do that and the reason is I believe because the scrum master is never embedded in the company structure and therefore the scrum master doesn't have the power to for example plan the implementation of scrum in the organization or helping the stakeholders understand and really act on it so everything that has to do with the company with the organization is just tough for scrum master because the scrum master is part of the team but not embedded in the organizational structure so this is my motivation why I want to offer the last bit of sociocracy and well now looking at hierarchies what we see in hierarchies is well a typical thing it's kind of a top-down structure now we have only three levels but there can be many more as you all know and well the problem with this especially if you compare it with Agile well maybe I'll do one more round if you think about what's at the core of Agile we have there this typical cycle what plan do inspect a depth and then plan again which is we do something and we want to learn from it and put that learning back into our plan right so in summary what's at the core of Agile I believe is feedback so whatever we do we try to acquire some feedback and want to learn from that feedback and we do this in many ways it is like with the iteration or sprint cycle it's with the retrospectives it's with continuous delivery it's with the test so everything is around we want to get the feedback in order to get better now if you look at the hierarchy there's just no feedback nowhere, anywhere so it's just linear and only in one dimension and that's I believe the biggest problem why it often feels that the company is not supporting Agile and it's more like a lift service and not a full service and that's by self-organization often only can happen on a very well let's say maybe Prince Island but not really throughout the company okay so what we need is what's called double linking and that's another thing that sociopathy is offering so the idea is that you don't only have the hierarchy top down but you also have, if you will, a hierarchy bottom up and maybe one other thing, how to automate that we often talk about managers who are in a sandwich position and the sandwich comes from that they are responsible for ensuring the implementation of, for example, a decision that has been made up at the hierarchy and is implemented below and their teams they're responsible for but we also expect that those managers are also kind of representatives or spokesperson or whatever of their teams and providing the information that's happening at the bottom up to the top now the problem is that both are typically not possible and that's why managers often decide one way or the other and if they, well, if they decide, like, the top down then it's more a command and control and if they are more designing for the bottom up, but this is also something that I see a lot then what you see at the team level that the manager is often overruled a typical thing that I see with product owners, if they are not fully empowered then make their decisions on priorities that everyone wants in a while somebody else, maybe it's the boss, maybe it's somebody for product management it's whoever is coming and saying, oh no, this is not what we meant and screwing up everything again and coming up with different priorities just one example, but we see this also in different occasions but I see enough people nodding that it seems that you all have seen that unfortunately I would have laughed and would say, no, no, no okay, so separating these two things out, that there is one person who is responsible for the bottom from top down decisions and information flow and there's another person who is responsible for the bottom up just loosens that hopefully and also comes to, well, better information and better decisions so the way it's working in a sociocratic manner, so first of all you have your hierarchy which is I think a really good thing because you can't stop where you are and it's not that I'm necessarily all in favor for hierarchies but most of the companies I'm working with, like, I don't know, the big insurance companies or Siemens or auto manufacturers they just have hierarchies and now me and Utah are going there saying, oh, well, hierarchies are really bad you should give up on hierarchies I don't see this happening in the next 20 years or maybe not even in the next 50 years and so this is what I think is helpful with that so you can start with what's there and it's easier to implement that and then you have on every level at this sociocratic election coming up with somebody who would be a representative of that level at the next hierarchy level so it would be here the, what do I have here, the reddish guy has been elected as being a representative of this team and therefore that person will be part of all decisions on the next hierarchy level and then again that group of people is electing for a person who will be representing that group one hierarchy app and also this, at least from where I'm working it's not so easy to say, like, okay, now we do this across so Siemens or HSBC or wherever but you can start somewhere and the start somewhere could mean, for example, the boss or the blue guy here is saying, oh, well, we are talking about this and that in our next meeting and can maybe, can you please come along because we need your wisdom here because that's the topic you know most about that and then you can make that as a leverage and say, like, oh, maybe we should tap that all the time somebody from the team because somebody from the team always can make a better point of what's going on here and this way it's much easier to implement that and so maybe you will be able to implement this only on this level but not on the next but you can start and that's at least what I really like about social policy it's something that allows me to start somewhere application and I think I said this already well application one of the things was I motivated it with this one with the scrum masters expect that we expect scrum master really implementing actual in the organization so one possibility is having this scrum master being the double link to the next level in the hierarchy therefore being embedded in the organization and I could imagine that this is really a good way of doing it however this also means to me something else which is the scrum master maybe would be a good idea if that person is elected and not appointed which I see typically that the scrum master is appointed but if we feel like this is the person who is responsible that well first of all we are represented but also that actually is understood at the next level we really want to be sure we have the right person here and we all agree on that five percent and electing that person so that might be a difference to how it's done right now and how you come up with this scrum master right now so that would be one thing another thing as well what we have often is already the top down link which is the often the product owner well in some cases I've also seen it's the scrum master which I think is not a really good idea because then that person cannot be really a spokesperson of the team because it's more spokesperson of the hierarchy of that and so that's why typically it would be product owner the link top down scrum master okay and I have been speaking I'm so good that we will have time for questions that's great so the lessons learned so the setting on consent really creates a full buy-in and you can trust me on that when I've experienced that it really makes a huge huge difference and again if you don't want to apply all of that just consider using it at times and consider not asking for do you really like that but more like is it good enough for now can we make the next step with that and putting a time stamp on a decision which I think these are really important things then maybe you want to think about sociocratic elections well maybe when you heard about it you thought oh this sounds like it takes a while actually it doesn't take so long it's kind of a quick way of coming up with with people to function their tasks and you have to buy in from everyone then the double linking is the way to really enable an organization to allow self-organization to many organizations allow enable a company to allow self-organization and you can start at just one level just at the team level and maybe one way up so that's the the really good thing you can start wherever you are and make the next step and that's a really important code because we often think it's people who are not who don't have the skills the capabilities for self-organization but it's actually the structure that haters it so if you work on the structure and the structure is like the hierarchy but also the decision-making thing with that you really can implement self-organization yeah right that's of course important so that's a really great book on sociocracy sociocracy it's really difficult work and the two main links where you find more information about that you're taking the picture and I have thank you for cutting and made all the illustrations and I believe we have exactly five minutes for questions so thank you um actually I get well the double linking will all to the top I haven't seen them not in the in the huge companies I'm working in but I've