ate um back in september we had a mugar update uh for the board and they mentioned that the conservation commission hearings would be starting and there was an interesting development last week at the february 1st conservation commission meeting the olington land trust had engaged a hydrologist to take a look at some of the test pit results and groundwater results and that that individual submitted a report that was just entered into the record last week it was done a little while ago and i'm just going to read one sentence from his report um based upon my analysis the proposed stonewater management system will not work as designed and may result in increased groundwater levels and surface flooding and of course we've been looking at this issue since 2015 and opposed uniformly as a as a community out of flooding concerns and other concerns in the area and one of the issues that is now come up is that there are seven or eight test pits and the reliability of the measurements on those test pits has now been put into question um had been putting to question previously but more formally through the submission of this report and it was a recommendation um that that this individual made that more monitoring wells should be installed so there's more of a measurement period and i think that's consistent with what we our position has been an abo as a board that um if the project is ever to be approved every single criteria must be met and every test must be met and if there's doubt um as to whether it's a test pit or monitoring well i say go with the monitoring well it's not our choice here but i will remind people who are watching that um there's not going to be a building permit issued unless there's a demonstration that there's a separation between the groundwater level and the in the lower foundation of whether it's parking garage or townhouses so i spoke to the chair the chairman about this and i may ask to come back to the board depending on what the the response is to this report for a further um maybe a comment letter to the conservation commission um from the board and and i will say the proponent that this letter just went on the record the proponent is going to have an opportunity to respond to that but it is i consider it a major development something that's consistent i want to commend uh one of the people who attended that meeting uh mr. more steve more who attends a lot of our meetings and he just really captured the essence that this has been the issue there should be no doubt and testing um that's something that everybody should be in agreement what the what the water levels are and more testing is probably necessary so sorry for the length there but i thought it was um given the timing was important to update uh the board and the public on that yeah no thank you for that update mr. diggins well it's the meeting before valentine's day and we hadn't picked up the pattern that's the day that's the meeting i always wear my favorite tie me so happy valentine's day to all of you it's always a pleasure spending you know monday evenings with you all you know so so uh yeah that's my new business thank you mr. diggins um i also have a red tie but i think i really can't it cannot compare so it also was an accident so i also i'm going to leave that one alone i got a couple of i could come back at but anyway sorry i think at this point we are ready to adjourn anyone here to make such a motion we'll enjoy all right let's take it the motion to adjourn by mr. herd seconded by mr. decorcy attorney cunningham this is mahan yes mr. herd yes mr. decorcy yes mr. diggins yes mr. helmeth yes by zero vote we are adjourned immediately bye


Welcome to Santa Lucia in Viana do Castelo in Portugal. Thank you for watching Rich TV Live. We are going to show you all the sights, all the sounds, give you all the tours of the most famous places in Portugal. Welcome to Santa Lucia in Viana do Castelo, Portugal. Breathing.


wherever you are. Just a reminder of our antitrust policy. I'm sure it's burned into your retinas right now. So on the agenda today we've got our usual reminders of the upcoming hack fest and the election. And then we have a quarterly update from... I saw a note last night I didn't see anything yet this morning. Do we have Adrienne or somebody on from the Colt project? Seems not, so we may have to defer that. And who's going to do sawtooth? Sean on? Dan's on. I can do a sawtooth at Dan's on. Okay, good. Sorry, just a couple minutes getting through the the multi-click pattern here to get into the zoom. Okay, you're very faint or that might be me. And then we have an update from the public sector working group. They're going to request a new chair. And then we have two updates from the white paper working group, so Hart, and then healthcare working group. And then we have a proposal from our colleagues on the IBMP proposal. Any other items from the agenda? All right, you're none. We can get going Todd. All right, sounds good. I'll move quickly through the first step. Quick reminder, next hack fest Montreal, October 3rd and 4th, right after member summit. Beyond that, to keep the cadence going, we're looking at Q1 2019 for Asia Pacific. It's been a bit since we brought it there. We are looking at spaces like the Hong Kong or Singapore. And then beyond that annual TSC election, just quick reminder, we will start the nomination process August 9th. Details in the link that went out in the minutes, as well as a link to those that are eligible. If you do not see your name on that list and should be, please get in touch with either me or Tracy Kurt ASAP and we'll get that sorted out for you. And with that, I think let's move over to the project updates. We've got a couple to get through. The first one being Quilt, Adrienne or someone from the Quilt team, are you on? Todd, before we move on to either Quilt or Dan. Yep. And I realize my connection is kind of crappy. Are we going to get next week a list of the eligible voters to read you? And what about the work group chair? Is that, is Tracy doing that behind the scenes? That should already be in there. Tracy, are you on? It's in the link of the process. It should be in there. That's how we had it built out. So let me connect with Tracy if she's not on and just we'll make sure that's done. Okay. Well then I would just then urge people to review the list. And if you think you should be on it and you're not, then it's, you've got a couple of weeks to get to Todd and Tracy and or if you're on a working group to your working group chair to make them, oops, muted, unmuted. So unless Adrienne is on or somebody from Quilt, I guess we can hear from Dan. Yeah. So I can jump right into it then. Go ahead Dan. Somebody post the link in the chat please. Todd, I don't know if you want to. Yeah, yeah, I'll do it. No, not a problem. Into the TSC chat. Yeah, no, I was saying we could otherwise just pop it on the screen. Otherwise I could share my screen when it was easiest there. But I will launch into it since it seems like we've got a pretty full agenda here. I guess it took me longer to put this update together than I thought it would. I ended up spending a lot of my afternoon on this, but that turned out to be good things. I didn't really recognize how much we had been, how much we'd accomplished here. So basically all good news on the sawtooth front here. I feel like we still have some good momentum from our release announcement earlier this year that we still have new people coming to the platform even though we haven't made a whole lot of new public announcements. We still see good commit traffic from a variety of places and so that all seems very healthy. And the core maintainers and new contributors have been adding a lot of new features. So I've called out a few of those up at the top there. So these are things that are in master but not necessarily in a release. So the more adventurous out there have already been grabbing the nightly builds out of master and working with these new capabilities. So the one that's listed on there is WebAssembly. This is a different way to do smart contracts out in the Ethereum community and EOS.  And it's kind of a way to do smart contracts but not have to be involved with solidity specifically that you can use a whole variety of languages that end up being treated like bytecode that you can store then on the chain. Another really big feature that we've been working on for a while is a notion of consensus engines. Consensus engines are essentially taking the consensus separate process. And one of the main advantages of that is we can now incorporate consensus algorithms that have been written in different languages. So kind of like our transaction processor model that you can write transaction processors in different languages and they communicate over a clean boundary with the core. Now that's the same thing for consensus. So the outcome of that is we're seeing maybe two or three new consensus algorithms becoming available for sawtooth around our next release. And those will be raft which is nice and fast but we hadn't tackled originally because it's only crash fault tolerant. But there's a lot of interest in raft. So we'll have raft. There's also some early work going on with the PBFT implementation. And then we're working on a new version of Poet as well. The next big thing on the list here is Rust. So implementing sawtooth internals in Python allowed us to adapt the architecture quickly before our 1.0 release. And now that we're really happy with that architecture we're sort of solidifying it in Rust even though that sounds maybe a little funny to solidify something in Rust. But yeah so we're moving from an interpreted language to a compiled language and we're anticipating some significant performance benefit from that. We had feedback from the community on challenges with deployment. It's fairly straightforward to deploy sawtooth since we've got a unified architecture for the validators. You don't have to deploy different styles of nodes. Just the same. A lot of people want to be able to deploy things rapidly in cloud environments and sort of form things out within their own data centers. And so we've got an Ansible repo now that will help lower the bar for people to do bigger deployments of sawtooth. We've also