Okay, great. It's about five after so I think we can get started today. So thanks everybody for coming to the CNF working group meeting. There's not the meeting you're expected. Please feel free to jump out right now. The other thing this session is being recorded so just be aware if you come like voice something or say something on camera it will be on YouTube after this. So the link to the meeting notes are in the chat. Please feel free to add your name so we can know who's discussing things today. So the first thing I just want to point out again this is a new working group. So we do have an overview deck for anybody that's new today please feel free to jump in and join there. The second thing that I'd like to point out, or I guess on the overview, some of the people some people were on the CNCF telecom user group so the talk call right before this. And just in case you weren't on that. So there is is a difference between the two groups. The talk is going to be more an industry wide discussion on broader topics of challenges facing the industry and have more like white papers coming out of that. Well this group is kind of more focused on a narrow set of problems and trying to accomplish something more in the short term, and like have results around some specific issues outlined in our charter. So we will be kind of having a discussion about that later with the presentation from Frederick, and I believe he's on the call. So jumping off of that. If you haven't, if you're not in the CNF working group Slack channel on the CNCF Slack, you're really missing out. It's been extremely active over the past week. Thank you for everybody that's contributing to the discussion. I think there's been some great discussion there and I think kind of a summary of that will be presented in Frederick's proposal for the initial framework that we have so I think that discussion is really sparked some good ideas. The second part. Thank you to Swisscom and Deutsche telecom for adding their interest to the charter. Please feel free to add this to the charter to add your company as interested to the charter. Now why this is important is because as we're trying to set up like a formal governance under the CNCF we need to know who like the interested parties so then we when we go before the technical oversight committee we can show them that there are enough parties interested in this and who those parties are. So the technical oversight committee just wants to know who's interested in the different initiatives so if your company is interested. Please feel free to add your company as an interested party there. The next part is I'd like to just kind of point out like two changes in the GitHub repo that happened since our meeting last week. So to follow up on our conversation around should it be like conformance and requirements or best practices. We've changed a lot of the wording to best practices rather than saying conformance. And so thanks Taylor for making that change more details in the merge GitHub issue or GitHub pull request. And the second part is adding into the charter, providing a list of cloud native benefits as a best practice provides. So that's another thing has been added into the charter, right. This is an open source community so if there's anything that you'd like to add, please feel free to open a pull request or open an issue against the charter or anything in the repo. Taylor, do you want to talk a little bit about the tug and see enough working group roles. Let's all that you just added that. I don't think I added that. Okay, so somebody else said okay so. I mean, it's good. I mean, so that you kind of went over it at the start. And the main thing is, we want to both have a place where we can have more open discussions to cover as much and as many concerns that as providers and vendors and everybody in the top domain and Kubernetes can come together and. And then we also want to make sure that we have a place where people can come together and know that we're moving forward on on something that has been decided. So there's kind of two audiences and I think Daniel Burnay from Bel, Canada, and Vook from Dushetel com have both kind of talked about this and the CNF working group, the audience for the CNF and the CNF work group channel. The audience that we're looking at for the CNF working group are people that are already wanting to adopt cloud native and let's say Kubernetes based platforms and technologies and really looking to say, how can we most efficiently use these, how do we, we either already understand or lack a lot of these philosophies and methodologies, or we're starting to want and we're starting to want to adopt more so you could be anywhere along the transition the bell curve for adoption, but those that are already bought in. And then the telcom user group would be the place where we want to have discussions about things that may not be covered yet maybe it's something that isn't covered yet in Kubernetes but it's a need within the telco industry, or maybe there's so many options that there hasn't really been consensus within the community about those things, or alternatives that just maybe don't even look like anything yet. So that's really what the telcom user groups about in the presentation today for those that didn't see it. One of the main items was something that Jeffrey silence was talking about the telco drivers and concerns so we're hoping to go ahead and and re surface a white paper that he started out last year and gather that information so this is a lot of the questions that people have put in what are our motivations why are we putting stuff about Kubernetes best practices for CNS like why are we talking about this if we don't know the motivations. That's why we put the little benefits in the scope for the charter we added that, but we don't want it to be the main focus within the CNF work group we're trying to say is this relevant at all the CNF working group is actually the place where people go we know it's relevant help us to actually find the best ways to utilize these. So this specific network function that we're using and we're trying to figure out the best way that we can manage it the life cycle management and those sort of things in the telcom user group though we can go deep into those drivers and all the things that we can utilize and source that information. As it becomes available into the working the CNF working group as well as other groups so I'm the test suite itself I mean, being able to have more context, the CNF test but another initiative can utilize any of those as well as other groups like an etiquette with the reference architecture and reference implementation that they're doing on Kubernetes. And so I'm hope I hope that that provides like some context, and we want to make sure there's a place for the questions and comments and discussions that have been coming up specifically in the CNF work group but same. So go out of scope. Yeah, thanks. I'd like to open for feedback to Bill and try to see if anyone has any thoughts or discussions around this like roles and scope that we're talking about for the CNF working group. And you may bill want to even bring up the charter itself. And for those who haven't looked at it lately so that we can see what is the new version based on all the different updates, but if I'd like to get feedback if people spots and stuff on. There's an understanding on what are we focusing on first and where can we talk about things that will help the telco community. Hi Taylor, it's Tom here. Hey Tom. I think, looking at the slack over the past few days, the biggest query that seems to be in people's minds is where do we write down the business requirements that's driving all three communities. I think it would be, it would be good if there's a kind of an agreement understanding, whatever, as to which of the three communities that level of thing needs to land. Because I think it would, it wouldn't be suboptimal to try and write it down in each community. And so it'd be interesting to get people's opinion on which community that would be a good place to source that information. All right. Well, I guess there's there's kind of two parts to it that I'm saying, probably the telcom user group is a place to have business requirements that are available for any different group or community including those outside of CNCF. And make it available to anybody. So telco business requirements. And then specifically for the CNF working group, if you look at the best practice proposals, which thanks Bill for bringing them up. So the best practice proposals, one of the things that's in the template what we're expecting is for people to provide references and motivation behind stuff. So if you if you're proposing here is a best practice that we think a CNF would be good to follow. That's all we're saying with these best practices. They're not going to apply to every CNF because not everything is going to be implementable. But for the ones that are here's ideally a way that the telco application being developed, can best utilize and consume the capabilities and services within Kubernetes. And one of the things that they should have in the proposal is what are the underlying business driver. And it may be that so this is the one part that may be a little off from what you were saying Tom, ideally it would be in one place. I don't think that's ever going to fully be the case, especially distributed and everything else group and what could happen though is you may end up where someone is working on a proposal. And they're thinking about existing application and starting to talk about how would this be done, following best practices for Kubernetes like a Kubernetes native.  I would hope that at that point, we could also push it back to the tag, and then maybe it makes it to a larger source. And the whenever you're reading this proposal and you're looking here and going okay, here's here's the best practice, and it has this requirement and then it says, go see here for more details. Some of them may have a massive amount of context around a business requirement others could be short. That's kind of how I'm seeing it. One thing I want to like throw into the mix to is the vast majority of us and we've talked about it from like the, you know, CSP perspective right like telcos cable providers, internet service providers. I think long term, just network operators in general, are going to care about this stuff. So my personal opinion is is within the tug, I would like people like you, Bernier, etc to help me get telco specific business requirements that we would then push into this group and say, this is what we're hoping to get out of here because what I'm worried about is if we were to build them say in here. Then it's going to become which we've seen it, we've been really notoriously bad at doing this in LFN is the telcos come in and we shove our paradigm down everybody's throat and then the Bank of the Americas of the world you know the disney's the coax that like run massive, massive networks are trying to, you know, figure stuff out. Additionally, to it's been brought up by multiple people, myself included that we're hoping to get some of the big public cloud providers in here, and I would really like to see some of their requirements pop up into some of these individual proposals. I know I've been the biggest one harping on we need to design to requirements I want requirements and I specifically the selfish part of me wants telco cable specific requirements. So it doesn't necessarily have to be the tug but I would like us as providers to go into one of the forums that specifically geared towards us for us to capture our requirements and then push those into some of these you know more cross organizational cross domain teams. So that way our voices heard, but we're also not drowning out maybe some of the good ideas that would come from like the pure app dev side the public cloud side the enterprise side etc. So guys, this is Robbie. So I think requirement may be an overused term. So I don't understand that the comments can come from the CNCF to use a group. I know there are some requirements coming from the CNTT before and there's certainly a few But maybe what we really need here is kind of principles that we know are very important and maybe trying to understand what are the principal foundations that will make this work important not necessarily frame it as a business requirement or a technical requirement. Certainly, what do you consider a successful program here? What are the principles that we live by? If you've got, I mean, that is, you might just be right that requirement is an overused word but you know a requirement is theoretically here a thing that you need in order to be successful. So, you know what you're calling a principle in traditional software engineering we would call a requirement I think. The big thing is is I want to know what we're using to measure stuff. If we go out and make the bold claim as a group of collaborators that this is a best practice. How did we validate and measure that best practice to say it is actually better than what we had before that it does do something that we needed to do and that we're not just doing it because we're a bunch of nerds who like to geek out on, you know, cool Linux deck. So, so this is sort of so isn't that something which CNPT is doing. So in RA2, they're defining their requirement in RI2 they're implementing them and RC2, they're actually testing for conformance against these requirements. So, so all of that is being discussed so and and they do work with CNCF Doug. So why do we need to redo all of that here why not take it work in conjunction with CNPT RA2 and and and see what's missing what and that's strictly being driven by telcos. And why not bring other players like you mentioned Jeff, the cloud providers and the Bank of Americas and whatnot in there and see look at it what what what pieces are missing. And rather than redoing all of that here, take what's there, and then figure it out what's missing and what we need to do here so rather than resetting everything.  