seen it like to the next level and then my hope is like with the actual where I see people are copying it from software to marketing to other departments that this was correct so that's the one one end so the other end so the the bigger difficulty I see is actually with that they don't really want to try it because of the term like social it's kind of with extreme programming which was too extreme for a lot of people just the name of it some have heard and read about holocracy and not only positive states proceed yeah it's really hard so the decision-making principle with consent I don't experience that adds a really hard thing to implement not at all and that's also something you can start everywhere or anywhere and that's what I do so often I don't even talk about that I just we are in a meeting some maybe I'm studying somebody else on somebody else's toes but I see we are in a meeting and we have that discussion it goes on and on and on and I say oh wait a minute I want to suggest now listen to that and then I just ask the question asking well sometimes I turn it around I do think this is safe enough to try good enough for now and go around this way and it's not even and that might be not fair not really explaining what we are doing here that we are deciding on consent here and then there's nowadays everyone's in a while there's a person like oh is this a consent decision yeah and this is so helpful so I don't see this is a big problem and I see also people like copying that and seeing like oh I've seen you two doing that that's great harder especially if you work in a multicultural I just realized do you understand the question in the back so the question was if I experience it to be harder implementing the side by concept in a multicultural environment and actually I don't but what I find hard or maybe you could also say it's a smell if the joint goal isn't clear and it could happen that you try to come up with the decision on consent and you cannot get consent because it's actually not a team aiming for the same goal because if you have that question do you think that decision puts our joint goal at risk then you figure that people are really deviating and which is good to know because you will have all kinds of troubles because of that so it's also a like actually it's a travel detector so finding out the problems you are having so and yeah maybe it's more likely that we didn't clarify the goal up front in a multicultural environment or people have different things in their mind but I wouldn't say it's necessarily so it's really for me more the do we all know what is our joint goal that if we know that then it's really easy and can be implemented everywhere and on the other hand as I said already I'm happy to know if we are having different goals maybe one more what is the drawback of doing the social that's the draw I don't really see a drawback the the thing is and maybe it relates to your first question which comes now to my mind which is that especially for the double linking that the higher up you go in the hierarchy well probably it's everywhere that often managers feel like they get they lose their power which is actually not true at all it's really not true at all but that's maybe also because of that social part in the term of it but it's also like okay and then there is also a double link and what is that and I thought I'm the boss but now so that's that's I believe that the half part of it and maybe the drawback in that sense that people are then hesitant to to give it a try to really experiment with it as long as they're the same stuff but I keep taking questions yeah one last one okay so I'm really using bits and pieces since I learned about social secrecy everywhere and I sometimes I don't even really realize that and that's all that would be also my hope that I trigger something for you that you think oh maybe I try that and maybe you try chest in quotes in a retrospective because that's kind of the same environment but once you try then you figure out if you are in a different meeting or somewhere else and it becomes also a second nature of doing it and again I haven't I haven't seen it being implemented across all organizations I know that there are companies who have implemented that but I haven't been part of that so I can't really tell what kind of struggles they have been going through I don't know about like the real huge ones the huge companies and these are the companies I am in but what I again what I can do here what's easy there is to start somewhere and that's actually to me it's the same thing how I started actual in those environments it's starting somewhere and now if we look at especially in large organization there's hardly a large organization not claiming that they are doing actual and so why shouldn't it happen this way as well and maybe what I could also imagine that people will not really talk about sociocracy which is unfair to the people who have invented it but that they are more talking about an actual organization because I really believe that those therapies providing answers to questions that actual doesn't have those answers but we see those problems so long answer to philosophical okay so all right thank you very much thank you very much


So, after learning that Justice Breyer of the Supreme Court would be retiring at the end of this term, my immediate thought was, will Biden even be able to replace him given how obstructionist both Joe Manchin and Kirsten Sinema have been? But come to find out, there's somebody else who is already signaling that they may want to obstruct, or at least slow down, Joe Biden's replacement. LA Times reporter Jennifer Haberkorn reports Senator Feinstein doesn't see a rush to confirm a Breyer replacement. Quote, with six months until Justice Breyer departs the court, the Senate Judiciary Committee will have ample time to hold hearings on President Biden's nominee. Hours after relearn about his retirement, it's already beginning. Corporate Democrats are already showing signs that they're going to block, if not back down entirely from just filling a Supreme Court seat. What do you even say to that? Now who knows what she's going to do? Diane Feinstein, I think that she is someone who possibly could be moved if you apply enough pressure on her. But who knows? I mean, we saw the way that she disgraced herself during the Amy Coney Barrett hearings. She was hugging Lindsey Graham after he had COVID and she was going out of her way to ask these really milk-toes questions, oh, tell me about your family.  Stop with the civility, stop with the decorum. But that's only something that she offers to Republicans, but when it comes to her own party, oh, there's no rush. Really? There's no rush? What do you even say? It's a parody at this point.   She is an absolute buffoon. And of course she's going to put the brakes on this because why would you want to rush? I don't know. Why not? Get it done. Why do you have to rush? Let me ask you this. What are you guys doing there? What are you doing? Are you guys working really hard to get nothing accomplished? If you can't get anything passed, at least you can confirm a Supreme Court justice now that there is a 6-3 conservative majority on the Supreme Court, but she's in no rush. She's just the first. I'm assuming somebody else will come out and throw cold water on it. I'm sure Manchin will talk about how, well, you know, we want to take our time and really vet these people.  But when it comes to the Democratic Party filling a Supreme Court seat after two seats were stolen, we get this from Democrats. I'm just exhausted and I don't even know how to respond to that. Wow.


Scene 1, take 3. Alright, place is ready and action. Imagine having the ability to connect, communicate and collaborate from any location and from the comfort of your own desk. With the wonderful world of webinars, this is now a reality. Webinars give you unprecedented access to standout speakers and groundbreaking content. Because Redback's platforms are so flexible and easy to use, you can access your webinar from anywhere you'd like with a simple click of a mouse. All you need is your preferred digital device and a stable internet connection. If you're new to webinars, here's what you can expect. Joining your webinar is easy. Simply click on the link given to you by your webinar organiser and enter the email address you registered with. There's no waiting for lengthy downloads that take up lots of space on your hard drive and all you need to join is the latest version of Adobe Flash. If you prefer to join your webinar via an Android or Apple device, simply refer to the easy to read attendee overview for more information. This handy guide can be found in your webinar details email. Once you've successfully joined the webinar, you'll be welcomed with a screen that looks similar to this. You'll see that the majority of the presentation is taken up by the PowerPoint presentation and over here on the left you'll notice that there are some more boxes. Your minds will be muted throughout the entirety of the webinar. So if you have any questions or comments for your presenters, simply use the chat box which is right here.  So sit back and enjoy the show. And remember, the guys over at Redback are on hand to answer any questions at any time. Simply dial 1-800-733-416.