improved our documentation so that developers coming in have sort of answered the frequently asked questions there. And then we had one more SDK that came in. It must have been around the time of our last update but this one was particularly interesting because we had somebody that we hadn't seen out in the community beforehand just sort of show up out of the blue with a .NET SDK. So that was pretty neat to see just from a community perspective. And then the last thing that I'll go through on the big changes in the sawtooth world is that we've added an RFC process. And the idea with that is before somebody goes and spends a lot of time on a big feature that might imply some little architectural changes or from their perspective little changes to the system, we don't want them to spend that time and then find out when they come offer it that, and this goes for core maintainers as well as new contributors, that there's something architecturally inconsistent about that. And so we want to get support for the feature early on before somebody invests the time in writing it. So this process isn't meant for bug fixes, it's not meant for relatively small features but if you want to add something like the WebAssembly capability, it's good to put that through the RFC process and then everybody gets a chance to get some input on there if they see something that's a design flaw or something that's architecturally inconsistent or on the positive side just that there's some awareness that a feature is coming before you go through the whole process of implementing it. Okay, so that's all the high level stuff with sawtooth. I did want to reflect some issues. There was a sense from some of the other maintainers, so I of course sit in this TSC meeting on a weekly basis but a lot of the other maintainers, they spend most of their time working on the sawtooth code or in other aspects of their day job and I don't know that they felt well attached to this aspect of the hyperledger organization. Feel like encouraging some more participation out in the meetups is helping to close that gap but I still wanted to reflect the views of some of the other maintainers out there. Maybe slightly related to that, I understand there's global meetups that hyperledger helps facilitate and I don't know if all of our maintainers feel plugged into that process as well. And then there was something that's a little bit tactical here but as far as access to the project pages, we had a maintainer report that he'd been rejected from requesting access to that. So just as a feeling of ownership of a project and proper involvement from the maintainers in the way that- And what project page are you referring to, the sawtooth project page or? Yeah. The one hyperledger.org slash project, sawtooth or whatever it is. I believe so. Dan, let me connect up with you offline on that and figure out what happened and we'll put that sorted out for you. Okay, great, I assume it was something logistic but you know how people feel when they get rejected for something so maybe we patch that up quickly. Let's see here, as far as things within sawtooth, we've been sitting on our latest bug release for a while and this is an aspect of people being really deep on working on new features and we had something just about at the finish line and release and then I think there was a protobuf change that was pushed from the Google projects that broke some things and anyway we're just kind of coming around to get him out so that's something that I'm not real happy with but we're working to resolve that. The increased, the continued increase in interest in sawtooth means that the chat and the PRs are increasing and that's, we're still trying to stay on top of that but I am seeing a little increase in those cues so again that's just I guess more effort on those activities. Yeah, last item there is that we've been in the process for a while of looking how to get off of a Jenkins environment that was originally donated by Intel and getting that into the Linux foundations hosted or the Hyperledgers hosted Jenkins environment. I think that's moving along but I just wanted to make everybody aware of that. All right, almost done here so releases, I kind of covered we've been stalled on that 105 for no great reason there and then that probably won't include a lot of the dock fixes that we've done that we get a lot of frequently asked questions from the developers so those dock fixes are available in the Nightly Master Build so that's normally what I link people to when they're asking questions but that's maybe not intuitive of course if you just land on the page and go looking for the latest docks. So that'll be in the 106 which should probably just trail 105 by a couple weeks ideally and then all those features that I mentioned up top for things like rust and raft, targeting those for a developer preview in the August timeframe. See here so moving into communication like I said chat and everything is up still seems to be the case that very few people are interested in using the mail server. I guess that's just maybe something that's stylistically different from what what other people expect or communicated about having the mail list activity. It seems like everybody's just happy to use chat. We do besides email and chat host a phone call every week to help app developers get over any starting obstacles or advanced obstacles and that's proven to be pretty popular but that was all US friendly time zone so we are creating an Asia friendly time zone call and I don't have the time for that now but all that will be available on the on the community calendar along with the rest of the Hyperledger project meetings. Besides that that app developer call we also have a tech forum that typically follows this TSC meeting on alternating weeks. We canceled the one for this week because of some scheduling conflicts but there's two the next couple items on the agenda that I should have put in there are min BFT so that's a new consensus algorithm that will be presented by be presented by by a sort of a new contributor I guess and then there's been a couple people including myself that have been experimenting with with ZK Snarks and how you would do sawtooth application development with with zero knowledge proofs so we'll have a session or two on that following the min BFT one. Sprint planning and so forth is is also something that you can dial into and then I think pretty much everything at this point is is a bit rehashing what we've already covered so we've got a bunch of new features slated for a 1.1 that should be August. See the RFCs for descriptions of those features and then maybe the only new point there is the SDKs those were all part of the same repo with sawtooth core and that was really bloating our build times so all those SDKs are being spun out so we've got now I think 752 repos so if you want to grab all the sawtooth repos that's a fun task but in most cases you probably just want to be getting the SDK releases anyway. Other news so maintainer diversity bitwise has continued to increase their participation and I believe they've eclipsed Intel in the maintainer count so as sawtooth was originally viewed I think as an Intel project because it's the early contributions there it's at least not the case from a maintainer count perspective at this point which I'm of course happy with to grow some community around there and we have participation from you know we've got maintainers from a variety of other organizations as well and the accounts for commits and committers and domains I think I pulled together correctly from across those 9000 repos that we have and that's that's about it. Question for you Dan. Any questions? Question for you Dan. Yes sir. Is a ribbon. Can you give a brief description of poet 2 because it's it's been so associated in the public's mind with sawtooth that any changes there would be significant news? Yeah and we are early in one sense and not early in another. Some of the research for how to evolve poet has been going on since last year so in that sense. Dan and then can we take this offline because we're most happily through the call and we have three more updates and a proposal to get through. Sure so let me just then the two second version of it is that poet 2 reduces the hardware requirements which should increase the breadth of of machines that are capable of running poet with its Byzantine fault tolerant features. You can always run poet on any architecture if you cut back on that Byzantine protection and there's different configurations that support that out of the box. You don't have to figure out how to do that it's just switching which version of poet you want. Any other questions? So Dan this is Bahua and how may the attendee be present on the weekly meeting you early? On our app developer call? Yeah it varies some days it's it's just a couple people that pop in with a question and and the meeting is pretty quiet for the second half of the hour and other days we've got about 20 people. Ten people so most of people from US part and maybe how many people are from the Asia area? I don't know it's it's uh I don't uh I'm not sure uh people who may be dialing in from Asia I don't know if they're just able to dial in at an awkward time uh so I don't have a good count there but I know that we've got anecdotal uh information that people were unable to reach that time zone which was why we wanted to spin one up in an Asia friendly time zone. Okay thanks. Yep any other questions? All right thanks Dan. Thanks Chris. I think you know in in deference to the team that's proposing the iBanP proposal maybe we should move that up and then because they're not regular attendees on the call and then we can after we get through that we can proceed with quotes and the white paper. Sounds good. So Federica are you? Federica and the iBanP team are you are you there? Looks like they're speaking but I'm mute. Okay maybe we should quickly go to one or other maybe if Adrienne is joined you're gonna have to close update while they figure out the mute button. All right sounds good. Yeah I'm I'm here. Thanks Andrew. All right so yeah apologies obviously that this is very late um things have been a bit a bit hectic of late with changing companies and a few things and I