This is the way the world ends. This is the way the world ends. Not with a bang, but with rebar to the back. In a party city clearance wick. Pulling the ending out of a cards against humanity deck would have been better. Carry On is a serious finale that I think will live on in contained infamy. For those of you who barely watch the show or never watch it at all, it's gonna pass without any further notice. But if you were at all a fan of the show in any way, and you saw this finale, you most definitely had an opinion. Not since The Last of Us Part 2 or The Last Jedi Before It have I seen so much of a divide on a piece of media. The literal war zone of opinions on the episode has led to over 17,000 ratings on the episode on IMDb, putting it currently at the time of this recording at a 6.7. Just to put that into perspective, that's over double the amount of votes for Swanson, which stands at just over 8,000. And these ratings, oh boy is it a treasure trove of emotion. It seems you either love the episode, it's so good. Crying a lot. It's not the perfect ending, in my opinion. But I think it's perfect ending for 17. The show is about these two brothers. Start with two brothers, and it ends with two brothers. I didn't cry for this show for long, but this episode got me so hard. Are you absolutely hated it? Damaging. It hurts. Are fans owed their dream finale by any show? Of course not, but this finale was so disrespectful, disconnected, and damaging. I would argue that coherent characterization and thoughtful messaging are non-negotiable. Those are things which a series finale has the obligation to carefully consider. Neither were meant anything approaching a basic level of adequacy.  I will now always regret supporting this show while it aired.  People have very strong issues or high praises with the end of the show that some have been watching for 15 years or had binge watched within the last five seasons. That group in particular has been one of the more vocal in terms of praising the episode from what I have gathered. Not to say that all within that group have praised it, there are certainly those who have their criticisms as well. It's just something I've noticed. I myself started watching the show at the end of season one back in 2006, and have been following the show week by week, month by month, year by year, for literally half of my existence.  I was there when Sam made the jump into the pit.  I was there when the show refound its footing in season eight. Angels Falling, Demon Dean, The Darkness, British Men of Letters, President Lucifer, Jack, and Evil God. So what do I think of the finale? I think it's alright. Nothing more. Nothing less. Pretty much a meh. Is there some bad stuff in this episode? Most certainly, but there are some good parts too, at least in concept. In this essay I'm going to talk to you about what I feel this finale did right, what it did wrong, and what it could have done better. Carry On was made in mind as a separate episode from the overall narrative. The Chuck storyline, which I have voiced my... opinions on in the past, has been settled. While I feel that they should have mixed the two elements, the ending of Chuck and the ending of the show, into one cohesive narrative, they did not go down this route. They planned the show as a single episode idea, and honestly, it hurts the episode. I understand they wanted to be reminiscent of a monster of the week kind of episode, but considering the totality of the show, they needed to step it up a notch. So with that in mind, I'm just saying now that Dean should have died taking on God. While I understand the symbolisms of the ordinary rebar killing him, Dean should have been killed by mortal Chuck. Now bear with me here. After losing all of his abilities and becoming a normal human being, following Chuck on a spiraling downturn, even if only briefly, would have been more character development than he ever got when he turned into evil God. I'm still miffed about that garbage plot twist in season 14. With Chuck living without power and without the title he gave himself, he would have a complete crisis of character. He would fall into depression and poverty. He would live on the streets and watch the world go by around him, completely unaware that their literal creator was living amongst them in squalor. But while Chuck is weak, he still possesses his knowledge of the spells and monsters. Which if Jack had literally become God, don't you think that he would have rid the world of monsters and the like? I know that he said he was hands off, but this guy still has the mental capacity of a three-year-old, technically speaking, and they have never deferred from that over the final season. So him ridding the world of monsters and all things evil isn't that much of a stretch. I can't believe the amount of people that have given this episode one star. It was a perfect ending to the show. Okay, I didn't expect Dean to die, but he was reunited with Bobby, and he was finally happy and at peace. Sam got a happy life too, and when the boys reunited at the end, it was the way an ending should be. Well done to them all whilst filming during COVID and for 15 years of a great show. Perfect ending! One of the biggest issues I had personally with the episode was the pacing of it. Supernatural built itself on the idea of a monster of the week kind of show, and that's its bread and butter, obviously. But it also, at least during the majority of its earlier years, was able to interweave either