And even more specifically, I work on the weird architectures. That means if it's not x86, I'm probably going to be assigned that bug. The scope of this presentation, we're going to be talking, as I said, about the 64-bit ARM architecture, also known as AR64. We're going to be focusing on the KVM virtualization stack, which I will assume you are mostly familiar with. And we are going to be focusing on the improvements over the past year or so. We will be focusing on a selection of user-visible changes because there's been so many improvements on all layers of the stack, but there's only so much time in this presentation. So we're going to just pick a few. And they will be at the LibVert level because that's what I work on. So that's the stuff that I know best. And you will notice during the presentation that I will go into increasing level of details that match with my increasingly increasing involvement with the specific feature. So we'll be skipping over a lot of improvement. There's been so many, but we will just focus on a few. And if you were attracted to this talk because of the pun in the title, there's not going to be more puns. So I'm sorry for that. I wanted to put a lot of puns there, but it didn't happen. So the goals that we had when we started working on this, one was to get rid of the limitations. There were some limitations in AR64 virtualization, and we didn't want them because of limitations. We wanted to move towards a world where AR64 and X86 are basically in feature parity. And we wanted to increase the user friendliness, which mostly from the LibVert point of view means that if you are using AR64 or X86, you shouldn't have to think too much about it. You should just be able to take your existing skills. If you know anything about virtualization on X86, you should be able to just start right away on AR64 without thinking too much about it. So the first of the features that we're talking about is PMU. So PMU stands for performance measuring unit. And it's something that allows you to look into the performance counter of the hardware and figure out whether your application is doing too many cache misses or stuff like that. So when we started on X86, you could just get this snippet in your integration and you got a visual PMU you could look into. On AR64, you had nothing because that was not possible. Actually, it was implemented in QMU, the support for PMU. But there was no way to control it. You could just, depending on the machine type, it could be on, it could be off. You had no way of deciding as a user. So that was our problem. Solution to this problem was fairly easy in a way. It was fairly easy for me because I didn't have to write any single line of code for that. The support that was in X86 just worked for AR64. So for me, it was easy. But it was that easy because we pushed for a consistent name and behavior on the QMU side. So if you need any proof of the fact that being consistent is good, this is one example. So we compare again, X86 with AR64, and now they are exactly the same. So exactly what we wanted. Next up, video cards. So again, we start with the comparison. On X86, you could get a video card, and the model is Virtio. So it's going to be a Virtio video card. On AR64, you get nothing again. So you're stuck with Serial or XVNC or whatever. So what are the issues? We have two models in QMU of Virtio-backed video cards. One is Virtio GPU. The other one is Virtio VGA. The only difference between them is that Virtio VGA provides a legacy VGA frame buffer, whereas Virtio GPU doesn't have it. So Virtio VGA has more stuff. We would want to use that. But unfortunately, it cannot work on AR64 due to cache coherency issues. I will not go into details. That's what they told me. It's cache coherency issues. We just cannot have a legacy VGA frame buffer on AR64. So the solution, of course, is to use Virtio GPU instead. To make that happen, there were some changes needed. The first one was to create an EDK2 driver so the firmware can put stuff on the screen. You can just see your UEFI menu. Then we had to fix XORG because XORG did consider any GPU without a legacy VGA frame buffer as secondary device and such required configuration for you to work on it. So instead, now it has been patched in a way that if the only GPU you have doesn't have the legacy frame buffer, it will consider that one as primary. And it will start right up. And by the way, this was also useful for people using physical AR64 setups. So this was pushed by virtualization but actually helped also people running actual AR64 machines.  So it would use Virtio GPU instead of Virtio VGA on AR64. We want to stick to Virtio VGA for all other architectures because, as we said, it has all the same features and more. So why not have the legacy VGA frame buffer? It doesn't hurt when you can use it. And now we see that this is what you have on your X86 guest and this is what you have in your AR64 guest. So you have exactly the same XML, very user-friendly. Then we're going to talk about interrupt controllers, very fundamental part of any architecture, or maybe not. On AR64, we have the GIC or GIC. I'm not sure how it's pronounced, but it's generic interrupt controller. And it's basically the same thing as the APIC on X86. So before you have, this is something that cannot be quite the same on X86 and AR64. So on X86, you have your APIC feature.  So that's not very friendly to the user. The problem, the reason you have to add it automatically, is that there are two versions of the GIC. One is V2, and the other one is V3. And they are not compatible with one another. So if you are running, in theory, you could have a host that can run both V2 and V3 guests. But in practice, most of the time, if your host is V3, you're going to want to have V3 guests. Otherwise, they will just not run. So you have to be mindful of that. But we want the user not to have to worry about that. So QMU added a new query GIC capabilities QMP command. And through that command, Livert can figure out what versions the binary supports and pick one or the other automatically for the user. So if we now compare, again, we have APIC on X86. And we have the same XML as before, but now it's been added automatically for you by Livert. So you don't have to worry about it for one second, unless you want to. Of course, you can override that choice if you have very good reasons to do so. And then the last bit is addresses. So this is a Virtio serial controller, and we can see that it's using a PCI address. This is on X86. Instead, on AR64, we have this Virtio MMIO address type. So this Virtio MMIO address type has several limitations. The first one is that it is slower than it should be. Second one is that you have a limitation on the number of devices that you can plug using Virtio MMIO. I think it's something between 6 and 12, something like that. It's a very small number. Another limitation is that it does not support auto plug. So that's a pretty big one. And also, it's just plain weird. It doesn't match what it's on X86. So it looks weird if you're just coming to AR64. Luckily, we have Virtio PCI, which solves all of those issues. It's between 10% to 60% faster, and it solves all the other issues that I mentioned. So of course, we want to use it. And we also want to use PCI Express rather than legacy PCI. Because unlike in X86, AR64 is new enough that we don't have any legacy to worry about really. So we should just avoid all the backwards compatibility stuff and just go for the newer standard, which is supported natively by the architecture. Problem is that when we started looking into this, it was still not well understood field. PCI Express was not very well understood. So the situation was that we had the i440FX machine type, which is the classic PC machine type, which only supports legacy PCI. This is on X86. And still, on X86, we have the Q35 machine type, which supports PCI Express natively. But we were not really using it. At the liver level, we were using legacy PCI devices to compatibility. So that was something we wanted to address. And the PowerPC64, on the other hand, is doing its own thing, as usual. So we identified the opportunity to share our efforts between AR64 for the VRT machine type and X86 for the Q35 machine types. So we set out to try and solve both issues at the same time. The first problem that we had was, what should a legacy-free PCIe topology look like? What kind of controller should we use? We basically had no idea. Turns out there are lots of caveats, like so many of them. It starts with what kind of device you can plug into what kind of controller and what kind of device you should plug into which kind of controller. Because maybe you will plug a device into a controller. It will work. But it will work just due to QMU quirks or being more relaxed than actual hardware. Or maybe it will work just fine, but you will lose the hot plugability. So that's all stuff, lots of quirks and caveats that we had to learn about. Luckily, we know folks who know this kind of stuff very well. And that's the QMU developers, because they have gone through the specifications and they have actually implemented virtual hardware that behaves like real hardware. So we got into discussion with them. It went on what seemed like forever. But at the end of the day, we managed to collect all the QMU recommendations in a document. This document is now part of QMU.get. So it's a living document that we can update whenever we feel like there are better ways to do whatever we are doing. And most importantly, we can use that as a blueprint. So we could update Libvert to follow the recommendation outlined by the QMU folks. And that's what we did. And now you have the situation where this is Q35 and this is AR64. So they are exactly the same.  