unfortunately have a conflict at this time most weeks um so as I said in the report uh it's been a slow quarter for the project um unfortunately the main contributors uh being myself and another guy at Ripple have both been pulled onto other stuff of late because I've left Ripple to join new companies in the process of joining Hyperledge I think will announce this month coming by the name of Coil and David has been pretty occupied with some deliverables within Ripple that have I think they're pushing for a deadline sometime later this month that hasn't given him any free time to work on Coil. Some positive news lately we have a new contributor who's an ex Ripple employee is now freelancing based on Asia I think and he's already started contributing on the issues and code reviews he's looking to free up some time in the future to contribute more to the code base directly but otherwise unfortunately not a lot of progress in the project last few months. Any questions? Any questions for Adrian? All right well good luck with the new endeavor and good to see you guys back in and a little bit more engaged soon. Yeah so comments on our scope um I know you know we had been trying to use Coil to the home to um bring uh put together feature complete implementations that a lot of intelligent components and sort of catch up with where the reference implementations are. We we in discussing on the last call decided it may be better to focus on some of the smaller components initially just have some libraries and focus on interoperability with the JavaScript code as opposed to alternative implementation. So we'll probably be focusing more on that over the next couple months. I know David has plans to add a few new codecs for some of the outstanding protocols. So I'm hoping yeah things will improve over the next quarter and we'll have a lot more focus on call it manageable chunks. Adrian? It's whipping again. We are starting a paper on interoperability in the architecture working group and since Quilt is one of the most prominent interoperability solutions inside the Hyperledger hard house I believe you know you guys should at least show up and make some contributions there.  I'd like to do that. Can you can you share the details with me maybe via email? Sure. If I can do it personally or we can try and get someone to help on that. I know we this isn't in the report and I don't know if it rhymes on the call but we have been exchanging a few emails about you know Quilt and your business what we're doing and we're hoping to you know bring a few other things to the table at Hyperledger as well around projects we're doing. One in particular is called Codeus but I don't want to deviate from the agenda today. Maybe we can provide some info on that down the line. Super. Thanks to Adrian, thanks to Ben. Okay, Federica and the IBM PP team, do you have are we back online? We still can't hear you. That's better. Okay. I think we lost you again. Yeah, I saw the note that he left the meeting. Should we maybe switch to one of the other updates while they're sharing the connectivity? So Federica, still can't hear you. You might want to try reconnecting or dialing in via the phone number. Sometimes zoom can be a little bit tricky. So if a heart is on, maybe you can give us an update on the actually, Todd, how do we want to do this public sector chair? Yeah, so this should be pretty straightforward. Kind of the context of it was we launched the public sector work group as that was coming up to speed. Marta B. Karska from the Hyperledger team had been chairing the work group. The idea was that she would have a three month runway there while searching for a chair. She's found a good chair for that. So we really just need to take a quick vote on that. But Marta, I'll let you give some quick context there and your vote of support for that. But otherwise, that's just a simple vote with the TSE. Thank you, Todd. Can everyone hear me okay? Yes. Great. So yes, so we've had three meetings now or four meetings. It has been going very well. The group is very engaged. We have regular 18 people or so. And one of the third people that has been showing up to the meetings on a regular basis is very active. She has been very supportive. Took on a lot of burden. She was even able to run one of the calls while I was traveling and so on. And the group seems to be very accepting of her. She's very objective, which was the important part of finding a new chair. So that's why I propose that she would take over. That was the plan anyway. And we don't have to wait the three months if we've identified someone because they did their job. Thanks. I reviewed the resume that you circulated and it looks like Rose has some great background. This is Dan and I for one think that that looks like a great, great option for leading that working group. All right. Todd, do you want to do any objections? Yeah, if there's no other discussion. So for the eight KSC folks on the call, all in favor please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Any abstaining? Any opposed? All right, that passes unanimously. Thank you. So Rosa is the new chair. All right. Thank you. All right, Federica, do we have you? So sorry for this technical problem. Can you hear me now? Yes, we can. Okay, thank you very much. So we have proposed to Hyperledger to become a partner and part of your consortium. And we have developed this plugin solution in REST API. I'm not a developer. I'm the marketing manager of this little team. And there is here with me our main developer, our CTO, that is Lorenzo. We are Italian, so we can't speak English very well, but we'll try to explain what we are doing and what we are trying to do. Iban Portability Project is a project that is born because in Europe there isn't the concept of the portability of the account number in banking sector. So customer clients can't switch bank without changing their own Iban number. This change would be possible because this thing has happened about 10, 15 years ago in the sector. So when the phone number was only one for each operator. So when you wanted to change operator, you had to change also your phone number. And this was a very big impediment and was a market barrier that now is broken. And with our project, we are trying to broker another barrier in the banking sector and promote the fintech activities. So this project is burned because of this reason. We have developed REST API plugin that you can see in a link that I have shared in our proposal that we would like to have all the suggestions and we'd like to improve and make better for next Zoom call. And our dream and what we would like to do is to give to Hyperledger consortium our plugin, make it to become an open source plugin that can be shared also in USA. Even if this solution was born as a new European solution, but I have tested that also in the USA there is a very big interest about this technology and about the value proposition under this project. Right now, we are in a little crowdfunding campaign. We have done many meetups and we have seen that many people are interested in this activity. So in the marketing activities, we are moving on. But we'd like to make the next step and the next step is the blockchain Hyperledger Fabric step. So we are trying to convince you that that is a good proposal. Can you hear me? Yeah, no, it's a good overview. So I don't know if you have understood the other thing because I can't speak English very well. But if you want, I can give the microphone to all my colleagues. We can understand you very well. Do not do not wonder about that. Yeah. So if I'm understanding this correctly and I think this is really an application layer on top that would leverage and I think it leverages fabric in the proposal. And not necessarily a formal component of the platform. Am I understanding that correctly? Would this be usable in another context such as we talked to? No, it's only for banks. It isn't usable in other contexts. Well, he's asking about whether the underlying DLT can be anything other than fabric. And why Fabric? Can you explain why? Because I'm not a technical figure but Lorenzo knows about these things. Because we won't have isolated transaction. We won't use the channel and the actor in the blockchain can see only our transaction and not the competitor transaction. We won't encapsulate the transaction in the same blockchain. So currently you are only targeting fabric because of the presence of channels in Fabric will help your particular use case. Is that correct? Yes, of course. Yeah. So I think in general, privacy is the key component for their requirements. But from the technology, but from the implementation point of view, bearing that specific requirement of the technology availability on our current blockchain offerings, I don't really see any specific constraint that this wouldn't be able to run on other implementations like Sawtooth. Right? If there's a way to solve the privacy issue, then it should be able to support other blockchain implementation. Especially since Dan is working on a ZK Snarks implementation. So it strikes me that as an application layer thing, technically it doesn't fall within the charge scope of Hyperledger, which is to basically do with technology, not applications. However, we did open up the Hyperledger Labs as a place where that sort of development could take place. And in fact, they've have approved a project called DP Core, which is coming from Finland. And again, it is sort of addressing an application layer on top of one of our or potentially others of our DLT platforms. So I'm wondering, do we have any of the stewards on? I know Tracy's not on and I don't know. I am a lab steward. Yeah, I thought so.  