There's no point in doing that. And so, so why not we look at it has is everybody here familiar with CNPT RA2 and have they looked at it what requirements are there and also the RM the resource management resource modeling, which is which is going on in CNPT, which is defining it at an abstract level. Perhaps those are the things to be looked at to start with. So I think I agree we should, we should look at them. So certainly from my point of view, RA2, I've been trying to keep very focused on the requirements relating to the interfaces that an application needs from the infrastructure, which I think is quite a functional set of requirements, whereas I think when we're talking about business requirements we're likely to be talking more non functional stuff which I've purposefully not been capturing in RA2. Because that wasn't the scope of CNPT at the start. Let me try to address this directly because this has come up several times before, and it's also, it's not just if we look at the CNPT or an etiquette work. It's also other groups this can come up again so why are we creating something there. That's the question. And I wish Daniel was on here because he said this I mentioned again I don't think you saw this book you've kind of mentioned this. The audience that the CNF working group is focused on and to some extent the telecom music group is different. It's a different audience. So there's not a one size fit all elephant doesn't do every have something that fits everything. CNCF doesn't have something there's other groups out there that are that are doing stuff outside of life as well, but CNCF is focused on a specific type of audience, those that are wanting to adopt the philosophies and methodologies that are behind the alternative. So, and specifically, the ones if you look at CNCF or cell phone, see it CNCF is about showing and highlighting various options, you could think of it more all the cart you can go in and say here's how they fit together and try to promote interoperability between them, but they're not being opinionated. LFN is for an audience that says we need something we want prefer something that's opinionated. We want something also that's maybe a little bit. It's going to be more focused on supporting integration between different groups outside and philosophies. So if you look at RITU and the RITU and all everything designed from that it's supposed to work with specific opinions on how things should should be operated and work in production. And that's good for the audiences that want that, then you can go there and you have that. That's not going to be what you would look at if something came out of a totally different group out of LF. You have other groups that are coming up with other platforms and ideas which may be very useful for a service provider and vendors may say this fits our model. So the CNCF and specifically the CNF working group is trying to provide something that's following the philosophies that are within the Kubernetes and cloud native community and that fits the best, the most efficiently to Kubernetes. That's not going to be a match to what comes out of CNTT. They are two options, by the way. They are two options because there are two different audiences that they're both trying to talk to. Can I take that point up about audiences a second? Ian, before you do that, let's let Vook respond because I've called him out twice and I'd like for him to be able to comment since I was appointing to something he's talked about in Slack. I am struggling a bit to reconcile the things between the starting point where we discussed about the conformance or idea of achieving certain framework of conformance testing where we can prove different types of CNF if they are conformant to something that we are hopefully about to agree. As a cloud native and the discussion with the best practices. So let's say the biggest interest or biggest value that we could see out of such working group that is focused on really making things fit to Kubernetes or creating a set of practices and even recommendations for the conformance. That would make a CNF work in a Kubernetes in a native, unopinionated or very little opinionated Kubernetes as a value for us. That would be something where we hoped, okay, as a telecom user who is deploying their own upstream based Kubernetes. We will not be in a constant struggle with different vendors who are preparing opinionated setups. If you follow what I want to say. So, if we are now moving away from that. I see the discussions in a different Linux foundation working groups, simply like, as Taylor said, to opinionate and we were hoping something that could be a conformance against the generic Kubernetes cloud native platform. So I don't know how we can reconcile these two things here. I think that this is Frederick, but by the way, so I think part of what we need to look at as well as separate out some of the some of the layers because there's the concept like from what actor you're coming from what what type of thing that you want to do.  You're likely not going to care about like is it a CNF or the VNF you care that there's an API that it meets certain both functional and non functional requirements. And you can call it and consume it in an in an explicit way as the operator of this. You care very much about how this thing is is is ran and operated and one of the problems that's been expressed by multiple by multiple operators is that you have a very rich set of things underneath of you that you need to control and manage and how do you produce this environment is that you're not, you're minimizing as much complexity and trying to give something that's a little bit more uniform to to basically run a command and control over your over your infrastructure. So when, if you're the vendor, there's two types at least two types of vendors, major ones that we've seen the first one is from an infrastructure provider, how do I build an infrastructure that you can run these things on, following a common set of roles, which is where you have we focused on, among others. And the final portion on that is like your vendor of a CNF. How do you deploy into into a CNF infrastructure environment. And so part of the problem that we ran into is that we've had. We've tried to focus on too much in many of these groups rather than saying okay what are some of these things that that's core and then how do we get these communities to interact with each other, because then what ends up happening is that whoever has a lattice voice in. If in the larger community ends up being the primary speaker at the expense at the expense of others so by providing a smaller forum that we can say okay like what are the best practices of running in a, in a Kubernetes environment, and that doesn't mean that open stack is any less important or PNF is any less important. We still have to work out how to integrate all these things together, but for the purposes of this particular group. I think the the initial focus should be very tight and saying how do we, how do we get something to run in in Kubernetes how do we get something to, to say like this is how to how to, how to operate it in Kubernetes and then we'll work out and share this best practices and it doesn't mean that you have to follow these in these rules exactly the market will decide what works and what doesn't what is important or not important, but to be able to say these are the best practices you need in order to, in order to move forward. So those are some of my thoughts that but I have certainly there. I know they'll be insufficient. So I'm hoping that others can help fill in or tell me where where I'm wrong as well. I'll just maybe two more minutes tried to get it or to throw it in the round a bit more pragmatic and then the round could decide is it something relevant for this working group or maybe just halfway relevant. The thing is, as we are working with the many, many application developers vendors of CNS, like Eric, so Nokia as my many years, Cisco's of the world, many other smaller one. We are getting now to situation that everybody has something like a cold cloud native or, let's say containerized applications network functions of different kinds. But each one has a has a caveat. Yeah, but the best way to run this platform or to this application is if you take Nokia, what they call cast containers a service or Kubernetes, essentially, or if you take Ericsson or if you take this one or if you take that one. And then as as an operator who runs dozens of network functions, you're facing the situation that you have a cloud native platform on one side, you have a huge scale that public cloud providers are achieving and having only one type of, let's say, parameterizable and configurable platform. And then you cannot use that because simply the CNS are using patterns and developments and practices that they tied you into certain very opinionated train, which I believe it's nothing that's efficient for the future. So what we are looking kind of to get is could we establish one basic foundation cloud native upstream based that every cloud native network function can be conformant to and can work better or worse. So this is a question of performance in that one generic cloud native platform. This is not what's happening and I don't know that the roots of that is it in the practices or is it in the, you know, different type of understanding what cloud native is, but it always goes in a very, very opinionated directions. And then you can have a cloud native platform per network function, probably or per network function vendor in order to make it work. So that's what I wanted to try to throw as a business problem as a business requirement. We want to have a one platform that is, you know, cloud native enough, flexible enough to cover multiple network functions running on the same. So, but I think that's because you're getting exactly what you ask for, but you're not asking for what you want. Cloud native, we're using it to mean a lot of different things. But applications are cloud native platforms are not cloud native.  But what you actually want is something that's consumable in your DevOps environment, that aspect of cloud native, the thing that you see from the outside of the CNF, not the, are these containers designed and run by, you know, orchestrated in a way that would suggest they're cloud native, because ultimately that doesn't matter to you so much. And that says that you can consume the result that it aligns with continuous testing and then automatic deployment. At no point will you find a cloud native definition that says must deploy with one API call or one click, although it's a perfectly reasonable thing to want and ask for. You know, strongly aligned with cloud native principles, but I think that is what you want, if I understand what you're saying and that's why I keep saying I want to bring this back to audiences because we want to assign why we're doing something to a group that cares. And a lot of cloud native principles are designed so that the group that cares is the developer of an application because kubernetes itself is very application developer centric it's trying to make applications easy to develop, because a lot of people use kubernetes develop applications that they then run. That's not the model we're on here. We're on a model here where we've got service providers in particular are most focused I'm not saying that exclusively focused but then most focused on operating an environment including CNF and on making sure those CNFs can be architected to within their network. The development side of things is more on the vendor side of things, not exclusively again, but vendors are more interested in making sure that cloud native development principles which typically apply to application developers are helping them, and that they can police their development teams to ensure that where a cloud native development principle is significant enough they want to ensure it's present. So, the thing about audiences I think is that it's not just one sided, we have actually about three maybe four audiences if you consider what the platform must