the main season narrative or something between the brothers into the story. This was the biggest issue with this episode. The main narrative was finished, and any development between the brothers didn't happen until the last 10-15 minutes of the episode. This should have been a red flag. I understand Dabb wanting to show more routines of the bunker for Sam to look back on once Dean is dead, so I don't mind that aspect. However, he doesn't do anything beyond showing how sad it is that Dean isn't there. Going to a pie eating festival was also low-hanging fruit in my opinion. Sure, it's a funny gag for maybe five seconds, but it doesn't link into the narrative at all, aside from the random circumstance of vampires abducting children nearby, which is such a lazy writing tool. And then when they go to the crime scene and talk to the cop, it doesn't even feel like a written conversation. Yes, I get the Kripke and Singer reference, haha, but the dialogue feels so disjointed and short. It feels like it was written on a scrap piece of paper, not an actual script. And that's an insult to scrap pieces of paper, because the Beatles wrote, I want to hold your hand on one. I would have kiboshed this scene entirely, to be honest. It's your last episode, guys. Not to sound dramatic, but everything needs to be top-notch and important and key to the story. This scene is here to do nothing other than tick a supernatural playbook checklist. And then comes the scene that I really go back and forth on, the vampire interrogation. This scene is… it's weird to me. First off, the vampire actor just… well, he's just kind of dreadful. I'm sorry to the guy, but either he doesn't have much skill or another possibility, he was barely given any direction other than do your bit and get out of here. Dean and Sam go into a… very detailed conversation about killing the dude. Dean is pretty close to character, if a bit full of himself during the interrogation, but it's Sam who is completely off the mark here. Sam is the one who has the small and more painful weapon of death, which is the exact opposite of Sam's character. I know it's a vampire, and I know that they are trying to get the kids back, but this is everything against Sam's core character traits. You are going to tell me that the guy who has tried on several occasions to find an option other than death is going to slowly cut the head off of a monster with a knife that might take him about 10 minutes. That's just not like him at all. Unless Dean dies and yeah, he goes really dark. I understand that they're trying to create some tension, but it doesn't really hit because you have no idea who these kids are. You get more of an idea of who Cobb's two kids are from Inception and you almost never see their faces. I might be reaching here, but I feel that this was supposed to be some sort of symbolic reference with the brothers saving two younger brothers, but they never spent a damn minute on them. While Dean is having his overdramatic death, the kids are long gone. They probably were abducted by some other monster at this point, and that kind of relates to the episode's other large issue. There are tons and tons of little nods to the show here and there, but they barely mean anything. Pie contest is because Dean likes pie and that's been done about a million times by now, so let's do it again for old times sake. The investigation is a cursory check mark. The kids mean pretty much nothing, and the ending montage has nowhere near as much finality as it should. On a base level, most of the episode is passable, except for three scenes. The fight scene has some decent choreography, which is nice to see. I think we are all getting really tired of the throw them against the wall bit. The second half of Dean's death scene is actually pretty well done, but we're going to talk about that later. And finally, most of the final montage. This finale is a good summary of all the things a writer should never do. Do not ignore the character development of multiple seasons. Do not make the same ending that one of your own characters called an awful and hopeless ending in the same season. Do not let your narrative ignore the existence of almost every other character. Do not make an ending that could have happened just like that 14 years ago.  Do not make it impossible to rewatch your show. Do not make your audience regret they spent 15 years watching this show. All of this seems extremely obvious, but it perfectly wasn't. But now, since everyone else has had their own different idea for the ending of the show, I thought I would give it a go. And as I said earlier, it still involves Chuck. Start the episode with the brothers in the car driving to a local diner. They can reminisce about having defeated God in the silly way they did in episode 19. They can remark on the fact that maybe now that Chuck is gone, perhaps all of the elements that they were so entwined with, like plot armor and the such, no longer exist. They ponder but joke that they don't want to find out for sure. This would make Dean's death scene a little bit more believable and more concurrent with what was being established throughout this season, even though they haven't properly explained that things have reverted back. The camera shows the Impala pass by where it then slowly pans to a homeless Chuck eating out of a garbage can. As he watches the Impala pass by, flames of hate and anger fill his eyes. Cut back to the boys walking into a diner and ordering some food. It's here that Dean finds out that there is a pie eating contest.  