Yeah, I mean, you know, we have had several other solutions that are fabric specific get adopted into the Hyperledger under the Hyperledger hot house, but that was in the beginning. And currently, I believe what you said is correct, which is that we would like to think about solutions that are, you know, more applicable across the platforms or developing a brand new DLT on their own. So definitely, I believe that this would belong in a lab at least in the beginning. And then, right, you can seek to grow it outside the labs by, you know, the number of contributions and the plans to expand your scope because labs were only conceived of as a sort of a place where things could grow from, or of course, die, because there's not enough life in there. But definitely, you know, getting it into the labs would be the first step if the TSC feels that this is an application layer thing and needs to be incubated. But it certainly feels like it. And so, Federica, so the process for creating the Hyperledger labs, and it's just a different GitHub organization that it still sort of, it still falls, if you will, under the Hyperledger umbrella. But it's just not formally a Hyperledger project. And as I mentioned, there's others that are coming into that. And I think the organization is still trying to sort of figure out, where do solutions and or application layer things fit? How do we, you know, how do we support that kind of growing ecosystem around our respective platforms? And so, the process for that is basically, Emily, I can send you a note that sort of points you to the process, but it's fairly straightforward. We basically need to have somebody, a member of the TSC, and or one of the maintainers of an existing project be a sponsor for this. And then, and Bippin can certainly tell you the rest of the process, but basically then the stewards are responsible for approving or not, if the case may be the addition of a new Hyperledger ledger labs, and then they can help facilitate, you know, getting the repository moved over and sending sending things up and so forth for you. But I think that, again, and I'd love to hear from others on the TSC, their thoughts, but it feels to me like this is sort of an application layer thing or a solution layer, and that we should steer towards the labs. So this is the question that I had is, so I think you don't have the application layer pieces is not as much of a concern for me as it seems like this would just be a single blockchain network versus, you know, maybe multiple people that would be deploying something for, I don't know, bond trading or trade finance or whatever. So, Frederica, can you maybe speak to that? Would there be multiple blockchain networks running this I've been the application or would it just be a single blockchain network shared among all the banks? Can you repeat to the question? Yeah, is it would this the IBANP implementation saying this or not, but a lot of times the question about why blockchain needs to be answered first for applications and I don't know if we have the time to get into that here but if you've got a single essentially a single database interaction between two parties that doesn't sound like a blockchain problem, but if you've got a multi-party interaction where all those parties have to agree on the same on the same state of information, so for example if you had a store of all the IBAN numbers and which companies they associated with then the entire industry is using that shared database and that's where you would employ a blockchain so I wasn't clear from this proposal whether there was or was not a blockchain need for this application. From what I understood then the issue is portability of IBAN across banks so there are multiple parties involved. That was my understanding too and wouldn't that necessitate just a single blockchain network then? So I guess I'm just trying to distinguish between is this an application or is this a single network that would only... Yeah, that part I'm a little bit unclear on too because if this is going to work then all the banks have to recognize it as such. Right, and then to this point about could it be on sawtooth or fabric, if there's only going to be one canonical network then it seems sort of it doesn't really matter about what it could be. Well actually there are thoughts about interoperability right? I mean because if it doesn't have to be a single network, if interoperability evolves to a certain point otherwise I agree with you completely that it has to be a single network but if you know if you can produce those claims somehow across networks then it could work. Yeah, I mean again as I said in the chat this feels a lot also like an indeed level application on top of the way that any can work where it can basically anchor claim on any blockchain. I see now what Kelly was saying that there would only ever be one deployment of this and that would in my mind also reduce the interest in having this be a standalone project. So yeah so I think again I think Federica thanks again for suffering through the mute button problems and for making this proposal but I think that again this feels a little bit to me like hyper leisure labs proposal and so I think that the sort of the next steps for this would be to I'll copy you and the stewards of the hyper leisure labs and you know with a link to the process and then I think one of the the stewards of the labs can then sure help you through the process and Elizabeth and you want to volunteer. Okay, thank you. The process is very lightweight. Yes, yes. Okay thank you very much Federica. Process to get into the lab. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. So do we have time hard to do the white paper working group? It's hard on. Yeah I'm here sorry it took me like three clicks to unmute again. Sure I can go over stuff so sure I posted the update form last night and I was hoping to have the actual final white paper this week but unfortunately it looks like we're still waiting on some marketing committee approvals. There have been a bunch of people on vacation but the long and short story is the white paper is essentially finally done and hopefully everyone should be able to look at it next week. I was going to propose that since the white paper is done the group well we're basically planning on essentially going dormant. It might be worth it to keep the email list around as a lot of people I know like the architecture and identity working groups are are heavily writing papers and it might be good to have sort of expertise from people who have slogged through kind of the the long process of getting a big document from you know from a lot of different people. So I know we don't have a lot of time and we still have some more stuff to do so I guess I'll just open it up to questions. I think most of the stuff I wanted to say is a little document including the kind of funny quote from the from the technical writer. Mark Wagner if you want to jump on the performance and scale working group on Tuesday mornings and at least once and sort of give us some more stories and things to look out for because we're about to get involved with a tech writer. Yeah I don't know that I can make it every morning. I usually have a conflict Tuesday mornings but if you want to if you want me to come one particular morning and discuss it and some of the things that worked and some of the things that didn't I'd be happy to do that. Great thanks I'll follow up with email. Yeah awesome. Well I want to personally you know so thank you Hart and the whole team for you know a great people a couple of great pieces of work and I mean again thanks it's amazing. I'm torn about you know sort of decommissioning the the team because it's been so effective but yeah I can also appreciate that you know now that the work is effectively complete it doesn't necessarily make sense to to sort of keep hanging on unnecessarily. We can always reconstitute the group I suppose if we if we have a need to get in to do another another white paper but I'll just sort of open up by saying thank you. I guess applause is in order. Let's not go that far. Yeah so I was going to propose that basically we our meeting schedule has already dwindled so we'll just I was going to say maybe we we just don't we don't schedule meetings or if we do schedule meetings we schedule them very infrequently but we leave the email list in rocket chat up so that people like Mark who are interested in kind of pulling the expertise from this group or asking questions can still use that as a resource and that if we ever want to I think that's a useful thing I know I've in a past you know when we were when I was doing the web services work we actually did that with I can't remember which one it was we actually kept the working group sort of in a suspended animation state for a couple of years to see if anything else came but nothing else did but it's one way and then all we did was W3C so we had to report annually to Tim Bernish Lee and tell him nothing had happened right and then they finally sort of pulled the plug on it but we could do that we could keep things in place and just sort of go into a dermacy cycle and and remove you temporarily from the quarterly updates yeah I mean I we won't have a ton of things to update obviously but I just want to I want the group to still be a resource for people that are writing their own papers so I want people like Mark to be able to ask like because there have been you know a lot of a lot of very core contributors Mick, Stan, Vipin, Trayvon, you know there are a bunch of other people Nathan, Sean and we've learned a lot about trying to write kind of large-scale things with a lot of people and if you read the the quote in the update at the very bottom from the technical writer it wasn't exactly easy and you know there were a lot of drawbacks but we did learn a lot and hopefully we can we can help others with that knowledge. Okay well thanks again and I unless there's any objections I can I think that that's a fine proposal to sort of leave it as is and so unless there's any objections I think we should just proceed that like I don't think we need a formal vote and yeah and once we're yeah sorry once the marketing committee gets final approval on the uh white paper I'll send it out to everybody. It should be soon there's some conference this weekend they wanted to use it for but there's some I don't understand what's really going on but it should be soon so all right well thanks everybody. Thanks. Thanks to all the members. Thank you. Thank you. All right Nadad I think we're at end of job so thanks everybody and apologies again for the the issues with the call but we'll reconvene again next week with the health care working group update and what was else Roja I think was next. Yep. Okay thanks everyone. Thanks. Thank you. Thank you. Bye.