provide to allow a CNF to get its job done. And if we have those four audiences are we representing all of them properly. And, or alternatively if we're saying this is done in the tug, or if we're saying this has been done in the CNCF do either of the sets of requirements there have a justification that says, this is the audience that cares and this is why they care. You know, one other, one other point of context as well is that we have to realize that by running on top of Kubernetes and part of the reason for the best practices here is also to determine what gaps are there in running in this space and we have to see the ecosystem at large so Kubernetes does not run in a vacuum it's certainly not a telecom only thing so the majority of these cases of Kubernetes is relatively small clusters, the small to medium size clusters in the enterprise space. So any, any gaps that we find any changes we have to be thoughtful of those communities because if we're not then any proposals we make are going to be squashed. And so, in the process of navigating that we also have this larger ecosystem we need to make sure that we that we navigate so not every audience that we talk about here is going to be the sole audience that we need to to think and care about. I think we're starting to now potentially overuse the word audience. But I don't know what should be there instead or an additional one. Well, if you are talking agile the term we're looking for here is actor. Okay, so Frederick you you had some slides about that uses actor to so the actors that sounds fine. And then whether the other part is within the actors or the roles, those type of people the personas whatever you're going to then have people that have maybe different preferences so you can have someone that's on an ops team, but they don't care anything at all about cloud native maybe they're doing embedded software, or I don't know whatever it is you're doing an ops team on a submarine and not following Agile or DevOps they don't care. So there's the persona or actor, and then what's important to narrow down is, what is the CNF working group it's not, or the tag or what is it in CNCF, or elephant or any of those, it's going to be a subset of those so the within the that, at least within CNCF telecom, both the platform and applications running on it and there is a there is a blur, as you've said Ian because kubernetes is application centric, but the, the philosophies behind what's cloud native are going all the way to the stack. So, within, within the greater telecom CNCF community. There's, we care from, you could say from hardware all the way up. It doesn't mean it's always covered at all. There can be gaps all over, but you care about how they could be layered for sure from the what we the kubernetes infra and each layer up above as they integrate within the CNF working group that the comments earlier were about, how do we have something. And Frederick you were talking a little bit about this, how do we move something forward that we do agree to for that subset of actors that say we want something we've we've decided we do want to utilize kubernetes we're not trying to bit bought in. Those discussions are happening in the tiger somewhere else. We are now at a point where we're trying to see how do we best utilize these for our telco concerns, as a ops team as a developer as whatever that you know you you have four different audiences and and I think are actors. And Frederick you have a few as well, whatever you are. What we're talking about is those actors that actually want to try to utilize kubernetes, you could say kubernetes native as an implementation of methodologies and principles that are more general. That's what we're currently looking at is a focus point. And it could, I think it will expand beyond application and probably get into infrastructure within the CNF work group, but wanting a starting point so that we can focus. It doesn't mean we don't need the drivers doesn't mean that we don't want the general purpose. What are those things behind it. It's those can happen concurrently. It's, it would be, what do you want to focus on. And right now we're saying, let's, within those CNF working group let's focus on a more narrow specific. Yeah, so I think. No, so I think Frederick has a presentation that'll, as Jeffrey said, I think we're like spiraling a little bit that'll help us like focus the discussion so Frederick are you on the on the call and we'll be willing to share the slides that you prepped. Sure. So, I'll keep it short. Sure, I will keep it short as well. So, my, the thing I wanted to focus on specifically is if we have the Charter. What is a, what is a model that can that we can build underneath of that Charter. And what can we carve out we want to start off with something that's that's relatively small. I mean, it's the only thing we focus on but it's the first small thing that I propose that we, that we try to focus on. And so back on to the problem scope we spoken a lot about this I won't spend too much time. I, but I will say this earlier models focus primarily on what is a cloud native what does it mean to be a cloud native network function. Maybe these are very important questions to answer and this is likely the wrong forum. This is something that we want to bring into the telecom user group and other forums. We do want to take into consideration on whether we are following cloud native to the best of our understanding that there's no single definition that's that's really ever settled. In time, we don't want to spiral down the philosophical example of or the philosophical question of what it what it's called native. Instead, I think we should look at it's at a few questions what are we really trying to do with a focus on on value on value there. And also the question is value value for who and these are things that we can explore as we move forward. A couple straw man things to consider and that is, there's there's a push for automation. The automation means that you're able to do things like auto healing you're able to to auto provision auto replace things. That means that you can potentially ties into other things like composability and reducing vendor lock in, where you could have something like maybe you're running a firewall from a certain vendor it could be like Cisco or Apollo or you want to you want to change to the other. What what is this, what are we thinking about scalability in fact the scalability even an issue is that's what we want to focus focus on and try to tie these down to values now the assumption that I think we're making here. What we think about scalability is that most of these costs are driven by optics. This is something very important to consider as well because if the cost or optics, then we're going to take a specific approach but if most of the costs we're trying to reduce our we have a very different set of conversations that we need to have. And so one of the things to ask yourself is, is, are we focusing on the right things from a financial perspective. And how do we reduce complexity in the running infrastructure and value for who because in the best case, the value chain benefits everyone. It should not be a push and pull against like operator versus vendor versus company that comes in who's contracted to manage. It needs to be something that is that is that the value add for for all in for the best chance for these efforts to succeed and if we're not seeing value for everyone. Then we really should ask, what can we do to to bring that in. But again, many of these questions are not for here but they're things to consider because they can derail such such efforts. So let's separate out. How do I consume from the operational details. And so a few actors that we can look at and these these may be too many or too little things. So these are more, some of the things I have to look at but we have the group is going to consume it. So the CFNF vendor, the CFNF operator again repeat those same things on the CFNF infra side, who provides the infra who operates the infra. And what what other actors are there as well and there's certainly some like there'll be some in terms of perhaps storage or others that we can eventually consider but but I think if we focus on on these ones as an initial set, then that may help us form some of our some of our questions. And the, the thing that I think we should focus as a community these are all important questions but I think the one we should focus on the community primarily is around what is, what does it mean to be a CFNF in Kubernetes. How do I, how do I build and deploy something what are best practices and the reason I'm not saying the others are not important questions but very specifically. So we start, we start here with informed by how do I, how do I operate this particular system. And this gives us the gives us something small that we can, that we can produce in a relatively short amount of time to help us gain that momentum because that this is this is what I tell my, my kid who is around as a young teenager and one of the things that she that's that I tell her is that the reason that you're doing all of your things here for school even though it's easy is to develop good work habits to develop good. And what we need to develop now as good community habits so that when we get into the harder problems. We're in this process of collaboration and with a very pragmatic view on how do we solve the problem. We're all going to have different opinions so we need to find a framework that allows us to deviate in those particular opinions let the market work things out, and, and then converge. In terms. So, so what I propose is that we follow a different, we try solving a different problems where designing a CNF is about designing principles, and that's a very important problem, but what I propose is that we focus on, what does it mean to be cube native Kubernetes native, and what does it mean to build network function on top of Kubernetes with a very strong focus on best practices and focusing on something concrete that we can look and test and something that in the best case scenario we're able to attest properties about it with the with the idea of servicing gaps and what and what can we improve providing this information as if you want to run a, if you want to run a CNF on Kubernetes, or a network function on Kubernetes to be more exact. These are the, these are the type of things that you may run into, you may need to expose certain pieces of hardware into it in this specific way. There's gaps around new alignment that are still being resolved. What can you do about it today. What do you, what do we expect for it to be able to do about it tomorrow, and to focus on best practices where, if you do a lift and shift these are the problems you're going to run into, if you, if you redesign your architecture to be horizontally scalable and to run in that container, then, and to provide information to Kubernetes so that they can orchestrate you. Then what, what benefits do you do you get from there and that does not mean the other approaches are invalid it just says this is how we do it in in Kubernetes. If you were to follow best practices, you can deviate at your, at your own risk, but at least, at least understand what the best practices are, and you can make an informed decision so that so you're not deviating out of, out of, out of not knowing and the purpose of this is to accelerate the, is to accelerate the space. And then in time we can expand this out like one of the big question is where do we draw the line between application orchestration versus infrastructure orchestration and I'll use an example enterprise example that if you install the test the test will run run the underlying pods for your system, but the test itself will actually run the orchestration of my SQL itself. So there's, there's an infrastructure versus application there's certain things that only the only the application can know how to do because we're application specific, and we have to define where that particular line is, and make it make it very clear, rather than saying Kubernetes orchestrate everything for you because it clearly won't. There's also questions in terms of what do we want to do about about multi multiple vendors on on the same infrastructure or type of infrastructure. So how do we, how do we set this thing up so they have a more uniform, sort of they're composable and that they're, they're consumable. Again, from a best practices perspective and it's not clear that there's a best practice it's that's fully surfaced yet so we may end up having to publish multiple things on the space, but and identify that that is a gap and and future things that we can work towards it. How do I ensure that they're compatible with each other, the witness test could be swap out one vendor for another with a vision towards zero touch automation. So, in many of these things we can push into the CNF test bed which already exists today. And that could be an initial focus to help codify and test some of the best practices. And so ensure that those are some of my some of the thoughts that