All the x86 examples up until this point were actually after we implemented all these changes. But anyways, the point is that if you're working on x86, you take your exact same skills. You bring them to AR64. They just, everything works. So availability of all this stuff we talked about. Well, it's upstream. Everything is part of a released version. So if you get the latest QMU, latest Libvert, everything is available. It's not in downstream distributions, unless you want to use Fedora Roheide, but it's there. And when it comes to future work, of course, there's going to be a lot of future work. But in the short term, there is something that we want to work on is these generic PCIe root ports. Because as it's said right now, you create AR64 guest. And you look into it, and you will have all the root ports are going to be marked as Intel something-something root port, which is just weird. So we want to have generic PCIe root ports that we can use for whatever architecture and doesn't have any brand on it. And we can possibly extend in the future if we fill the need, because we don't necessarily need to match the exact behavior of existing hardware. Also, whatever you want to do, because, I mean, it's an open source project, just get involved, jump on the mailing list on IRC, tell us what direction you would like to see our work go into, and we work on it. So now it's time for a demo. And again, I've kind of been lying, because it turns out this was a demo all along. So this has been running for the entire time on AR64 guest. Thank you. Thank you. And we can see that we have all the hardware events, because the PMU has been enabled. And also, everything here is using PCI addresses. We have the Virtio Ethernet, whatever. We have the Virtio GPU is here. We have the PCI bridges, which are the, this is a preview. These are the generic PCI bridges I'm talking about. I'm running very unreleased software. But these are the PCI bridges, the generic ones, the non-intel ones, and they work just fine. And I mean, yeah, this is full GNOME. Maybe I'll make it bigger. So LSW dash, like this? No, just the same thing. OK. I don't know how to try it. We'll try. I can try. No, I don't think so. Because I'm connecting through Wi-Fi, but the system is remote. And it has a fairly decent connection. So it should take just a bit. Well, OK, it's happening. So, oh, I don't have VI mode enabled. That's a shame. So that's your, I can run that as root, actually. So it's going to be more comprehensive.  You can look at the recording later or something. Or I can provide it to you if you give me your email, whatever. Yeah, go ahead, take the picture. Perfect. So that was the demo. Conclusions. Well, we have mostly achieved our initial goals. I mean, of course, X86 feature parity is kind of a work in progress and also moving target. So, but, I mean, I'm pretty happy. And virtualization in AR64 is better than ever. That's a takeaway. So go play with it. There are bugs. Report them. We will fix them. I'm a minute early. So questions, OK? So the question is, is there plans to port this back into CentOS 7? I don't know. I mean, all of the stuff is in upstream. So as soon as the downstream projects pick up a new upstream version, they will get it whether they like it or not, really. So I guess, yes. Other questions? So he's asking about the list of actual physical hardware you can buy. Yeah, that's a tricky subject. I know that there are some that you can get, some development boards, stuff like that. I don't shop for the stuff, though. My company thankfully provides it for me. So I never have to bother with that, sorry. There was a question there. So are you asking what the underlying hardware, the host hardware that I'm running this guest on? That's the question. What? Right. So this specifically is a Mustang development board, the one I'm running the demo on. But it can be any other number of 64-bit ARM that they have to, of course, have the virtualization extensions in order to make it fast. And I'm using a developer board from, I think, a couple of years ago, and that's a trick. So I don't know. Most of it, most hardware, I guess. So the question is, do you need any patches to the guest OS? No. The up until quite recently, guest support was an issue when it came to Virtio PCI. So we had some resistance to switching to Virtio PCI. But as the second half of 2016, every major Linux distribution ships that out of the box, except Debian, which we are waiting for the next release that's going to have it. So that is not an issue. The only thing is the Xorg patches, I believe, are fairly new. So if you want to run graphical desktop without having to do any configuration, Fedora 25 works out of the box. Other distribution, not sure. But mostly, no. You can just pick any AR64 distribution and run it as a guest. James was asking something, and then it decided not. OK. Cool. To connect remotely. So the question is, what software I'm using to connect remotely? It's VirtuManager. I can show you. I can prove it to you. So there you go. This is VirtuManager. And that guy is the doctor. Don't make him angry. I'm using VNC because reasons. I mean, technically, Spice should work just fine. But you need to have the Spice headers in the host-to-protein systems. I didn't want to fiddle too much with this stuff. So I used VNC. VNC is not the best, but works. OK. So if there are no more questions, I would say, oh, thank you.


A stereotype is a common belief about a particular category of things or a group of people, such as their personality, preferences, appearance, or ability. For example, French are fashionable, arrogant, romantic, and have poor hygiene. Germans are punctual, hard-working, straightforward, and have no sense of humor. Americans are optimistic, loud, materialistic, and lack cultural awareness. And Japanese are shy, disciplined, can't drink alcohol, and love anything cute. Accurate or not, stereotypes help our mind to categorize information and make predictions, so that we can act fast without thinking. Whether you agree or disagree with any of the cliches we presented about the French, Germans, Americans, and Japanese, two types of stereotypes might have clouded your judgment. Explicit stereotypes are preconceptions you are aware of. For instance, you may have heard of the cliché that the French are arrogant. Armed with this self-awareness, you try to interact with each French individual from a seemingly unbiased standpoint. However, you might still be judgmental because of another sort of stereotype. Implicit stereotypes are those that guide your thoughts from your subconscious. The stories about people your parents might have told you when you were too young to remember. Associations that make you judgmental without you even realizing it. And that's a problem. If we are part of a group that is the target of stereotypes, they can become a threat. A stereotype threat occurs when people are aware of the negative cliché others hold against their group and then become afraid that they confirm it. As a consequence, their performance often decreases. Say a society holds the belief that boys are better in mathematics. Girls just need to point out that myth prior to math tests and some girls will get anxious and as a result perform worse than men. Even just sitting next to boys can significantly lower their grades. Timamanda Ngozi Adichi summarized the problem like this. The single story creates stereotypes and the problem with stereotypes is not that they are untrue but that they are incomplete. They make one story become the only story. So what do you think? Are some stereotypes still useful in today's diverse world? If yes, why? And if not, how can we get rid of them? Share your thoughts in the comments below. And while you're at it, tell us are some of the clichés presented in this video true? If you like this video and want us to make more, subscribe to our channel or support us on Patreon.