Hi. I didn't bring sunblock today. So thanks very much for coming up. I'd love to talk to you today about one of the core technologies that we are building at Ubuntu to make deployment of large-scale data centers easy. That technology is called MAS, and it's basically a bare-metal solution tool. My name is Christian Ries. I'm VP for Hyperscale and Storage at Canonical. I oversee basically all the next generation server work and our storage portfolio. I'll be talking this afternoon at 3.30 about our storage announcement that we did this week. Very exciting, including multiple technologies from multiple vendors all backed by our support services. But today, or at this moment here, I'm going to talk to you about our bare-metal solution. And I'm going to start actually far away from bare-metal, just talking at a high level why cloud succeeded. And I think talking about cloud succeeding gives you framing about the potential that you have in your bare-metal kit and how you can use it. So looking at cloud computing, there are two core drivers that I see as being the reason why cloud was a successful technology transition. First, it reintroduced this idea that you could do pay-as-you-go computing infrastructure like you did in the 60s and 70s. So when I went to university for the first time in the 90s, we were starting to phase out this idea of being able to pay-as-you-go using terminals and batch computing. But cloud computing was interesting because it reintroduced this idea that you could start paying zero and then grow as you needed more infrastructure. But the second thing I think is more interesting, it solved a very common use case in a spectacular way. And addressing that use case is what led the cloud to actually growing. This use case is actually quite simple. Give me a new server to run this thing that I'm working on. So this is the typical dev and test use case and it's primarily the reason why most of the open stack clouds deployed today are primarily for dev and test. Because this use case here is of fundamental importance. Let's look at Bob's use case in a little bit more detail there. So he's asking to give me a new server machine and if he's lucky, he gets to specify to his IT that he wants this much CPU, this much RAM, this much disk. He'll have a chosen operating system. Maybe it's what the enterprise determines that he's using or if it's a bit more like the Wild West, they get to choose anything they'd like to use, maybe even Ubuntu. He'll specify how he wants the drives configured, if there's caching, if he needs LVM or RAID because that's important for durability reasons or not. And on a specific network because he wants to be on the DMZ or inside the QA lab. So he needs to specify where it is with his credentials on it. So basically something which, once it's provisioned, the user can come and access it and start using it. So Bob's use case is fairly straightforward. He goes to IT and he says, okay, can I have this this week? Ah, okay, what about this month? What about in three months? So that was a typical IT experience for anywhere larger than 20 employees. You have to actually find someone in IT that wants to do the job for you in a hurry if you needed that done in a hurry. So the cloud and Amazon as the best example of that, it completely nailed that use case. And I would also say that Ubuntu is part of that by ensuring that you are able to deploy at zero or the lowest cost possible with the best experience possible. The work that we did in cloud and ITs early on made the Amazon experience for the developer for this person in test and dev capacity such a great experience. So what are the other things that the cloud introduced? This idea of pay as you go, starting at zero and that you had a new machine in minutes. So you basically said, push a button and in a few minutes, you've got a full machine that you can deploy your software on, test it. And if you're running live, like Dropbox would do, you can have a new server up, servicing user requests in minutes, which you would never be able to do with traditional IT. Now, the way this was done in infrastructure as a service cloud was through virtualization. And the thing to ask of yourself today is, what does that use case actually have to do with virtualization? Virtualization enables it because it makes basically setting up that server a trivial operation. You don't have to actually mess with any hardware. But it also, because you're using Linux or a hypervisor to drive the cloud, it also lets you basically, just through the command line or through standard Linux utilities, fire up a whole new machine that the user can use. Wouldn't it be great if you could treat bare metal just like the cloud? So bare metal is trapped in the 1980s, right? It's IPMI, Pixi, DHCP, DNS, that's where bare metal today is. But it would be fantastic if you could manage your bare metal just like in the cloud. This is the objective of MAS, the technology that we deliver to open to users free of charge. So MAS stands for metal as a service, but today we just call it MAS because that's actually what the brand name is. It provides you with a cloud experience on bare metal. In other words, you can treat your bare metal as if it was a cloud. Instead of saying, I want that specific server, you can say that, but you can also say, give me a server which has this much CPU or this much RAM or this much disk space. It offers you a RESTful API, a web UI, and a set of embeddable libraries that you can use in your own application. If you have a management system or if you're offering a public service that wants to drive bare metal, you can embed MAS in it and drive bare metal directly. People like Softlayer, OVH, other bare metal clouds have technology similar to MAS. Ubuntu is now making that technology accessible to everyone through MAS. We have an incredible provisioner, the work of our amazing server team, which basically does image-based installs, which means that we install the operating system much faster than the native operating system installers do it. With SSDs and Ubuntu, you can get two minutes provisioning from scratch, which is pretty impressive, I think. With 1.7, we've announced now the inclusion of multiple operating systems. We built this initially for Ubuntu because we had very important internal use case drivers. I think oil that we talked about earlier today completely based on MAS, hundreds of nodes tracked in there, but we understand that, of course, people have lots of different operating systems deployed into their data center. They have VMware, they have Windows, they have Red Hat, and we wanna make sure that MAS as a provisioner is useful for all those use cases. And so, we have added in 1.7 the capability to deploy any operating system on a MAS cluster. We're using the same technology, basically writing out the image and doing configuration of it. Now's the time for me to check with my solution architect in how much trouble I am. Do you wanna just do a walkthrough of MAS? You don't want to, do you? I'll give you a few more minutes, okay, all right. This is a node listing from MAS, which basically shows, and this one is from oil. So this is a node listing of MAS of the kit that is currently registered in oil that's running there. You can see in the listing there that we've given you easy access to the number of cores, the amount of RAM, the amount of disk, and the MAC addresses there. And it's also cut up in different zones. So in a way, the zoning and the fact that you have all this metadata available there, the number of cores, number of RAM and disk, means you can treat this as a cloud. And I'll talk more about why the API makes that even easier. And if we manage to get the setup here working, we'll actually walk you through and show how the provisioning works and the details there, yeah, sure. What is oil? Oil is the Open Stack Interoperability Lab. It's one of the projects that Canonical has internally that does basically continuous validation of Open Stack in multiple configurations. So we work with a variety of hardware vendors and we work with a variety of software partners that are providing extensions into Open Stack. Oil is what lets us do the mixing and matching or variation of those permutations and testing on top of it. It's what lets us give back to vendors to guarantee that your kit works in Open Stack as is deployed by Canonical in combination with all these other technologies here.  Well, oil is a guarantee that Canonical provides that they will work together. And so any sign partner with Canonical, there's an oil add-on to that engagements that they can get into and then that's really part of the offering that we provide. So what can MAS do? What are the key functions that MAS can do? Well, first it can discover new hardware.  Where's the MAC address for that? Sure, some people will receive nice CSV files with all the MAC addresses and everything, but the reality is that the data center is a dynamic place. You're racking your kit, you're moving it around. What MAS can do for you is discover new hardware as it's plugged in. So the first thing that MAS does is it will boot up that server and run an ephemeral environment on it, which will detect all the hardware and which will set up IPMI credentials or basically management credentials that allow you to remotely control that server over there. So at the end of that first process there, we know what the machine is a little bit about its hardware and we know we can now remotely power control it because without having to use default IPMI passwords and other abominations that are standard in some data centers. MAS can also configure the disks for you, so basically you can say how you want the disk layout, do you want B cache on them, do you want LVM setup. It will configure the networking for you, so if you want bonds, if you want jumbo frames, if you want specific VLAN IDs on the outgoing ports, you can do that as well. It will install an operating system, pretty much our objective is to install any relevant server operating system. It will set up admin credentials for you, so essentially it will let you, at the end of that provisioning cycle, SSH into the machine, or it will hand off to DevOps Automation. You can then from that point onwards control that bare metal as part of your DevOps infrastructure. We work together with Chef on doing first class support for MAS and Chef together.  