I that I have I don't have anything else in these previous documents. But I want to put this as an as an initial framework. I have actually one comment. I think I agree with the conclusion few slides now the one thing that I wonder about since we are trying to define the actors, which is we have a slide who says number five I think, who are the actors. The problem I see here that we're trying to find you find the questions in their behalf. So maybe one approach we can do is once we define the actor. This ask them this ask them what is the main point that you would like us to solve. It might be worth doing a survey targeting only those actors that we're trying to target and ask them really what are the three points you find that we can help you solve. And this way actually we can create a roadmap for this group, but trying to really do it in a way that's serving the customer themselves, the audience for this work. I completely agree with that as well and I put, I wanted to have some continuity in the slides. But if, if you look at this like nobody really wants. It's like something like a sorry I'm sorry I'll be like you you want to from an implementation detail, but what the, what the customer really wants is a faster system or connection into a very specific system, or additional properties are being added in by their top of the switch. They don't really care about the actual mechanism itself. And so, so I think, like, how do I consume this particular thing versus some of the operational details that we, there's, there's things that we can that will need to to to work out on that. And I think when we start asking some of these types of questions like some of these type of differences or challenges to our assumptions will will pop out. And I think doing some type of a survey of each of these types of groups like if you're a CNF vendor, what, what, what are your, what are you trying to do like what is your value proposition why are you doing this. And what are your pain points that we can come up with a variety of different questions to, to ask to help us inform these type of these type of things. And as we, and these ones we should like the these some of these particular questions. There's different forms of this question depending on where you come from as well like if you're a CNF vendor and you're saying how do I consume the network versus you're a customer interesting how do I consume a network service. The two very, very different things even though it's the same question, even though it's the same words in this in the question. So I think, you know, the question that this slide provokes my mind is, is, does it make sense to perhaps have either different subgroups or have even different work groups. I think I think I keep thinking that we're, we've got to the point of audiences and actors we have different people who want different things out of this work group and that's why we keep getting stymied on the charter. And to me this slide really crystallizes that and I'm wondering if it might make more sense to to reformulate what exactly we're trying to do in these terms. Yeah, it may make sense. One of the things that, and this is one of the challenges that we have as well is in the past and I'll put it very bluntly because the risk, and please do not know no and be offended by this specific thing I want to be very clear because this is a very complex problem. When you look at the ratio of different groups that are here like we still don't have very many CNF vendors are still very small number very small number of them because that the, the infrastructure has not been ready for them to really build and deploy on there's been an increasing amount of doing things internally. And once to the service provider and operators there's only a very small number of them, but there's a very large number of vendors that are within the community and one of the problems that we that we run into is by throwing everyone into a single pot and saying okay have fun. And when you have an operator say something, and that the vendors don't necessarily agree with there's 20 vendors ready to rebut at that particular at that particular path and what ends up happening is that we scare away the operators in the process and it's a function of any particular group trying to, to be mean to them. It's just that everyone wants to be heard which is fully understood. And simultaneously, it's a function of the process. And so, rather than trying to blame people and say okay what can we do to fix the process to make sure that every of the major actor that's here gets a voice gets there. That's their opinions heard but at the same time we don't establish in a way that that overwhelms any any of the single actors, especially if those actors are, are smaller in number. And so that's something that we have to be very, very careful with in how we, how we organize the these particular these particular path and different, a different working set of subgroups could help with that, but there's also the risk that they become isolated if we take that approach we need to make sure that that we have somewhere that the work groups meet together on a regular basis to to describe the high level things are doing to make sure that that all parties are heard. I think you really did a good job at underlying the issue here because in the end we we list all these actors, but we're going to be dictating or guiding the CNF vendors and particularly in particular so they're a little bit cornered in the way we're, building things right now and if, if I joined the brainstorming maybe I have one suggestion of a way out of this is instead of thinking about the individual actors, the, maybe the scope of this work group can be specifically on integration. That is, not to tell anybody how to build a CNF, but rather to integrate all these various actors together and make sure that they have ways that the operator the vendor the platform provider that everybody can work together in the best possible way. Yeah, I was getting at when it came to, you know, you know we've sort of danced around the idea with best practices which is unfortunately not terribly concrete and hard to action. You know we you talked earlier about vendor lock in and as I, as I mentioned earlier in the in the chat you may not have seen it Fred because you were, you were presenting. The fun that what what what vendor lock in is really a proxy for is the challenge of integrating new things and the general challenge of interoperability. I think that's what what tall was just pointing at as well and also what the slide really gets that. And so I think that that tall is is right and and again I really think this slide crystallizes, you know what we're all really struggling with their their separate but related things that build on each other and fundamentally what it comes back to is, how do we integrate and how do we ensure interoperability. So we can, if we can focus on I think from that lens as opposed to, you know, how do you, you know, the specifics of how something is built or something like that, I think that that that gets to what everybody really needs here. So, we're so overt is there's something actionable you want to do. Yeah, yeah, so I want to make sure we close here and then we can. We'll, for sure, next week planning on having a call. I think the week after we may have to gap weeks, and then in January, we may go to twice a month type of call. The, I think the focus right now is going to be what you've presented the Frederick, and, and that's where the charter and everything else is kind of gone to. It's not that we may not expand later we can always adjust, but looking towards something more actual, I think is going to be easier if we have a narrower focus so this is going to be in a cube native or Kubernetes native is implementations of the cloud native. And I think as far as the test ability, that's going to be part of the proposals. So there's a, if, if anyone's interested in trying to help with this that would probably be one of the first areas trying to take an idea, like I posted one in zoom. About containers dropping root privileges which is actually part of the open shift guidelines. If you look at those guidelines. So, coming to something and then giving references on why this is a practice, how it can be testable, that's part of it. That's valuable to telcos that's where we want to center the discussions and then come back and go. Okay, is this actually something that is going to solve the telcos problem is this something that's going to benefit a vendor because they can get something to market faster whatever what what are the drivers all around that. That's where we want to start centering on putting forward those, whether it's a simple idea or something existing that you go and, and that's where we want to start at the docs. And, but I think otherwise we need to continue with this conversation maybe some new actually view some of the proposed best practices for next week. I'm going to maybe finish with one words that someone on the call early in this call said it was about and is that the best practice or the requirement or whatever you're looking at however when I call this. Does it is it worse or better. That's what we're talking about in this. Most of them. I don't think will be requirements. For, if you look at Jeffrey said the service providers are going to have different stacks. So they will come up with the requirements and work with each vendor. But that's going to be a selection hopefully if we have best practices are useful, they can select what they want all a car. What we're going to allow help is, are you doing something that's worse or better. Interoperability between the applications and interoperability for a certified Kubernetes platform or not. And I think that'll go with what you were saying Lisa and everyone else interoperability is is definitely a key point for Kubernetes. Thanks everyone. And we'll see you next week. Thanks. Excited. Thanks.


Choice. Allow voting. It's sometimes useful to be able to see at a glance how your learners are progressing or to gauge their opinions or needs. Moodle has an activity called choice which allows teachers to set up voting options with radio buttons and a learner chooses a particular option. It doesn't only have to be how well you feel you're progressing. For example in this choice the students are asked to select a group for their project work. As a teacher you can always see the responses because you have a view responses link to take you into the reports and if anyone fails to make a choice you can make the selection on their behalf. Let's go into our course and set up a choice. To do this we need to turn the editing on from the gear menu top right and then in the section where we'd like to add our choice voting activity we click the link add an activity or resource. This brings up Moodle's activity chooser. Choice is an activity because students are interacting with Moodle and when we click the button once we see that there are various examples on the right of how you could use a choice activity with a link to more help. We can click add at the bottom or simply click the radio button twice to take us to the setup screen. The first thing to do is give it a name which will identify it on the course page for our learners and we can give a description if we wish and take the box to display this description on the course page. If we're only going to have a few options which will show as radio buttons we can display them horizontally. If we think we're going to need a lot then we can choose to display them vertically instead. If we allow the choice to be updated a learner can change their mind. This might be useful if for example it's a choice about progress through the course and they might not be too sure of their progress on Monday but they feel more confident on Wednesday. You can enable a setting to allow participants to make more than one selection if you think it's appropriate. For instance when choosing preferred meeting times. If we limit the number of responses allowed then only a certain number may choose each option. This might be useful if you need to put students into groups or simply if you want to give them all a chocolate bar and you only have 10 of one particular type of chocolate bar. We then type in the options which we want to see against the radio buttons in each of these boxes. If we need more we can click to add more. There are other settings which might be useful to explore at a later date such as availability if you want to set a time limit to your voting and results if you want to decide whether or not you want your learners to see each other's choices and if you do whether or not you want them to see the names of the students who have chosen or not. You might also wish to select to show a column for unanswered. This means then you can see instantly who hasn't done this task because they will appear in a column of their own and you may make the selection for them. We just then need to scroll down and click save and return to course and we have set up a voting activity, a choice for our learners.