Night begins to fall as Dean digs into another piece. While this is going on, Chuck watches them from across the street, anger fuming from his nostrils. He wants his revenge. He craves it. But how? It's at this point where he devises an idea. He performs a summoning spell and he doesn't summon vampires, especially in a universe where I keep getting conflicting reports on whether they should still exist in this universe or not. Literally, the lore of this show has been completely thrown out the window over the last four seasons. In fact, he summons the very damn thing the brothers trained to fight were bred to fight. He summons demons. As Dean finishes the last piece, he sits back and is sworn by the locals congratulating him. He looks over at Sam who gives him a nod of congrats. They walk outside the diner to have Dean say, hold on a minute, in which he goes behind the Impala and pukes up the pie. It's at this point that Sam makes the comment that maybe in fact they have lost some of their grandeur. At least Dean's ironclad stomach, that is. It's at this point that the demons appear in front of them.  But these demons don't really matter. Let's not bring someone back from some one-off episode just to make an incredibly obscure cameo. Even though he just finished puking his guts up, Dean is quick to react by quietly opening up the trunk of the Impala and takes out the necessary weapons while Sam keeps their gaze on him. Dean then calls to Sam as he throws Ruby's knife while he pulls out the Saunov shotgun. The two parties converge on each other. All the while, Chuck watches from the shadows. The fighting becomes intense as the brothers deal out as many punches as they are given. They take the hits hard, but they keep on fighting. Killing most of the demons, but they can see they are starting to become outmatched. Sam is almost overwhelmed by a final demon dropping Ruby's knife, and he slowly starts to fight for his life. But thanks to Dean's quick reflexes, he throws the knife into the final demon's back, harkening back to the I'm a Batman moment from Season 3. But of course without actually saying it, we're not going that low here. The brothers look nearer on the same as they did when they fought Chuck in the previous episode, but they are victorious until Dean gets stabbed in the back by Chuck. Dean falls to the ground while Sam runs to his brother's aid. He looks up to see Chuck relishing in his victory. Dean's life force is fading quickly.  He begins the back away from them, continuing to tarnish the very meaning of humanity and mortality, slowly backing out onto the road, rattling off on this is the beginning of a new end, how he will return to power until he is hit by a car. He slams into the concrete, his body broken, and slowly blood pools from his body. As he dies, he slowly realizes the very place he will be going. He begs for more time for something in the narrative to change, until he has nothing left in him, and he passes. Now it is at this point, despite how we got here, that the narrative of the original finale state is relatively similar, except for one major difference, we do not take 10 minutes for Dean to die. Another massive issue myself and others had with this scene was that it went on way too damn long. In that time, Sam could have got a first aid kit, called an ambulance, patched Dean up, and finished a crossword puzzle in all that bloody time. This is the case because the first half of dialogue between the two, aside from the is hammy hammy trash. It's so damn cheesy and brings oneself out of a very critical moment happening right in front of him. Oh and on a side note, there would be actual blood from the wound and coming out of Dean's mouth, because he would be actually dying.  The reason why I keep using picks from season 9 when Dean died, is because this is actually a much better version of what we got in season 15. Every single issue I have with his death in season 15 is completely gone in this death. It is short, it's to the point, and it hits home. This is exactly what Karrion is trying terribly to regurgitate. Sam panically tries to patch Dean up, while asking a pedestrian to call for an ambulance. But after seeing all the blood loss, he knows that Dean's fate is sealed. And Dean knows it too. They have a short dialogue about accepting Dean's fate and how this was always how it would happen, but then we jump to this part right here. This was the part of the episode that turned me around. By cutting out the unnecessary fat and giving the moment far less time, you were giving it far more weight and realism. Don't have him stand against a pole all the while looking mildly inconvenienced at the fact of death. Have Dean know that he only has a few moments left. Show that they were the utmost of brotherhood. Dean would pass on and Sam would be left alone, holding his dead brother in his arms. Okay, there is one slight tarnish on this part though. This is overly emotional nexopia emo writing here. The ending of this series felt like the proper closure for these characters. Sam and Dean did indeed find peace when they were done. When Karrion my wayward son was playing, now your life no longer empty. Surely heaven waits for you. And Sam shows up behind Dean's back. I suddenly stated, reflecting on my journey with these boys, all the sacrifices they have made, all the pain they had to endure. This happiness is what they deserved after all these years. Castiel didn't