Hi everyone, Joe for jaspyscasewrakes.com, coming at you with 2020-2021 Panini Mosaic UEFA Euro Soccer, what a tournament that was. This is break number 19 from a fresh case too. Sold 12 spots, one spot gets you two countries on this list right here, so let's double you up, likes or mix a lot. Just PJ, David, and Brian in on this, thank you very much. Gentlemen, appreciate it, there are the teams right here, let's roll it, let's randomize it. Six and a four, ten times for names and teams. One, two, three, four, six, and then four more times right here. Seven, eight, nine, and ten in final time. Got Brian down to David. Six and a four, ten times for the teams. One, two, three, four, five, and ten in final time. After ten we got Russia down to Portugal, so most of you know I was making picks for entertainment purposes only throughout the tournament. So I had some futures plays that actually worked out pretty nicely, and I did the math yesterday and it turns out that all the money I lost playing matches I won back with futures plays and I basically broke even. So all that, I had fun with it but all that just a break even. Brian with Russia and Slovakia, PJ with Hungary, Sweden, France, Brian with Switzerland, PJ with Finland, Brian with Poland and Denmark, PJ with England and Scotland, Brian with Wales, PJ with Ukraine, North Macedonia, Germany, Czech Republic, Belgium and Spain. I forgot that I had a futures play on Pedri to win Young Player of the Tournament and he did. And I was also on Italy to win right there as well and they did, although personally I wanted England to win. Hart was with England, the Wallet was with Italy. Brian has Turkey in the Netherlands, David with Austria, Brian with Croatia and David with Portugal. So let's get this right there. Let's sort alphabetically by country and trades are allowed but I'm going to switch away from the screen just for a second. I'm going to pop open this fresh case and we're going to see which two box we're going to. This is Mosaic, UEFA Euro hobby. All right, so there are stacks of two, right? We'll just go one, two, three, four, five, six on the dice roll and that's the two that we'll select. We'll use that die and it's one, that's easy. The left two right there and these we will save for next time. Next time I'll probably just grab just two random boxes. All right, so we're going to pause the video. When we come back we're going to see if there's any trades. We'll see if there's any trades and then we'll have the break, stick around, I'll be right back. All right, welcome back. No deals were done so this list right here remains the same. Thanks everyone for spending a bit of your Monday night with us, I appreciate it. Got the home run Derby on the background, Pete Alonzo raking. He still has like 45 seconds left, he's already had 21, 19, there's 20. 25 home runs for Pete Alonzo. Still has a minute left, leads the field already. The pitchers for this? Yeah, that old guy out there is an all-star. Usually they're like pitching coaches or like an old high school coach of theirs or something like that. That throws him the ball. There's Igor Deveev, rookie red for Russia, that'll be for Brian. An all-card ship of course, there's another Russian rookie there. And there's Bukayo Saka who, youngster, really young but missing the crucial penalty at the end for England. That was a rough way for them to lose it. But they've got a really exciting young team, England. Guys like Jack Grealish too. And he's already at 31 home runs, Pete Alonzo. 88 out of 99, we got Hans Hattibora. Wow, he's got 34 home runs. Greal Filish for Portugal. Portuguese youngster going to David. And this goes to the Oranj, that is for Brian. For Slovakia, there's Stanislav Lobotka. A mosaic parallel rookie. That is for Brian. Slovakia, there's Diogo Jota. Kai Havertz for Germany, PJ. Yeah, I don't think Salvador Perez is going to advance here. He'll be shocked if he has 36 home runs in this round. And there's our autograph. There's Marc-Andre Ter Stegen. Nice auto for Germany. PJ with the Germans. And the second box. Brandon saying, what, pizza-grade interview? Yeah, it seems like a good interview from what I've seen. So you know what? I'm watching the Statcast. He's on the other TV, I think. I'm watching the Statcast version of this. Should I go to their main broadcast? Alright, second box. Good luck. There's the Italian keeper. What a great job he did throughout the tournament. Did he win? I think he may have ended up winning the player of the tournament, too. Don Aruma. That's for Italy. That's going to go to Brian Croft. Another youngster. England team will learn a lot. It'll be interesting to see how they respond in the World Cup. These guys have a little more experience under their belts. We've got a Ennis Bardi, 33 out of 49 for North Macedonia. Pink Parallel for PJ. You know, I think last year, just just pre-pandemic, Peter Lanzo, some of you may remember, we went to that top million-card RIP party in Dallas. Peter Lanzo was there, and I wasn't on that trip, but the guys who went on that trip were saying how great he was. There's Nico Williams for Wales, Brian Croft. There's Mbappe for France. There's PJ with Le Bleu. There's Sancho for England. Oh, and a redemption for the autograph. Interesting. There's Jordan at Pickford. And let's see what this redemption is going to be. It's going to be nice. Euro-Autographs Mosaic. Phil Foden for the three Lions. Another youngster. England, in spite of a disappointing final, they do have a good young core of players. So it'll be interesting to see how they do in the World Cup in the next year and a half or so. And that is PJ with the three Lions. Let's see if it comes home for them in the World Cup. I'm Joe for Jaspeyscasebreaks.com. Thanks for watching. Thanks for breaking with us. I'll see you next time for the next one. Bye.


Traffic analysis is an attack to discover communication patterns. It can be applied even if messages are encrypted. Assume Alice sent messages to Bob but an attacker in the middle is able to detect this communication. The attacker is now able to conclude that Bob and Alice know each other. Traffic analysis is thus a form of social engineering. The number of messages, their pattern, precise timing, but also their absence can be important information for attackers. For example, the interval between messages can be used in SSH timing attacks and the absence of messages can be used by burglars to determine that you are on holidays and break into your house.