How can we learn from the moment when things go really badly wrong? When we are caring for or working with children with a diverse range of needs there are always going to be moments when it all goes to pot and you feel that you haven't done the right things and yeah things have escalated or whatever and we can do two things there we can beat ourselves up about it or thanks buddy or we can consider what can we learn from that and I know that's really easy for me to say in my calm colour coordinated shed and perhaps you're dealing with the day to day of this and it's really really tough but I'm going to give you a really simple strategy for trying to maybe get to the crux of what's gone wrong in those moments to help you understand a bit more and what you'll find is if you begin to become quite inquisitive about these moments when things go wrong and that sometimes they're the moments that you learn the most from actually the the days when the kids are sort of plain sailing a little bit and kind of coasting we don't necessarily learn a huge amount about how to support them on those days but if we're willing to stop and learn from the moments when this happens we can often learn quite a lot and quite quickly but it's really you know it's hard we have to take a step back and be our best selves in order to do that now the approach that I like to use is called the five wise approach it's called the Toyota approach but I like to call it the toddler approach because it's like a toddler you know when you're working with a little kid or supporting a little kid then all they ever want to know is why why why why why why why why it's just like that it really is that simple now it's based on the idea that Toyota discovered some years ago that any manufacturing problem if you just kept asking the question why you would get to the nub of the issue and often there would be a really simple answer that you wouldn't have thought to have got to if you hadn't have just kept asking the question why so I just run through an example here I'll pop it up on the screen by some magic so we start off with in the Toyota factory or manufacturing cars the robot has stopped so why why did the robot stop the circuits overloaded causing a fuse to blow why is the circuit overloaded there was insufficient lubrication on the bearings so they locked up why was there insufficient lubrication on the bearings the oil pump on the robot is not circulating sufficient oil why is the pump not circulating sufficient oil the pump intake is clogged with metal shavings why is the intake clogged with metal shavings because there is no filter on the pump so you go through all these why's and in the case of the Toyota factory we get to this really really simple answer that the filter needs to be placed on the pump but we've started off with a broken robot and there's no way that you would have guessed that you know from that that the problem was with a small filter but because we keep asking the question why we get to this really quite simple and relatively fixable answer and this kind of can happen when we're working with kids too when we keep asking the question why what we'll often find is that we get different answers than the ones we might have assumed so that big angry outburst that you've seen from this child at the end of the day and you find yourself automatically saying what was happening in the environment at that time who were they with what triggered this actually when we keep asking the question why sometimes we'll find out this wasn't about anything that was happening right now this was a this child was ready to boil over because at break time they got really overwhelmed at lunchtime they had an argument after lunch they didn't understand what was happening in class and you know that there were lots and lots of things that led up to this the other thing is that we can be quite as humans we're kind of programmed to try and figure out what's going on all the time and we are quite good at jumping to assumptions but we're not always good at jumping to the right assumptions so again be asking these questions why be flexible in your learning and where you can do this at a time of calm with the child themselves and actually instead of being punitive about whatever you saw whatever this kind of maybe it was an outburst or aggression or something like that instead be genuinely inquisitive I really want to understand more about it because actually we'd like to be able to support you to try and prevent this happening which would be better for you too really wouldn't it and then by asking those questions why at a time of calm genuinely inquisitively without judgment without anger can sometimes help us to understand a bit more now you'll find over time you get better at doing it and that if you do it with the same kids again and again they get better at responding to this too so give it a go see how it goes and if you find yourself at a loss you find that something's happened something's gone wrong and you don't know what the reason was remember just keep asking why however quick caveat don't do this at the moment it's just happened at that moment we're not in a good position to be asking the question why probably the child is in a heightened state of anxiety or anger and perhaps so are we instead wait until a time of calm and look back reflect on it and see what you can learn from that moment it's really important to remember it's difficult it's really difficult working with some kinds of children but actually we can learn a lot from them but only if we're willing to do so and we keep on asking questions and we're inquisitive in our approach good luck i hope this was helpful please subscribe and do leave comments if you have any other ideas on this or experience of doing it and also let me know if there were any other kind of videos you would really like me to record and tune back in on tuesdays and fridays for new videos see you soon bye and bye from buddy say bye bye


Hello, and welcome to this session. This is Professor Farhat. In this session, we would look at partnership and specifically admission of a new partner. This is part three of five. This topic is covered in advanced accounting, and obviously it's covered on the CPA exam. Now, I would really like to connect with my viewers, so please connect with me on LinkedIn. I'm very active on LinkedIn. I always post additional lectures, tips for the exam, so on and so forth. If you're a Facebook user, you could go to my Facebook page accounting lectures, or definitely, I want you to connect with me on YouTube by subscribing, because this is where I post all my new lectures, as well as my Twitter account, and my website is farhatlectures.com. Let's go ahead and record changes in ownership and membership in a partnership. There are two methods that are frequently used. One method is called the bonus methods. When we accept a new partner, we use the bonus method, and what does the bonus method implies? It implies that assets are increased by the amount of the asset invested by the partner being admitted. What's going to happen? We're going to have more assets. Of course, we're going to have more assets, and any difference between the asset invested and credited in new partner accounts capital is adjusted to the capital account of the other partners. I'm going to just give you some numbers real quick, but we're going to work on this more specific example. Let's assume we have a new partner and that new partner invested $100,000. That's how much they invested. What's going to end up happening? We're only going to give them $80,000 in capital. Hold on a second. Didn't you say they invested $100,000? Yes, they did, but we're going to only give them $80,000. Take it or leave it. What does that mean? It means there's $20,000, $20,000, and that additional $20,000, it's going to go to the other partners, to the other capital account. The whole amount goes to the partnership, but the capital account of the other partner increases, or this partner invested $100,000, but we're going to give them $120,000 in capital. Why? Because we're so desperate for money and desperate for this individual. We want to attract them. Therefore, we gave them more capital than they invested. Then it's going to be taken away from the existing partner. This is the bonus method. Again, we'll work an example. Don't worry about it. The other method that we're going to be, that we could use is called the goodwill method. What is, how do we do this under the goodwill method? Under the goodwill method, under the goodwill method, a new asset is recorded that's based on the difference. So the new asset is recorded based on the difference between the value implied by the amount of the consideration and the value reported in the partnership box. So simply put, what's going to happen when somebody contribute money to us? What's going to happen? We're going to have to find out how much is the value of the, of the partnership worth. How does that work? Well, here's how it works. If somebody contributed $50,000, oops, $50,000, and we said, we are going to give you, we are going to give you 20% of the partnership for that money. Well, what does that mean? It means we are implying, if we take $50,000 divided by .2, we are implying that the partnership is worth $250,000. So we're going to find how much is the partnership worth? Then based on that, we're going to back into the journal entry. So just know that we're going to have to find the implied value. If somebody paid $50,000 and we gave them 20%, it means the partnership is worth $200,000 and $50,000. Sorry. And if you watch a show called a Shark Tank, I'm sure you do on CNBC.  And immediately with this, what these people do, they grab their calculators and they take $100,000 divided by 20% to find out what? To find out how much does this individual value in your business? So if we take $100,000 divided by .2, the business is worth half a million. So this is how they start the negotiation. They say, well, is your business really worth half a million? Because that's what you're telling us.  So we're finding the implied value. So the best way to illustrate this is to work examples. And we're just going to start with the very simple examples then build up. We have two partners, Phil and Tim, our partners in an electrical repair business. The respective capital balances, $90,000 for Phil, $50,000 for Tim. And they share profit and losses equally because the partners are confronted with personal financial problems. They decided to admit a new partner so they need money to the partnership. After an extensive interviewing process, they elected to admit Don into the partnership. Prepare the journal entry of the admission of Don under each of the following conditions. So we're going to have a different scenarios. The first scenario, we're going to assume that Don acquires bought one fourth, 25% of Phil's capital. Guess what? The partnership did not get anything, okay? And they paid Phil $30,000. So here's what's going to happen. This is Phil's capital. Phil's capital is $90,000. Phil's given up 25%. So Phil's given up $22,500. So Phil will reduce his capital by $22,500 and Don will be admitted and they will get $22,500. So simply put, the partnership did not benefit. The partnership as a business did not benefit. Basically, Phil gave up $22,500. It was replaced by Don. So notice, no cash is involved here. No cash for the partnership. Obviously, Phil took the cash and Phil deposited that cash in his personal account. But the partnership itself did not receive the cash. So notice this is basically a transaction. In terms of cash, it happened outside the partnership, but they had a partnership structure. Don acquired one fifth of each of Phil and Tim's capital. Now, Phil gave up 20%. Tom gave up 20%, which is 90,000 times 20% equal to 18,000. So Phil's capital will go down by 18. Tim's capital will go down by 10. And that's going to go to the new partner Don. So Don acquired the 28,000 of 18,000 coming from Phil, 10,000 coming from Tom. Notice this is outside the partnership. What do we mean by outside the partnership? The partnership did not receive a penny in these transactions. All what they do is they gave up some, they gave up their balances. So the partnership in a sense did not benefit. Now we're going to work where