We have the Chef guys here and I wanna call them up but MAS needs to tell me that I'm allowed to and if not, well in the end where they can talk more about what the work is and what they're seeing in terms of demand there. How does MAS actually do it? Well, the first thing, MAS packs in quite a lot of functionality in it, so if you are used to doing provisioning manually, in other words you have to set up all the services yourself, et cetera, well you have to set up a DHCP server, a DNS server, offer up TFTP, offer iSCSI for the nodes that are mounting a block. HTTP if you're offering an interface for people to be able to drive that infrastructure there. You have to then figure out how am I gonna manage these machines if you've got a variety of server kit like we do at Canonical, you need to support IPMI but possibly ILO extensions, DRAC, Cisco UCS, things like moonshots, even Intel EMT and ME. What MAS does is it probes and configures the BMCs and the PDUs and it then remotely controls the machine power state which is essential for you to be able to actually do the provisioning and then do the deployment as well. We've got this image-based installer that I talked about which is pretty unique which writes out to the disk a full image and then does resize at the end of that and MAS does one additional piece which makes it ultra valuable which is it will detect hardware component details and will auto-tag machines based on capabilities. So if you've got a machine which has a GPU, if you've got a machine which has a different architecture, MAS will know about that, it will tell you firmware revisions, it will tell you how many drives, if it's attached to a hardware RAID controller, fundamentally MAS will tell you everything about that machine and will keep that for you in a database. You can see okay, this machine had this configuration today and it evolved over time. It models layer two and layer three networks and interfaces so you can say this machine has these interfaces, I want them on these networks over here, I want them configured as a bond with this VLAN ID on this interface here and so it's on this network here and so that allows you to through the MAS UI do all the stuff which today you have to do after you've provisioned, logging into the machine, tying things together and hoping it works. And the last piece that MAS does which is a great amount of great work that we've done for one of our customers that is using MAS in a multi-tenancy setting is security commissioning. So when you decommission a machine, MAS will also wipe the drives for you ensuring that the next user that comes along will not have an issue, will not have access to existing data on the drives. We offer, as I said, a cloud-style RESTful API and this is the thing I think which distinguishes MAS from other provisioning systems at its core. The API is designed to operate like a cloud so when you're talking to MAS you don't say install this OS on that machine, you can say find me a node with these characteristics. You can provide CPU count, memory and architecture but you can also provide arbitrary tags that we set up for you. So you can say give me a machine with a GPU or give me a machine with an FPGA or give me an ARM machine with two cores that has an SSD attached to it. So it gives you that ability to find in the data center what machines you actually want. It can of course install the operating system in boot. You provide to the start command just a parameter which says what operating system version you want and if it's one of the supported versions that we have and the image is loaded inside MAS it will boot it up. It can get node hardware and LDP detail so this is how you expose that information that we detected when we did that commissioning step where we're doing hardware detection and finally it can do discovery of servers in a chassis. So we have support for new hyper converged or ultra dense chassis like Moonshot, like UCS. Those machines normally will have an interface which lets you query what actual blades or what nodes do I have installed inside this chassis. So MAS, you don't need to then go and individually configure all of those. MAS will probe the chassis controller and it will tell you this is all the machines that you have in that chassis. We do the same for Microsoft for their OCP kit and so we can also query the Microsoft OCP chassis and say give me back what machines we have, give me back what MAC addresses are there and then from that point onwards you can treat that as basically accessible infrastructure that you have. We did our first release in 2012. This was the first generally available release which was 1.2. 1.7 which was released at the end of last year is what brought in Windows, CentOS and RHEL installation. That 1.7 also brought full machine status tracking and this is maybe I'll do a parenthesis just to talk about why that's so important in a bare metal provisioner. The reason why the cloud was successful was also because hypervisors are a reliable way of controlling VMs. You can ask a hypervisor, start a VM up and it will start that VM up and you can ask a hypervisor, is that VM running and it will give you an answer. Anybody who has direct experience with a variety of VMCs in this room here. So okay, so you people here who are like me living in the 1980s understand exactly. So VMCs can be single threaded, you do a request, oh wait I'm servicing somebody else's information or my monitoring system has just gone through and I can't power the machine because it's servicing that request over there. So VMCs are notoriously unreliable and in the end your provisioning tool is the gutter of all your problems in your data center. If the BMC doesn't work or if you have an issue with the installation or the drives are dead, basically your provisioning tool has to tell you about it because otherwise you have no idea what went wrong. I press this button and I have no machine back. So the work that we did in 1.7 was instrumental towards actually tracking what is happening with the machine. Did we manage the boot at the first time? Did we manage to do hardware detection? Did it hang during an OS install? Did the mem test succeed? Did we manage the firmware upgrade successfully? So, Maz does not fire and forget. We run through all the machine states and we track what's actually happening with it. We give you basically a full dashboard which says this is what the node state is, this is how far it's gone, it's hung here at this point and we'll give you an alert if it takes too long. 1.7 also was a version that brought Chef integration as a fully supported system. So, you basically if you're using Chef, provisioning or knife or Chef server, Maz will integrate seamlessly into an environment where you can basically deploy any bare metal machine and control it with Chef. And 1.9, which is planned for the second half of this year, will bring out advanced networking and storage features and our redesigned fully dynamic web UI. So 1.7 has one limitation which is the web UI in certain circumstances won't refresh to give you back live information. In some places you still have to reload. The main node listing and the node page do reload themselves and so the individual elements will tell you this machine is now booted, it's running, but with 1.9, everything is dynamic. So if you're looking in front of that network view, you'll see dynamically the nodes being added onto that network and you'll see the network move or change as it goes. Maz pricing, I want to have a pricing slide here because I'm a product manager. It is open source and free to use and that includes the Chef and Juju integration.  It runs on all Ubuntu certified hardware. So we made an explicit decision inside Canonical to ensure it to add Maz certification as a requirement for certification testing. So if you're a hardware vendor that's working with Canonical, you'll have noticed that since 14.04, our requirements have changed. We now require your BMC to actually work. We now require your entire kit to be deployable with Maz, which I think is the bare minimum in a cloudy era where everybody's racking up tons of kits, but that is now part of our certification requirements and so we are fully assuring that you will be able to deploy basically any machine that's Ubuntu certified with Maz itself. What's available commercially? Well, you can get 24 by seven support through our Ubuntu Advantage product which covers basically all the product portfolio. You can deploy RHEL, Windows, Sless, and ESXi as an Ubuntu Advantage subscriber. If you're interested in using Maz inside your own solution that you are going to export, talk to us about an embedding license because the way that Maz's license requires you to have an agreement with us in order to provide a public service and any custom development. If you have a new piece of kit that we haven't worked with a vendor before, we can go out and talk to that vendor. If you've got interesting use cases in networking and storage that need to happen, then we're also happy to drive that there. What should you use Maz for? So this is the tail end of the slide, but I actually want to just go back and think about what the actual primary use cases there are. So first, managing bare metal at scale. If you're here at the OpenStack Summit, it's because you care about bare metal at scale and you may be hiding it behind OpenStack and using it directly through Horizon, but you still have to have bare metal deployed and Maz solves that problem perfectly. If you're doing web storage and Hadoop and other performance critical workloads which require bare metal access, you don't want to run Hadoop in a VM and suffer the virtualization overhead. Well, Maz is perfect for managing bare metal at scale and it will provide you with a very easy path to running systems. It will allow you to replace homegrown provisioners. So if you yourself have this bolted-together system like we had a canonical where you had Pixi, TFTP, ice-caze demons running together, non-high availability, Maz is a great solution to give you a robust provisioner in that data center there. This is a way for you to get a fully supported Pixi and operating system install, Pixi environment and operating system install environments. If you're building your own bare metal cloud, Maz was built to be embedded. The API is exactly for that reason, very simple. It handles exactly the embedding use cases which are give me a machine, let me control access to it, give me feedback on what the status transitions are. So if you've got a GUI, for instance, you will live update how that commissioning or installation process is going. And at the end, if you want to deprovision, again, it will do secure wipes. So you'll have the R&T that your disk is clean before you hand it to your next customer there. And at a high level, keeping your operation seem happy. Abstracting bare metal complexity, as I said, is super valuable to people that have been working with unreliable hardware, unreliable protocols, as people that have used CSTP or Pixi, which is a combination I guess of DHCP and NTFTP, have found. And this is, Maz is a