My name is Koko Shadal. I work for Red Hat and this talk is a little bit about the addition of AFX-DP as sort of a data pad or an open v-switch. It's not really going into the details what the AFX-DP is and does, but in short it's an enhancement that will allow packets to be sent directly to a user space, so similar to DPDK. With the advantage, it's a little bit more friendly, so you can either decide that you want the packets to be handled by the kernel and then sent to the user space, or you could actually say I want the packets to be directly sent to the kernel and do normal processing. The modern advantages in the OVS perspective, it's purely a user space application, so you don't have to worry about updating a kernel module, which sometimes makes it easier to do a quick change or maybe some experimental phases that you won't do. So last year at the OVS conference, or about a year ago, there was a presentation about AFX-DP and how it actually was integrated in OVS, so that might be something if you would really like to see how the technical details of the implementation look like. That's a good presentation to watch. I put the reference there. You can skip this slide, push it up. But the main question always is, you know, is AFX-DP faster than DPDK or is it faster than the kernel? Or vice versa. A lot of people ask that question and there's not much data out there that show the differences. If you talk to the AFX-DP people, they say AFX-DP is better or almost faster. If you talk to DPDK, they say they are always faster. So what we tried to do is a apples-to-apples comparison between the two or between the three different data paths and see what the differences are. What I did in this specific example is that we used the PVP test suite.  Okay, I tried to talk a little bit faster, harder, not faster. So what we did, we used the OVS Perf test suite. There was a presentation for me about it last year, I think, also here and also in the OVS conference. It's a PVP test where we send packets to a virtual machine through a physical port and then back out on the same physical port and then we measure the performance on that. For this, we also test the physical-to-physical port just to make it easier because then you don't have the overhead of the virtual machine, so it might be easier to spot the delta differences. We use an open-flow rule with the normal action, which means just bridging between the ingress, egress ports, or the ingress and egress ports of the virtual machine. We try a couple of different packet sizes and a couple of different number of flows, and the flows are based on five-tuple variations in the test. I have no latency tests in this thing, so there's no comparison between latency for DPDK versus AFXDP versus the normal kernel data path. What will we compare? There's a couple of different flavors. There is the pure kernel data path, which is a kernel module for OVS that does all the data path processing. We use AFXDP with a TAP interface into the virtual machine because that's the default case from a kernel perspective. Then what we also try to do is we do AFXDP with the V-host implementation from DPDK, just to see where the bottleneck is there. Then of course, most people would like to see is the AFXDP versus the DPDK implementation of the data path. Then also there is an AFXDP PMD in DPDK, so we try to compare what's the difference if we use that PMD versus the native implementation of AFXDP, and there are some differences there as well, surprisingly. So some of the results, some of the numbers, it's probably a bit small for the people in the back to read, but I'll walk through it. So this is a kernel version of the kernel data path. We have the different colors or the number of flows, and then you see the more flows we have, the more performance we get from like one million packets per second for a single flow, up to eight million packets per second in the reference architecture that I use for the test. But what you can see here is the CPU utilization, so the CPU usage is just a difference because it uses the queuing mechanism of the kernel.  So it looks nice. You can do eight million packets per second on the kernel data path, but you have to take into account that is using about eight to nine cores just for packet processing as a total. That's what I tried to show here. So this is the physical port in and the same physical port out, so just looping it back into the system. This is the same thing for the virtual machine in the picture, so packets go to the virtual machine and all back out of the physical port. Here you see that a single flow is a bit faster, and I think that has to do with caching, but I haven't figured out the details yet, so that's still the thing where I would like to figure out why it's faster. But you see you get about 0.6 million packets per second, but you see the same usage of the CPU, it even gets higher, because the virtual machine also needs some extra CPU power because you basically have two interfaces that you're pulling in this scenario. So this is for AFXDP, so the same test, but you use AFXDP as your data path in this example. So physical port to physical port. Here you see that the single port is faster, a single flow is faster, but it's roughly around 3.5 million packets per second. We do a comparison of it in the next slides between the two, but you can see that for all the number of flows, the CPU usage is sort of stable. You get your, here you can see your PND thread, so your PND thread is roughly 100%, which in the user space data path is always pulling the PNDs because it's a similar implementation as for the DPDK side, but you get additional CPU resources because the kernel also needs to pull the XDP part, so it needs to pull the driver, so your total CPU utilization is roughly about double in this scenario. But at least the number of flows is not depending on it. The V host interface, so the PVP test, you see the same. You get about 800.8 million packets per second. The flows are roughly the same. The CPU utilization is higher because you get the PND thread about 100%, and then you get 100% for the virtual machine pulling the V host queue, and then you get 100% for the hardware nick to be pulled as well, and then some overhead from QEMU that is actually doing the interrupt handling. So out of all this test or the different tests and the different frame sizes, I picked out one so we could compare the results rather than trying to compare all the possible frame sizes and all possible flows, so we took the medium, which is the 100 streams with the 64 byte packets because that's most of the people who would like to reference again 64 byte small packets. Also because in that scenario, we're not filling the pipe, we would take a bigger packet, we would fill the pipe and we don't really see where the bottleneck is if we want to compare them, and then we use the PVP test because it's more of a realized scenario where you actually go to a virtual machine and then to go back. So doing that for AF-XDP versus the kernel, and I have to apologize that the skills are not the same on both graphs, so it's not, you cannot compare them one by one, but at least you can see here that from a performance perspective you get about 8.8 million packets per second on AF-XDP versus a little bit more, roughly maybe 5.6 million packets per second. So you would say it's a bit slower, but also you have to look, take into account the CPU utilization, and you can see here that this is basically what is used for the PMD, which is always 100% on the AF-XDP part because it's constantly pulling if packets are ready. The virtual machine, of course the gas, it uses 100%, and then you can see the remaining part of the CPU that is used on this scenario. I cannot really read it there, but I can see it here. So the system is using a lot of the additional CPU power, about 200%, just to pull the two XDP drivers, and then there is a little bit overhead from Pueymi doing the interrupt handling on. So the conclusion is it uses a lot less CPU power, oh my gosh it showed the CPU for the kernel, because that's not on scale, but it's still about almost 10 cores, additional cores that is used to process the packets. So it uses way less CPU, there is more throughput, and there is no kernel module dependency for AF-XDP. So the good part is that on this side, sorry the bad parts are, it's not a full feature, so the features compared to DPDK or user space and the kernel is less, so there are some features missing, including QoS egress policy, and there is some design which is also there for DPDK, is