the new partner invests directly into the partnership. And this is, and we're going to be using the bonus method to account for this. Now, this is where the new partner, Don, invest in the partnership. Don acquires one fifth, which is 20%, one fifth capital interest for $60,000 cash investment. Total capital after the admission is 200,000. So here's what happened. We already have Phil with 90,000, Tim with 50,000. And now we have $60,000 in cash. So the total capital is 200,000. And what's going to happen? Don said that I am going to get 20% out of this. So he's going to get 20% out of this. So 20%, 20% out of 200,000 is 40,000. So notice Don paid 60,000. Don's getting 40,000. Why? Hey, look, if you want to invest with us, we're going to give you 40,000 for your 60,000, either take it or leave it. So basically what's going to happen, the new partners, because we're using the bonus method, they're going to get the bonus. So first, the partnership will receive $60,000 in cash. So this transaction involved the partnership itself. Don will get 40,000 in capital because this is how much based on the computation they're going to give them. Now, what about the additional $20,000 that Don invested? It's going to go to the capital account of Phil and Tim, 50,50. So Phil and Tim will split that additional capital as a bonus to their account, 50,50. So this is the bonus method. Now, let's assume we're going to be using the goodwill method. So Don invests $40,000 for one-fifth of the business. Now, here's what's going to happen here. First, we have to find out how much is the partnership worth. If Don invested $40,000 and we gave Don 20%, it means we are implying that the partnership is worth 200,000. Okay, let's do this. So we are implying that the partnership is worth 200,000. Now we can compute this. Phil's account is 90. Tim's account is 50. What's left is, which is 90 plus 40, 90 plus 50 equal to 140. Plus, we're going to give Don 40. So what's left is the $20,000 goodwill because it's supposed to be 200,000. If Phil has 90,000 balance, Tim, $40,000 balance and we're giving Don only 40,000 because that's what they said. We're going to give them 40,000. What's going to happen? We have 20,000 left and that's 20,000 is the goodwill. So let's go ahead and generalize the goodwill. So Don invested $40,000 cash and Don got $40,000 in the business. Now, as a result of this transaction, we find out that our company is worth more because what happened is the company only had, from a business perspective, here's what happened. From a business perspective, from a business perspective, the company was worth before Don 140,000, the 90 plus the 50. If Don contributed 40,000, then the business would have been 180. But what we said is when Don contributed $40,000, we sold him the $40,000 on a 20% discount basically. So the company is worth 200,000. So we revalued the partnership. The partnership is worth more than 180. The partnership actually is worth 200,000. So as a result, what's going to happen because the partnership is worth more and we know this because somebody was willing to invest with us, we're going to record an asset called goodwill and we are going to increase the existing partners' capital balances by 10,000. Why did we do so? Because somebody said your company is worth more than what it is. And because of this extra more, the existing partner, they get basically increase in their capital. So let's summarize. So acquisition of an interest by an investing asset. If the fair value of the asset invested equal to the book value of the capital asset acquired, there is no goodwill and bonus. So somebody invested $10,000. We gave them $10,000 in capital. There is no bonus. There is no goodwill. If somebody invested $10,000 in a business and we gave them only $8,000 in capital, then we have $2,000 going to the existing partners. So there's a bonus to the existing partners or a bonus or a goodwill to the company. If the person invested $10,000 and we gave them $12,000, we gave them more for their book value, then the additional $2,000 goes to the new partner. And we'll see an example. Okay. So if somebody is getting more than what they paid for, they will get a bonus. If somebody get less what they paid for, the bonus goes to the other partners. Okay. And the best way is to work through a series of examples. We have B, S and L, Beth, Steph, and Linda have been operating a small gift shop for several years. The partners concluded that the business needed to expand in order to provide an adequate return to the partners. The following balance sheet is for the partnership prior to the admission of the new partner, Mary. So they want to accept Mary, but this is what their position looks like. Cash $160, other assets $640, total assets of $800,000. They have liabilities of $200,000 and this is their capital balance. Beth right now own 40%, Steph own 40% and Linda owns 20%. Okay. But they want to admit Mary into the partnership. So we're going to work a few examples to show you how Mary is admitted and how do we account for that transaction. Under the first scenario, prepare the journal entry to record the admission of Mary assuming one. Mary is to invest sufficient cash to receive one sixth of capital interest. So Mary to receive one sixth of the interest. Right now, the total existing capital is $600,000. Okay. Now, what we're saying is when Mary is added, Mary is added based on, based on, not based on, she's going to be owning one sixth of the partnership, one sixth of the partnership. But we don't know how much she's invested, but she's going to be getting one sixth. Well, what does that mean? It means $600,000 that represent right now only five, six of the company. So the $600,000 represent five, six. So simply put, the company should be worth $720,000 after Mary invest. Okay. So how much Mary would need to invest? Well, if the company should be worth $700,000 and the capital balances should be $720,000 and right now it's $600,000 for Mary to get one sixth, she will need to invest $120,000. Simply put, if you take now $720,000 multiplied by $16,000, it's going to be $120,000. Okay. So basically Mary is, Mary is, is, is getting six, one 16th of the company. One more time. But first we needed to find out how much is the company's worth. So one divided by six equal to 16% times $720,000. And Mary will need to invest $120,000 to receive one sixth of the business. So that's the deal. You invest one 20 will give you one six. Right now, the company is worth based on your admission $720,000. Okay. Let's take a look at, so let's look at the journal entry. The journal entry will debit cash, credit Mary's capital $120,000. This is what actually happened. There's really no goodwill, nothing. Just we told Mary, you, you get one six and we computed how much that one six is worth. Now, prepared. This is a different scenario. Prepare the journal entry to record the admission of Mary assuming Mary is to invest $160,000 for one fifth of the capital. Now, Mary's going to invest $160,000 and get one fifth. Now let's take a look at this. Well, let me do it for you first. Beth, well, let's look at it anyhow. It doesn't matter. Beth has $265,000, Stath is $215,000, Linda is $160,000 and now we're going to add Mary's capital. Mary's capital is $160,000. So the total capital invested will be $760,000. Okay. After Mary invests $160,000. Mary is to receive 20% ownership interest. Well, if we take $720,000 and give Mary 20% of the current of the new capital, she would receive $152,000. So Mary spent $150,000. We gave her $152,000 in capital. We have $8,000 bonus, basically. What is that bonus going to go? That bonus is going to go to Beth, Stath and Linda. How is it going to go? Well, remember, they're 40, 40 and 20. So here's the journal entry. We debit cash 160. The partnership received actual cash 160. Mary's capital only increased by $152,000, although she paid 160, but if you want to join us, you're going to have to get less than what you paid for. And the 8,000 is split 40 to Beth, 40 to Stath and 22 Linda. So that's how it works. Okay. Let's assume in the same, again, one fifth, and now we're going to be assuming we're going to be using the goodwill method. How does the goodwill method works? Well, if we're saying Mary is investing 160,000 and we are saying Mary is to get 20%, now we're going to value the company. We're going to value the company, the partnership. And what we say is this. Okay. What we're saying is 160 divided by .2. We're saying the company is worth $800,000. Okay. This is the total implied capital. How much the capital should be? Well, how much is the total invested capital? Well, the total invested capital is this. After Mary invests 160, when it's added to everyone, the total invested capital is 760 right here from the prior computation. Well, and now the company is worth 800,000. It means there are $40,000 goodwill. Again, the 760 is what Beth balance is Linda, Beth, Linda and Steph and add Mary to them. Okay. But the company is worth 800,000 because Mary was paying get only 20% of 160, which is make the company worth 800,000. So there's a goodwill of $40,000. Obviously, what do we need to do? We need to record the journal entry. We debit goodwill credit, Beth account 16,000 credit Steph account 16,000 and credit Linda's account. So the goodwill went to the existing partner. Now, obviously, Mary is going to get 160,000 for her new capital. Okay. So this is a goodwill example. We work the same thing with a bonus example. Now, prepare the journal entries assuming three. Mary is to invest 160,000 for one fourth capital interest. So now we're going to be using the bonus method and Mary is to receive one fourth, which is 25%. Let's see what happened now. After Mary added her money in, the total capital invested should be 760. Now, if we give her, if we give Mary 25%, Mary will get 990,000. Here we are desperate for Mary. We want Mary to join the partnership. So Mary paid 160 in cash. Mary received 190 in capital. So Mary received a $30,000 bonus capital. So who's going to pay for that bonus? Not pay. Who's going to give up their capital accounts? Well, the other three. The other three will have to give up in total of 30,000 in relationship to their current ownership, 40, 40 and 20. So here's what's going to happen. Mary invested 160. Mary is to get 190. What happened to the other 30,000? Beth will give up 12,000. Staff will give up 12,000. And Linda will give up 6,000. 40%, 40% and 20%, multiplying by 30,000. Let's compute this using the Goodwill method. If Mary is to invest 160 for one fourth capital, well, one fourth means right now, right now, the current capital for the company is 600,000. Okay. The current capital is 600,000. How did I know it's 600,000? Well, right now, if you add up those three, they're up to 600,000. So this is how I know it's 600,000. And now we are going to give Mary one fourth. We're going to give Mary 25%. That means the 600,000 represents 75% of the company. What is 600,000? What's 600,000 divided by 600,000 divided by 0.75 equal to 800,000. We are implying the company is worth 800,000. Okay. But the invested capital is only 760 after Mary invests her money. So we have a Goodwill of 40,000. Oh, let's, let's journalize the entry. We're going to debit cash 160. We're going to debit Goodwill, 40,000. And Mary in that situation would receive 200,000 in capital. But basically, Mary got all the, all the Goodwill. Basically, Mary got all the Goodwill because she got one fourth of the company. So she received more than what, what she contributed. Okay. So hopefully this will, this, this, this illustration will help you understand how we, how we, how we, how we account for transaction. So notice the other partners here just going to let you know, did not reduce their capital. Basically, all the, all the, all the new, all the 40,000 went to, went to, went to Mary. So there is no reduction in their capital balances in contrast to the bonus method in contrast to the bonus method where their capital was reduced. Just so this is just for you to pay attention to. If you have any questions, any comments by all means email me. If you're studying for the CPA exam by all means study hard, make sure to visit my website for additional lectures. If you happen to visit, please consider donating. Thank you. Study hard. It's worth it.