game changer in that aspect because we're providing a freely available, fully supported solution that's owned and is responsible for hiding all that complexity behind it. With that, I'm gonna pause again to ask our spectacular solution architect. Can we go? Okay, all right. So I can take some questions while we're there and then we can have a look at Maz together. Sure, go ahead. Okay, correct. Is that to what? Cypher zero. I'm not sure what Cypher zero is, but I can tell you how it's done. So when we boot up the machine for the first time, we are not doing power control. So the first time the machine boots for us to detect it, it has to be manually booted. It will do a Pixi request and we're not gonna install the operating system, we'll send an ephemeral image over. That ephemeral image boots on the machine and through in-band IPMI, it will set up the user credentials. Does that make sense? Okay, so basically at the end of that, we'll have added an additional user there. That's a very good question. Do we support UEFI secure boots and trusted boots? We support UEFI out of the box, which is more a task than just the sentence would let you believe. Trusted boot and secure boots, I think that there are caveats and we don't fully support them on all the hardware there and I'm not sure if anybody else actually does because there are, at least for secure boots, there is a bit of a chicken and egg problem and I don't actually know about hardware compatibility. The one thing I can tell you though is that we have not had any customer demand for it because if we had, it would have been a first-class feature inside MAS. For UEFI, we definitely do because there's a new server kit that comes out that is UEFI by default. Even the stuff we have in the data center today is only transitioning slowly but we see that UEFI is definitely a trend in the data center and that's supported there. Thanks for the questions. Sure, go ahead. Yeah? CentOS is freely available. So if you're using CentOS and MAS, there's no commercial engagement required, you can use MAS perfectly and we understand that people that are deploying CentOS are doing it because they don't want per node friction so we understand that perfectly but it's fully included. Yeah? Yes. That's a great question. The question is, does MAS configure all my switches? No, it doesn't configure all your switches yet and that is an exercise today left to the reader. So basically you have to configure the switches yourself. Part of the reason is because you have to operate with a bunch of different switch technologies. There's no single API that you can use to talk to all switches as we're all aware of. Part of the reason is also because we don't want MAS to become this thing which completely takes over your network the moment you put it in. So we want it to be something which you can gradually put into the data center and then grow as you feel confident with it.  I have two questions. Yeah, okay. When you commissioned a machine, it tells you how much CPU, RAM, and disk it has, right? Yeah. But for some reason it only show you one disk, the first disk. Yes. If your server has 10, only show you one. Yes. Is that for some specific reason? Well, part of it is just because of an information management issue. We can't give you too much information back when you're looking at a glance. But we know all the disks. We run LSHW, NLDP checks and other probes when we boot it up. So we have the full LSHW output there stored in the database and tracked. So we do know everything which is on the machine. We don't expose it to you on the listing and on the node view. We do do a simplified version because, first because in the node listing you can't give back too much information, it's overwhelming. Yeah, but we do know and if you request it when you're doing the provisioning, when you ask to acquire a machine and you specify I want a machine with five disks it will go out and find that machine for you. Okay. Second question is, MAS has its own DNS and DHCP, right? Correct. And works perfectly with the commissioned machines. Yes. I use it and I deploy OpenStack with the autopilot from Ubuntu and it works very well, but OpenStack doesn't have a functioning DNS. Is there any in the roadmap intention to integrate the MAS DNS into the OpenStack or something like that? Yes, however, I'll say yes. Our intention is to interoperate with third party DNS in general. Our philosophy with MAS was functionality first and integration second. So we want to make sure that you are able to deploy at all and integration adds a lot of complexity to it. Being able to interoperate with standalone or remote DHCP and DNS is definitely part of our requirements, but on the OpenStack case it's interesting however that if you're using MAS to deploy OpenStack, you have the same chicken and egg issue that you have with other bare metal provisions that are very tied to OpenStack, which is, is DNS running by the time you have the provisioner up? And so it has, even in the OpenStack case, you would have to be, we would still have to have a standalone DNS server and then switch over to using OpenStack once the cloud is provisioned. Oh, can MAS offer DNS services into OpenStack? It doesn't today, but it could. And if people are interested in it, then I'd be happy to discuss it. Sorry, I had two questions there beforehand, so I just want to get to those. Yeah, sure. So the question is, is there an integration plan with bare metal, with OpenStack bare metal as service? It definitely, there definitely is. We haven't done it yet because our demand immediately has been to lay down OpenStack clouds. I think people using OpenStack to drive bare metal has been a use case which people are only considering now until we haven't had a lot of demand for it. But if you are interested as a customer, come and talk to me and I want to actually make sure that we have that captured in the roadmap there. So it is on the roadmap, we will do this work, but it's not there today. There was another question in the back. Yeah, so that's a bit, that's a longer question to answer because, well, I have to ask you back. Do you mean when first racked or do you mean after the machine has been acknowledged as something that you want to manage? Because we treat those separately. Right, so let me explain how we treat hardware and then I think that will answer the question. So the first time you rack the machine, you have two options. You can boot the machine once at which point we will know about it because it's just tried to boot from us or you can create the machine manually. You can basically import a CSV file and we'll create all the machines for you. No boot required if you're importing CSV. We will boot once to find out everything about the hardware. In that use case there, we'll boot once to find out everything about the hardware and we'll store that in the database. We've got IPMI credential set up at that point. We will boot once to install and then we'll finally boot once into a live instance. So it is at most four boots, typically three boots, if the machine has hardware information inside MAS already, in other words, if you're recommissioning, it's one boot to install and one boot to run and that's it. Thanks. Sure, go ahead. We do support class, so this is a good question. I think we do support CloudInnit and you can provide CloudInnit metadata that MAS will run at the end. CloudInnit is great in a way because it allows you the flexibility to do whatever you want and the same team that did, for instance, the provisioner that did the basic disk installer did CloudInnit as well, so I'm sure it's integrated there. Yeah, go ahead. Do you need a different app? That's a great question. We'll call you the last question. That's a great question. The OS stream is done either through TFTP or HTTP when you're doing the OS install. The ephemeral images are provided over ISCSI, so there's multiples there. You've called out the architecture which I didn't highlight here because I wanna talk about high-level functionality but MAS is done with the idea that there is a highly available region that you set up and that region contains all your server kits in that data center basically. Then the separate concept there is the cluster control. The cluster control is what actually provisions the machines themselves. The cluster controller is supposed to own a layer two segment because it has to handle broadcasts for being able to do pixie boots. It will grow to as big as your layer two network can handle broadcasts of pixie. Normally I would say 50 machines, maybe 100 machines in a layer two network and over that it starts not to become practical to provision on it. So you would normally segment at that point. People have done architectures where it's one MAS per rack, one MAS per group of three racks we have then in our data center and when I say one MAS, I'm sorry, I mean one MAS cluster controller. And talk to me afterwards and I'll tell you more about the architecture. It's a bit more involved. I'll talk to you how availability is done and how it's put together. Yeah, sure. You can actually provision VMs instead of the metal. So one thing that we offer you is verse integration. So there's a verse power type and if you give that verse power type the configuration information to access a specific machine it will launch VMs through verse. In fact that is a configuration that we use when we're doing demonstrations on the orange box like Massimo is rushing here to let us see. Now we didn't build MAS to be of an open stack replacement and I really believe in being fanatical about scope because you really wanna do one task really well. There are obvious use cases where you want to be able to deploy an additional VM or manage VMs in the same, with another same pane of glass. This is not an open stack replacement. It's not designed to give you all those services there. So it allows you to do that out of the box. Yes, exactly, yeah. So, yeah. And you mean softer configuration, right? Yes, so. Well, hardware configuration I think, I come from a hyperskill background which means you can stitch together hyperservers as you wish. We don't do that today. We don't basically create hardware out of the box but that's definitely something which we have in the short-term roadmap is working with people that are providing these disaggregated or hyper-converged infrastructure. It's sort of like one upside of the other and you can define that. Having said that, you can use the API to drive whatever you want on the machine. So you could, and it was designed to do that way. You have your own internal automation. Oil is basically built on this. Today I'm deploying open stack 100 times. Every time I'm configuring it, it's a different number of machines. Different machines participate and so on. That's exactly what it was designed for. Yeah? You can deploy as well as TFTP which is a UDB-based protocol runs on the Layer 2 network. Is Jason here in the room? I wanted to ask if he is here. Anyone from the oil team from our side? We've had actually, do you want to talk about that? Or can you talk about that, Dan? The question is, how many concurrent installs can you do when you're driving Mars? On oil, how many do we do concurrently when we're doing installs there? Do we stagger or do we do all the machines? We don't stagger? Let me connect you with the oil team afterwards which has the most knowledge that I have of somebody that is continuously redeploying. So one thing which is interesting, most customers are not redeploying continuously. Most customers are growing. Once they have that first setup done, they're growing sort of organically. Oil is special and it's basically the test and dev use case that we're always re-imaging all the machines. And so let's talk to that team afterwards and they'll actually be able to answer back that question. 