the way that if you send traffic in from a kernel interface into DPDK or AF-XDP, it needs to bypass, so your packets take longer to process. So this is the same data, and I'm going to go through it a bit quickly, it's the same data for the physical port for the DPDK, so you get about roughly around, was it, million packets per second, sorry 10 million packets per second on the physical port, for the PVP it's roughly 2.5 to 2.8 million packets per second. So DPDK uses the V host user as the interface to the virtual machine, because DPDK and V host are both user space data path and OBS, they can be mixed, so in this scenario the V host user is also, the DPDK V host user is used in this scenario to loop back the packets, so you get the better performance, it's roughly about 1.6 on average for 100 flows, so if you compare them you can see that the DPDK, oh this is not DPDK, so this is the comparison between the XDP using a tap interface to the virtual machine versus a V host interface to the virtual machine, you can see the difference, it's about 0.8 versus 1.6 million packets per second, so roughly a double the speed if you have a different interface into the virtual machine, from a CPU users it's roughly the same except because you have only one XDP interface, your CPU usage for the other, for the V host part is totally taken into the DPDK PMD threads CPU utilization, so you will only have the additional XDP but not the V host, so conclusion, so the V host uses less CPU power, the throughput roughly doubles and you have a constant CPU usage if you increase the number of virtual machines in that scenario, if you add more XDP physical interfaces then your of course your CPU utilization will increase but not that big, that part is that you need to set up VPDK infrastructure, so you need to set up your huge pages and you need to set up the DPDK memory assignment as well. I think this is the one people like to see most, it's the AFXDP versus the DPDK, so what is the performance gain there or the difference, so as you can see it's like 1.6 million for AFXDP through a virtual machine where it's about 2.75 million, so the delta on this is roughly I guess if I call it already 1.6 or something times faster in that scenario, so DPDK is still faster if you take a normal use case scenario, but what is the main advantage, so the CPU power is less because you actually know what's going on in the thing, whatever you reserve for the PND threads is what you have, so if you reserve one PND thread your CPU utilization will be max 100% independent on how many ports you add to it, whereas for AFXDP you add the additional CPU usage for the XDP, so your driver, you'll use roughly double the CPU power there, so roughly 1.6 times like I said need to set up DPDK, you have to have PND drivers that might not be up to spec with the latest version, so if you have your kernel drivers that might be better, and you cannot use XDP steering, so you cannot put an XDP program there that say okay maybe some of the packets I would like to be handled by the kernel, and the rest should be go to OBS, I'm going a bit faster because we have only five minutes left, so the same thing for AFXDP but using the DPDK PND and not the native implementation, I'm just going to click through it so people can watch it, the thing is that the AFXDP PND is a little bit faster where you would expect the other way around, the reason is that with the AFXDP PND they reuse the buffer, so when you send something from one port to another port, you use the same AMBUFF for transmission, so you don't copy it, in the current native implementation when you copy something to a different egress interface, it actually copies the entire buffer, so there's a buffer copy for every packet transmitted, and that is one of the, I have some future items here, that's one of the things that's still being worked on, so we have a shared UMEM between the different interfaces, and then there are some kernel work for trying to get the native zero copy support there as well, so that we can bypass, there were some people thinking about having our own VO's library for AFXDP, rather than use the DPDK one, I'm not really a fan of that, but I think someone's researching that, there is currently no egress QoS support, but we can probably use, reuse the DPDK library to support that, but we have to see, but that requires you then to link DPDK to the project if you might not want that, and then this is some other stuff that is, I think the lower two ones are already in the master branch at the moment, and the other thing that we need to look at is some CI testing of the whole stuff integration, so the conclusion, so we didn't compare latency, and we also didn't do any multi-Q in the examples to see if that will speed up even more, so that's still something that needs to be done, so why does the speed comparable sit, so AFXDP is somewhere in the middle, so it's between between the kernel and DPDK, it has the advantages of that you can keep the kernel driver, so it may be a little bit easier to set up, but if you still need the additional throughput, you might want to go and set up DPDK in that example, and there I think your kernel needs to support AFXDP, so some of the kernels in the distributions don't have it yet, so you might want to still put into a new DPDK. Okay, that's it, any questions? I think we have one minute left, okay, so perfect, any questions? We have extra time, all right, thank you.


Just got out, something's wrong I waited out with wounds on my feet Where will you be? Flickering with memories, the Polaroids Yellowed in the sun, longing to be seen So come and hide Cutters with me


Everybody Matt here for late in sports cards ripping five of the 2023 Panini National VIP gold packs These are for Wade T. Good luck Wade. That is Kevin Garnett purple ice 50 and Larry Bird Josh Allen Red ice as to 199 and Mike Piazza Well, let's see big card in here for you Cristiano Ronaldo That is blue ice to 199 third one of those we told this morning KJ Evans rated prospect It's a Quinn yours rated prospect pink ice That was the 75 so the pink is the 75 the purples to 50. They're Steve Young hyper All right last pack Patrick Mahomes Red ice you go away. That is to 199 and Nicole Yoke itch All right, that'll do it for your packs. Thank you Wade. We'll get these right out to you


What? Why are you laughing? You're laughing. What? Look at me. You like what you see? Look at my... I look like I just bought an iron pole. Yeah, yeah, yeah.  Yo chat, what's up? Look at my legs. They're freaking jacked. Hello. Good afternoon. We are at the mall. We came back because when we came to the mall last time, everything was closed, pretty much. So we were like, let's just come back to the mall. There's a bunch of stuff to do here. Bonnie is here. I think she got distracted by something, which is normally my job, but Bonnie got distracted by something. Bonnie is with us. We'll hang out at the mall, we'll do some stuff, and then we'll go to... We think we're going to the zoo. And we'll do that on Bonnie's stream a little bit later. Part one of the plan for today is that we're going to get food. Part two is that we're going to do some shopping because I'm out of clothes in Minnesota and Bonnie's out of clothes in America. Yeah. So we're going to do a little bit of shopping and then we are going to go on Bonnie's stream. And on Bonnie's stream, we're going to go to the zoo today. Hopefully, if we have time. Yeah, if we have time, we'll go to the zoo. Yeah. Yeah, I think that would be a lot of fun. That is so... Bonnie was so funny. You have to make that an alert. You have to make that an alert. It's so funny, dude. That is so funny. But also, if somebody ran on the lobby in America. Okay, so if we were to do this, if we were to do a Lego building stream at some point, what would we want to build? Thor's hammer actually is sick. Individual pieces. Wait, it's like a candy store. I want to feel it. Don't put your hands in there. It feels dirty. So people just buy like mass parts of Legos and if they want to build their own like... It's new. Whatever they create. That's not me. I'm not that old. What do you mean that's me? It was not me. It was the Shrieking Shack. Oh my gosh, I actually want that one. Wait, is this Wrath of the Lichman? Combined expansion sets to create an endless adventure. Wait, it never ends? It's like more than 64 speed rides. Well, this is cool though. I'm going to keep asking you now.  