Each year, tragedies occur because of unsecured firearms. Hello? Okay, I'll meet you in the yard. Don't let it happen to you. Take the time to secure your weapon. For more information on firearm safety, licensing and registering your weapon, visit the Queensland Police Service website.


Yes, and that was King Kambu. Now he is not so new to the industry, ali kwa apokitambu, but now he has decided to make a kamba kubwizad ke lasong kwa shina anga. I hope ni me ise ma vizuri. Ni me ise ma vizuri. Yo jina ilu kwa nanitua. Teza kwa na shimdo sasa pa we lise. What we lise? King Kambu. Uko VP? Iko 80. Nashkuru. Karembu hapa kweto. Asante. So kindly introduce yourself to our people at home. We went inani na Joe Chawambia ni King Kambu, but wambi eduki dogo King Kambu ni nanin. Kameraya ko ile. Okay, as you know I'm King Kambu. I was there before. Na badosu nii kom na niyona. Bado ko. Bado nii ko. So, the music is a long channel. Kitambu nii kwa na ito ameya boy. Ah, umkunisha ameya boy. Yup. So, tu na fanyamambo na na fatu fanyamambo and we're here with the good news to change industry music. Yes. Last summer Kenya tu ye kwa kukulumap. All right. So, um, lume sema uli kwa, lakin ni bado uko. So ni mili hapen ukachamu ziki for a short time. For a good number of years. Ya. Mizi kitambu music i li kwa tighti sana sika masai. Shereya music i kitambu. I li kwa sika masai. Sai kumu you can sing anything. Ya. Oh wow. Kwa jyama nii kwa, kwa jyama nii kwa mongo kwa sana ufalana na trend. Uh huh. So nii... So, kitambu i kwa i mongo. Kitambu i kwa i mongo kitambu. Kitambu lazimongi. Kitambu i mongo kwa lazimongi. Kiki na snaice. Kiki. Ya. Pasing. Ya kwa na kikera karaka katahumu nii skepa na nmwa kна mongo inkwa. So, una prefata nii kitambu tu solo tayame u ia ue karaka nannifa hai. Kitambu, kwa I manchugg, lakirini.... Sa i dannmco nii pinku isu. So, I'm King Campbell. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. 2016. For those of us who don't know, and for me, and us, you. So, what you can say is something like a dance that led to twist, dance in a little ruümpa, dance in a little mutiny music. That's what we do. So, this kid is a spoiling kid. Say kids are spoiling kids. Nkisha ruwa na meny shanini. Mama patienta in셨un, to husighta band ambiki. Na kikiya kapanda mimi kama kengambo, I have a quote in news, Muki ni followed that yu ame ni sana. That's how you change the music to imbe music, we need to sing African music. Mimi sa kwa liliwahi 3 gwa liliwahi. We do kwa kama kengambo sa kuli. Yes. Umi amuakuru di, nkwa shi nanga, mi ama piano ka ni wa so. So mono kachanga wama piano peki ake, mono kudisai ni bongo, ama gengeton, ama any other genre. Na jelu kwa ni, ono jelu kwa ambi e oe ujiyo siria ma pi ano. Ma pi anota ske yo ni kanseni oku ushaa gos, unoski anke na ni ona pi kanga isili, unoski kwa ma pi ya, wu jimusi na relate na awa kalicha. Sundi yo, suno jelu, the really music, music kapisa, that's why sii kama Kenya tume pote. Akuna Kenya wajelu kwa ambi e, kwa ni ni mostly Kenya sa leasing Nigerians music, jumina jelu kwa shohen no, out of 100 you play 75% 100% Sunza kunasingine, sejone ojote start ya apa, they are playing Nigerian music and a book of flavors. Sundi yo kwa ni ni, kwa sabu Kenya jiji kiton nafa o imbe, Suno upata kama awa sayo, awa toto Kenya town, wali kobi kutoka Jamaica, kujesi kasa, sii ni ni ni, Then they copyrighted the two kengaton. I thank you, Naisha. Mimingoma, asana katufanya Kenya and the music, katufanya Africa and the music, Natui put in club on. Piwa sisi piwa takwa miongoni. Country, senya saka usna. Tambulika. Wana cheza zetu piya. Wana cheza zetu piya. Piawa wana, miwa. Chezeni za kwe tu sasa mecheza za kengata. Saida neti kwa evruwa. Ika nkotu yu simi kukul. Funt out sa iupade kama kuna Musaniote Kenya Anachesotansaniya. Amakuna Musaniote Kenya Anachesot South Africa. Amakuna Musaniote Kenya Anacheswa Nigeria. Amakama kama kuna Piliput. Ukamodapata Piliput ya Musanimu Kenya Iko Nigeria. Tekkena mga from that guy. Nipigiena kupatiwa 100,000. Nikwana, nipigieta eh? Rudiatana. Please come again. Rudiatana. Kama kuna Piliput ya Musanimu Kenya Sai kupa townia Nigeria. Nigeria pekiake. Iko Nigeria. Kata katia townia Nigeria Kwa Piliput, Musanimu Kenya Kama ni kinka kwa rwarewa. Amakama ni ya wakenge tonia. Unyambian doi. Tuma pizza. Kinka noi. 100, umeskia. Fanya, pinga sugili Tafuta. Go do your research. Do your research and figure out Whenu jwa kama kuna Piliput ya Amstaniwa Kenya Iko Nigeria. Ukipata kinkamba, umesema. He will give you a hand. Kenya zi kovinkiwa eh? Ya mombasa road. So is that the reason why you say you're here to change the game? Yes, yes. You got to ask more Kenyan music, more African music? Yes, yes. So will you accept New England's? Azure Khan music? In Nigeria music? Persona jina depend. iswi wo mebakiweja zinaf rabbitu, mebakiweja. So you combine now we are in another level. Yes. So now that you're back nah ume road i noo baya Best pizza i ko ya kufanya music I ko ya kufanya production na kusapot Kariaia kua musici. What's next after? na kujya. Kwa niya kolabu na doktu kakosti, kwa niya kwa niya kujya, niya itwa too much. Too much. Too much. Too much. Awa piya no ba doa miwa. Awa piya ayu ko ni Kenyan Bang, lafutu na eka African Flavor ki doko. Very soon uta drop video. Mita rudiya papa. Mita rudiya papa. I think we can launch the child launch out. By then, soko tumedwa kama kuna mtu anupata. Milbuna nigeria. Okay. Right? Yes. So one last question before Tumalize.  Ya, I was a mayor boy in Kutambu. Mayor boy. In short, I'm a bizak. But kaku jen kachengi, jen kapo King Campbell. Luya King Rapa. So dosai na takaku try ku implement. Do you okay too? Nasa hi ko hinge. Ako miya nijui. Ya. Nafainu refishon. Ya. Kali. Ya. Arobi kani. Ya. Alright. That is nice and we are happy for you. I hope sasa akuna kurudi nyuma. Kwen na tukisonga. Na kwa ma na kurudi nyuma. Ame bini ga nigambia wa Kenyan. Nojio Kenyans mostly dar watu nyakona insana. Arobi kipadu nyoli fanya research in Kenyans on a ka internet sana. More than other countries. Ya. So Kenyans also need to support Kenyan music. They need to subscribe kwa kawando sana wa Kenyan. Na wa partia more views. So nasa padam Kenyans sana skybuild sana pojida outside artist. Ya. Nasa hawa. Na kuna sana wa hawa. Ya. Yuma kutuna kuna kati, kuna misanyal poku ya nituwa Chris Brown. Unyama liipu almost 300 million. It's only for 30 million. Ya. Mekuja Kenya. Ya. 300 million. Na kutuna misanya pa Kenyan liipuana 50k. Na performu zikiyo, dapuna na suidana ona moto. Ok. Ya. Ya. So it is what it is. But le tu kikambamisema, we need to support Kenyan artist. And if you're tuned in to this show, you're definitely doing the right thing because we here will support Kenyan artist. Nakiya pa bekiyake, kisha maliza apa Go ahead, take that step further Subscribe to their channels Pachestia music Kamakuna maliwa natko pachesting bikiya Support So to kumalivia, what are those up top Your songs on YouTube Na social media and all those up top Mio kenda YouTube Kinkambo Tanipata apo Facebook Sam Twitter Instagram Boomplay Mtundo Kodo Kenroko Kinkambo That's all And up here niki malizia Mdha achiwa sa niwa Kenya saan And they need to invest Fanya musici saan o henge kwa stare Kisha wana budya kuli ya kwa media tu wa changi ya do Aa, nice Aja maa, fanya musici pika shop Fungoka shop Fungoka empeza Aja mimi niko teli na kudi ya kuba saan And ifanya majego Western ita touch family It's calming It's very traffic in nice rooms When you're Western To kujetutemen Sawa-sawa All the best And that is a very important point Was I need to invest U siyandze kwombomba wa tu pesa You might get some money from the shows But remember to invest that money Musici niza Anything can happen anytime You remember tainia COVID So invest in yourself Invest in your talent Invest in everything In something extra Kinkambo, asana kwa kukam through So say si sitra apu Thank you DJ


Hi guys, my name is Shachi and welcome back to my channel, hope all of you are doing well. So it's been a while since I uploaded any video related to the US visa process so I thought today I'll come here and share all the updates with you. Since March you might be aware that lot of things have happened, lot of changes happened, lot of things got implemented, lot of things got reversed back and I did upload few videos on this channel talking about all these changes but more importantly I have been putting up almost daily news updates on the community tab of this channel. So if you want to keep yourself up to date with what exactly is happening then do subscribe and hit the bell icon so that you get all of these notifications. Now for today's video I am basically going to summarize and bring you up to speed with all the changes that have happened. So if you haven't really been following the news or you're just confused about what is valid, what is not valid, what is true, what is false then this video is for you. And the way I've structured this video is that you're going to start in chronological order. We'll start from March all the way till August and I will basically explain the changes which happened and also tell you the current status of the same whether it's valid or not. So let's get started. So let's start from the beginning from the month of March. So in the month of March is when the corona virus situation became really serious and it became pretty clear that this is going to be a pandemic and a lot of measures were put in place to contain this virus. The flights were stopped, borders were sealed and the U.S. Embassy shut its doors. So on 16th of March 2020 the U.S. Embassy in India announced that they are going to cancel all interviews that were scheduled to happen and also suspend all operations. So when they