16 is what you said, or 6-0? Yeah, 60. All right, I think Massim is telling me that he's ready to go. Yeah, all right, so let's show off the Mazen Chef integration first. Let me hand this over to JJ. JJ, amazing Austin engineer. Like me has a very newborn child on his house so he's suffering from lack of sleep and when he travels it's when he actually is able to do seven hours straight. So JJ did all the work to get Chef up and running on Mass for the first time. We did this for ChefConf the first time. We announced it there and I really want to thank you. You've been a fantastic partner to us and let you drive the demo. Hey everybody, so there we go. Basically what we're going to show here is the base. Oh, it's really small in the corner over there. This is us just listing out from the mass directly leveraging the API. So I'm blaming the orange box for the brokenness, just FYI. It's pretty straightforward. It basically goes in. You can run Bootstrap off of there which will actually go ahead and install Chef after telling Mass, hey, look Mass, I want this machine to Bootstrap. If you saw on the Chef slide a little while ago, that was actually the little screenshots that you took of my laptop actually running this stuff. So it was pretty cool. I love Mass, I actually do. It works exactly how I would hope you would and it does the thing. I wish I could do the Bootstrap. Except when the machines are not running. Yeah, you can see what you're saying. Exactly, but basically the Bootstrap is just one simple command to say, hey, I want a new machine out there and it'll boot it, install the OS that you're expecting to have, then go ahead and SSH into it if it's SSH or if it's Windows it uses WinRM and then injects the Chef binary on there and actually checks in with your Chef server with your KnifeRB and your validation PEM. So it's one step, you can do it. I'm putting a project together to actually build the Chef OpenStack cookbooks with Mass as the top layer to the Bootstrap for these things. So if you're building OpenStack clusters over and over and over again, Mass will be one of the drivers for that. That's great, that's great. Cool. If they wanna see this running, can they stop by the Bootstrap and take a look? Absolutely, we'll have more than, you know, 20 minutes to talk about this and please find me on the Bootstrap Chef. Also my boss, Matt's here. I do. Do you have a Bootstrap? We have a Bootstrap down in, what is it, number? I don't even know. It's the one with the big Chef on it. Perfect. They're awesome. Yeah, any questions or I can answer anything? It's also lunchtime. How many Chefs have you been here? Awesome. Any of you using bare metal automation today? Sorry, yeah. Are any of you using bare metal today? Okay, interesting. So take a look at Chef. If you're interested, come in and talk to JJ. He'll talk to you about how the integration was done. There's a YouTube video that we did for ChefConf which we distributed there that you can take and see it running in action and downstairs we have hardware which is behaving a bit better and we can show it off to you. Do you wanna do a walkthrough of itself, Massimo? Excellent. Are we out of time? Can we keep going? Four minutes. Okay, four minute walkthrough. Thanks, Vanna. So we have, so I apologize, the hardware's not cooperating with us today, but I can give you the highlights, right? So there's different tabs at the top and we have a new version of Mass that I can actually show if you would like or not. You choose. So you decide, what's the nicest to show? One, one dot eight. One, we'll go with the old version for now. So basically you have the functionality on the right.  We can, if the nodes were cooperating and we had all the information, we'd have, it listed at the bottom, so there's like a discovery. So you basically, you know, you get the, down to the serial numbers or the firmware versions, serial numbers of, you know, the drives, the firmware versions so you can update them. There's a lot of information. So Mass has a command line client and also an API so you can actually query the API if you have existing auditing software that you need to grab the information, you know, for whatever reason for auditing purposes. So you have full control again. You have node listings. So talking about the scaling, so Mass is set up as, there's a region controller and cluster controllers and here we have the cluster controller. We only have one running but you can set up multiple cluster controllers. They do the caching, the package caching and you're really limited by, you know, disk speed and bandwidth at that point. You can just add as many cluster controllers as you need to. There's an idea of zones, kind of like AWS where you can split a crossing and open stack. So if you deploy to zones that kind of, or if you deploy multiple machines it kind of spreads them across the zone so you have an increased or a lower chance of failure. The networking, so we can define networking and network so Mass understands them in the 1.8. I think you mentioned the IPAN functionality where you can actually query Mass and say, hey, I need a block of IPs. Mass catalogs that and sends off the response back images. We have multiple architectures, multiple versions, not only Ubuntu but custom images like Windows, Lez, CentOS, et cetera. So you can install multiple architectures, multiple operating systems. Here we have ARM64 and also PowerPC along with X86 obviously. Any specific questions about the user interface that I can answer? That's a great question. Do you want to answer that? No, go ahead. The images have to be specially prepared to be deployable with Curtin. So we deliver these images in the same mechanism through Simple Streams, which is how we deliver our cloud images on Ubuntu today but they're specially treated in order to be able to be Curtin installable. There's an old legacy installer that uses Debian installer that will use the original, I guess Debian installer bits but the newer version uses a special image. Let's talk afterwards. There are two answers to that question over there and I'll explain. You can assemble the images yourself or you can download them but because these mechanics were done, so the CentOS piece was done as a last thing in the 1.7 cycle and so we didn't do a lot of publicity on it so we basically shared it with customers that were interested in it but let's talk afterwards and I'll... That was an example. Yeah, no CentOS specifically, there are two ways of doing it and I'll tell you afterwards how it works. This is not a fair rendition and actually I have to apologize to Massimo and I'm gonna get yelled at by Dan Poler who is Massimo's boss who's asking me why has this demo come up in the last minute? I apologize, I didn't prepare for it. So, this is not a fair demonstration of Massimo. Please stop by the booth. All the orange boxes are running Massimo underneath. If you wanna see Massimo walk through with the latest version of Massimo with all the features that we talked about here, stop by there and talk to the team there. Massimo was there most of the day as well so I'd be delighted to help you and walk you through how it works. Thanks very much for your time today.


Course Reports As a teacher we have access to some very powerful reports telling us what our learners have been doing in the course and when. To access these reports or logs we click the More link from the gear menu. We can see here logs and live logs, an activity report, course participation report. You may see other reports too if they've been enabled by your administrator. Live logs shows you what's happening right now in your course. And if we click Logs we can leave it as default which shows us everything everyone has done or we can specify a particular participant, day, particular activity and type of action. We can also look at different types of logs. Teaching usually relates to what course teachers do that will affect the learning experience of their students. For instance, updating a course section or creating an assignment. Participating usually relates to the students' learning experience such as posting to a forum and other might be updating the calendar or viewing a message, things which do not directly affect learning. So let's select a specific date and create and teaching and we can see that on that day our teacher Sam set up an assignment. Currently our teacher Sam is the only participant in her practice course so let's go to a different course on a different site to explore reports with more interesting activity. On this course we see that extra reports such as competency breakdown and activity completion are available. You will only see these if they're enabled on your site and in your course. The course participation report is useful for seeing easily who has and has not been taking part in particular course activities. One of the activities in this course if we click the drop-down menu is a forum where learners must tell us why they are here. So if we look back one week and choose student and post we will be able to see who has posted in this forum during the last week and we see that only students Barbara and Francis have posted so far. So we can select a number of students and message them together with a polite reminder. Finally the activity completion report is very useful if you have the advanced feature of activity completion set up in your course. The ticks against activities are to tell us and you when a task has been done and the activity completion report shows the teacher at a glance who has completed which tasks and who has not. Note that as a teacher you can also click into a box and mark it complete on behalf of your student.