Screws McDuck. Crap, the sauna's playing. We got to move. The Nike store. Let's go to the Nike store. I actually need new shoes for real. I wonder if they have weightlifting shoes here. Training, but these aren't really lifting shoes. These are kind of lifting shoes, but not really. These are like cross-training shoes. What are you looking at? Observing. Okay, can I help you? How can I help you? Wait, what is this? Feel this. This is our new material. It is biodegradable, but also it is cut by a three-year-old. If you look, you can see that it is an uneven cut and that's basically a reach from the artist to make it look more... like a swimsuit material. Yeah, this is like... With it? But it doesn't make much sense either. Dude, I'm going to be honest with you, chat. We're in Minnesota.  What do you mean? What are you talking about? We're in Minnesota. We're in the Midwest. Man, this is where Soda was invented. No, no. I'm telling you. No, we're in the Midwest, okay? These boys are corn fed, okay? You want to get some good offensive linemen?  You get some big bone country strong boys. That's what you do. You get Minnesota, Wisconsin, Nebraska. Excuse me. Hey, do you guys have like lifting shoes but like, not like this? Not the Metcons? Yeah. Because I remember the old Metcons, you should not be as good for it. But I don't know... I never heard that before because that's for sure the go-to. That's always been a go-to. Like you're heavy lifting, you're squatting, you're dead lifting. That's always been a go-to. Really? Yeah, man. I used them before, but I would always get like this like... I think it's because I'm so... I'm like 300 pounds. So like, I would get like this weird... It was like a snow crunch. It sounded like I was like walking in snow. Interesting. But I think it's because I... Whenever I was... Those were like Metcon ones and I was like... They'd be after like months of like heavy squats. That could be a man. Different product at the time, bro. Different material, man, so... Yeah, I don't know. I just... I just might go with that then. I don't know. Go with the super resume. I've never tried the super reps. That's something definitely new, bro. It's definitely the same with you. It's like a... It's a hit shoe, so... Yeah. High intensity... Yeah, high intensity, whatever... Yeah, yeah, yeah. You know what I'm saying? Yeah, I understand. So that's gonna be like the next one for you, bro. Really? So... Maybe it's... Because I mean, that was so many years ago. Maybe it was like... Because I always thought like the Metcons were more for like this kind of stuff, but they probably just kind of like specialized it. Yeah, that's how it was. That makes sense. That makes sense. Yeah, yeah. Cool, thank you. Yeah. I also want to go to the Underarm Restore because I've never seen an Underarm Restore. You never see an Underarm Restore. And I actually love Underarm Restore. Yeah, I have mostly Nike stuff, but I love Underarm Restore. Bye. Let's look at the Underarm Restore. What do you mean? This serves on boring. How do you expect to win state? Okay, we have to train. We've been training our whole life for this.  Dude, these look sick. Dude, I really like leather jackets. Like a leather jacket with Barcie jackets. I used to have a Barcie jacket, black and gray, but then I got it at a thrift store and it was sick. I loved it. And then I left it at Raffle Gator's house and then Raffle Gator's wife gave it to Kyuko. He gives it to me. And Kyuko? Yeah. What did she do with it? And then Kyuko, I think lost it. But you think this looks good? Yeah. I really like this. I actually really do. Honestly, Esa, I know you're memeing, but literally all you have to do is memeing. Yeah, but I don't want to. Like, I want to lift weights. Yeah, you can lift weights too. I don't know. You said all you have to do.  No, no, no. You said all you have to do. Yeah, I mean, I'll do cardio too. I joke. When I say don't do cardio, I'm joking. If you're subscribed to this channel. Okay, where should we go next, Chad? I feel like we should go to the maze. Oh, hey, Monty's here. Hey, what's up? I'm going to loop around and go down. I can almost guarantee you, Bonnie's going to come up the other side while I do this. Oh, I'm telling you, I know Bonnie, and it's like a 100% chance she's going to do this.  That's exactly what I'm having. Okay, so there's the mirror maze that we can do. I think the mirror maze would be cool on the shoulder cam. Chad, where's the maze? Hey, Minnesota. Where's the maze? This is the store. Hey, what's up? We're looking for the maze. We're lost. It's like a mirror maze. Do you know where it is? It's so close. Yeah? If you want Minnesota souvenirs while you're here. Look, it's donut bat bombs. Donut bat bombs? Who's the most famous person from Minnesota? Oh, he left. Never mind. The store's called Anime Fix. I need my Anime Fix. Hmm, look at this. Look at this. Bro. Yeah, I know. Bro.  What are these? All right, let's get out of here. We can't go in there with shoulder cam. Because... It's too much to us stuff. Yeah, they have, like, fricking dildos and stuff in there. Lava lamster.  Oh, it's supposed to be lava lamster. What the heck? This is huge. Awesome, look. I'm trying to go anywhere. Oh, frick. Dude. Dude, gosh. Okay, well, so much for now being able to go into Spencer's Gifts. What is that? Dude, what? These mannequins are TOS. Why are these mannequins showing so much? What? They're not, like, wearing... The mannequins aren't wearing bras. Those mannequins look like it's about 32 degrees out here. All right, thank you. Thank you. Well, we don't get stickers. No, no stickers until we finish. We have to earn these stickers. Look, this is this... No, we have to finish. We're doing this old-fashioned. Okay, wait. Bonnie. Bonnie. Bonnie. I said exit. Bonnie. Wait, what? Dude, I look so weird. That's much better. Hell, yeah. Yeah? You like what you see? Look at this. Look at my legs. Look at my legs. Look at my... I look like I'm going to spawn an iron pole. I'm going to go through without hitting a single mirror. And then you're going to do it. Wait, what do you mean? How do you... Watch. So I'm going to go through together? Okay. That's sad. You want to come with me? Yeah. Okay. Wait. Oh, my gosh. Oh, wait. I forgot that thing. No, you didn't. I did. No, only I know. You dare me to run? Yes. Okay. Okay. You dare me to run? Yeah.  Go run back to the beginning. Back to the beginning, back to the beginning. Go, go, go. Fun. You have to run without your hands. I don't want to see your hands. It's fun. It's really fun. That's so cool that we can see us just popping in and out of corners. There we are. Go. Go over. Okay. And then you have to run into the wall. Dude, this is actually so good for stream on a shoulder cam. No, yeah, you have to use echolocation. You just echolocate. Exit! Look, look, look. Just, just do this. No. Ready? Just. See, I can hear the wall here. That noise. Stop. Wait, what's wrong with that noise? Stop. Wait, where? Oh! Reflection. I think she's right there, just like, waiting at me in a mirror, and then she runs into me. Look, it's outside. We should stand here and just scream help out people. Location. Why?  I'm a dolphin. I actually ran into the wall. Right here. This way. Oh my God. This way. This way. This way. This way. This way. This way. We're getting close. We're getting close. I found it. Nice.  Yo, chat. What's up? That was sick. Oh, nice. We're champions. Yeah, that was good. Okay. Thank you guys so much for joining us on this Sabbath day. Thank you. Go check out this video that I just published, chat, S-Van's tailgate tour, episode one. Guys, like the video. Leave a comment. It's really, I'm just telling you guys straight up, 100% honest, it's very important for me, for these tailgate videos, to the streams to go well, and also the YouTube videos, especially to do well, even almost even more important than the stream, because if the videos do well, that's what I can show to other colleges and be like, hey, look how many people watch this video. Look how popular this is. Look how good this content is. The content being really popular on YouTube, more than anything, because that's what normies understand the most, is they'll see the views on YouTube and stuff. That's really what's going to help me sell the show, to have the colleges let me go and do the show there. If you guys could just watch those videos, like them, leave a comment, make sure to subscribe to the YouTube channel, all that stuff. It's absolutely huge. Anyways, guys. Here's the chat. That's Fandel. Thank you guys for all the subs, the bits, the donations. Everything today, and I will see you guys later. Okay. Amazing weekend. Bye. Bye.