say suspend all operations what it means is that not only are the interviews being cancelled but also everything which happens in the back end. Things like dispatching of passports, background checks, administrative processing, all of this was just put on hold. And it is important to understand that this was done not just in India but throughout the world. So basically U.S. embassies in each and every country in the world followed the same protocol, suspended all interviews, put all its operations on hold and essentially shut its doors. So coming to the current situation, so currently we are in August and the U.S. embassies in India are still not open for B1, B2 visas and for other immigrant visas. Worldwide the approach that is being followed by them is of a lot of caution and this is what they call post by post basis which basically means that the opening date of the embassies will be different in each country and it will depend upon the coronavirus situation of that country. So if you take a look at embassies around the world it is currently open in very very few countries. So U.S. Embassy is currently open in UK and it is open in some European Union countries and there also they are not giving all the services, the services being offered are quite limited. So I think currently only the B1 that is the business visa and the investor visas are what you know are being interviewed and being scheduled. In India like I said the embassies are not open for B1, B2 interviews but they are allowing you to book your appointment and schedule interview for future dates. So I think right now you are allowed to book your interview starting from October. So this also gives us some idea and you know some indication about the timelines that we can expect. So next coming to the month of June. Now in the month of June is when major changes happened in the U.S. immigration laws and this brought a lot of panic and a lot of anxiety to people. So I actually have an entire video on this so if you are interested in knowing about this in detail then do check out this video. So essentially what happened was that on June 22, 2020 Trump administration issued a new proclamation which banned three visa categories that's H1B, L1 and J1. So by ban of these visa categories it meant that no new visas would be issued to people in these three categories and also all the visas which were due for renewals for stampings or which were currently under processing would also not be done. And a timeline was kept for this ban and it said that the ban was valid till end of this year that is till December 31, 2020. Now understandably this brought in a lot of anxiety to everybody especially to Indians who constitute a huge chunk of the H1B and the L1 visas that are issued every year. There were people who were in the middle of getting their work visas and you know their processes were suspended, they were dependents, there were families who were back home who had come back for stamping and for renewal and they were suddenly being told that you will have to now wait till the end of this year to get your visas done and go back. So to the current update so thankfully there is some positive development which has happened with respect to this proclamation just about a week back Trump administration announced the first set of relaxations under this proclamation. So this first set of relaxation basically states that people who have H1B and L1 visas and who are going to return to the same employer to the same job and to the same work pay. So basically you are going back to the same work conditions. Then you are exempted from this ban and basically you can apply for your visa, get it renewed and go back. Of course once the embassy is open and also it said that the dependents who were you know stuck back home could also get their visas done be reunited with their spouse in the US.  The proclamation would have banned this spouse from entering the US till the end of this year but under this new relaxation the dependent is now allowed to get the visa processing done and go back to the US. So next coming to July. Now in the month of July it was the turn of the student visas. So after your H1 and L1 visas it was now the turn of the F1 and M1 visas which is essentially the student visa. So on 7th of July 2020 the Department of Homeland Security issued new visa regulations for the fall semester. The fall semester is the semester which begins from September. So these regulations were valid from September 2020 and it basically said that if your course or your module has got converted into an online course which means that you do not need to attend any classes physically then your visa is no longer valid and you will have to leave the US immediately. Now this was a major blow to the student community again of which Indian students comprise a huge chunk in the US because obviously because of the coronavirus situation a lot of universities and a lot of courses had got converted into completely online modules and this meant that huge chunk of these students would be affected by this ban. Coming to the current status now thankfully there are a lot of positive changes which have happened with respect to the student visas. So once this new ban was introduced it wasn't well received at all neither by the universities nor by the corporations and there was a lot of talk about how this just does not make sense in a pandemic situation. So what went on to happen was that universities like Harvard and MNCs like Facebook and Microsoft actually filed lawsuits against the US government and against the Trump administration. They in fact went on to win these lawsuits which meant that the ban was withdrawn. So just about 10 to 15 days after this ban came into place this ban was officially withdrawn and this was no longer valid which meant that whether your course was online whether it was offline or whether it was a mix of two you would not be impacted and your visas would continue to be valid. In fact another great thing which happened was that in the month of August in fact from 17th August of 2020 the US embassies in India started taking student interviews. So right now the embassies in India in all the five metros are open for student visa interviews. Now this is for students who have applied for the fall semester and who have got admission for the fall semester. They can in fact now schedule their interviews, get their visa and go to the US. And now coming to the month of August. So I think for the month of August the biggest positive development which has happened is resuming of international flights. So India set up air bubble arrangements with few countries and air bubble basically is a international travel arrangement which allows travel between the two countries direct travel without any transit without any layovers. And this air bubble arrangement has been set up with US, with UK, with some countries in the European Union, UAE and Canada. And this has opened the doors for international travel. Of course there are a lot of mandatory requirements like 14 days isolation, quarantine, declaration forms, negative coronavirus tests and all that but still international travel has finally resumed. What is important to keep in mind is that not all visa categories are being allowed right now. As of August 2020 it is only the work visas, the business visas and the student visas who are allowed to travel outside the country. But here's to hoping that in the coming months and as the situation improves more and more visa classes will get added and more and more people will be able to travel internationally. So these are all the changes that have happened from March up till now. I hope this has brought in clarity and brought you up to speed with everything and to sum it up and to basically put things in a nutshell especially for India. Here it is. The US embassies in India have opened but not completely. Only certain visa appointments are being undertaken right now and these are essentially the F1 or the student visas and certain emergency appointments. However, they are allowing you to schedule and book your appointments starting from October for other visa categories such as B1, B2. So if you're interested and you're keen on traveling, you can go ahead and book your appointment. But I would like to add something here and bring in a word of caution. I recently got to know that a lot of B1 and B2 appointments which were booked for the month of October have been cancelled by the US embassies in certain places like Delhi and Mumbai. Now, what was the reason for canceling this? We still don't know. We are still waiting for full clarity on it. But this is also happening. So when you book your appointments and you're planning out your travel, do keep this in mind. In the end, I would say that have a wait and watch policy. Things are changing every day. It's really, really dynamic right now. So it is just better to have an open mind and to keep all your plans flexible. Like always, I'm going to be tracking all these changes and bringing all the updates to you right here on this channel. So do subscribe and do hit the bell icon so that you don't miss out on anything. And in the meanwhile, if you want to start preparing for the US visa process and keep yourself completely ready, then do check out my playlist. This has a lot of videos which are going to help you. And also check out my website, shachimul.com. So on this website, you'll find free resources to prepare yourself and also find really useful things like the DS160 toolkit and the interview toolkit which will help you prepare for the US visa process from the comfort and safety of your home. Thank you so much for watching. Signing off for now. I'll see you in the next one. Bye.