belong in the empty. He's a leader and still has a purpose to serve. Making him God Jack's assistant honesty is so effing fitting. The other thing I was so happy about is the fact that there's still some Winchester's Sam's children on earth to keep fighting the good fight. Sam and Dean didn't just leave everything behind and went to get their happy ending. Their legacy will live on forever honesty. Now another reason why cutting out this unnecessary section of dialogue is so important is because it frees up more time to show how Sam moves on with his life as well as closure for Dean. In a perfect world, Dean would have also met up with Jack up in heaven and he and Bobby could have explained how heaven had changed. He also could have explained how cast is sacrificed, completely canceled the character out. He would no longer exist on any plane. He's actually perma-dead.  That sacrifice had to mean something. You already had your bait. Now actually make it mean something. You can't make it all happy in rainbows. You already get that with Sam and Dean at the very end of the episode. There needs to be some actual weight and consequence to cast a sacrifice and Jack can remark on that and how selfless it was for cast to do so. And then Dean can comment on what cast said to him before he was taken by the empty. Now another slight pause here. I'm not a SDL shipper. It's just not my thing. I viewed these guys as bros. Brothers from a different mother if you would. If Andrew Dad was actually going to confirm this was an actual relationship, he should have grown some balls and actually done it rather than hold the carrot of it as low as he possibly could without actually reaching for it. I'm not saying I would have agreed with it purely from a story writing perspective, but at least it wouldn't have been baiting. It would have been an actual confirmation. But back to Sam. We would see him grieve the loss of his brother. We saw him kind of question what was the point of his life anymore. We saw him at the very edge of despair. But then we cut back to Dean driving and then we cut back to Sam who has moved on with life entirely Admittedly, this was another aspect definitely affected by COVID. As I said in my series finale review, there was probably no probable means to bring the actress who played Eileen out for one day of shooting. She would have had to self quarantine for two weeks after coming up from California, shoot her single day of scenes because probably that's all they would have done, then go back to California only to self isolate for another two weeks. Production would have had to pay for all of that. And as we clearly saw in the final episode, production was definitely cutting corners or should I say wigs.  We could see her comfort Sam. She would tell Sam that Dean's in a better place and that he would want Sam to move on with his life. We would see her bring Sam out of the depths of his despair in a montage slightly similar to the one that we saw. We would see Sam build a family, teach his son Dean about the means of hunting, but also about the ways of life itself, like teaching ASL. You could even have Sam finish his degree, which would have been a really nice nod to the very beginning of the show. They also could have spent more than five bucks on Sam's aging makeup and hair. All the while this is happening, Dean is still taking his drive around in heaven. I actually don't have many problems with this part of the episode because narratively, different heaven doesn't really offer up much else rather than what we were given. Admittedly it might have been interesting to see Amanda Tapping's character come and talk about how heaven isn't going to shut down, you know, that major tease that they gave us that didn't really lead to anything. But admittedly that would have been inconsequential to the episode.  That's why it's okay to give a majority of this episode to Sam, as he is the one who's actually getting development in this part of the episode. Sam would die in a similar way with his son and Eileen watching over him as he passes on and he meets his brother at the bridge. It's also at this point I would remove the pop version of Carry On My Wayward Son. I'm sorry, but not sorry, I wasn't a fan of the cover. Sam and Dean hug and they look out over the water. Sam would make a comment about not remembering this moment and Dean wouldn't then explain that heaven is a little different now, and then to take a small page from The Good Place, which honestly, if you guys haven't watched that show, you really should, Sam remarks on what's after this for them. To which Dean would respond, I don't know, but I know that I won't be alone. I'll see Andrew Dab in my nightmares. It's hard to imagine such a wonderful show ending so horribly. It's as if Dab either decided to throw out 15 years of character development on purpose to spite all of us, or he got a case of amnesia and forgot it all. How this show ended was, to be frank, disrespectful to so many people on so many different levels. This finale conveys a horrible message to those who watched it, that you can only find peace in death. They took Cass and Dean, two characters who are heroically suicidal, and then killed them without a second thought. They took Sam and made him live out an apple pie life miserably with a faceless woman, only to give him peace when he finally died of old age. Not to mention that they erased any shred of family that the Winchester's had left to make the Fibros and the Wincess Shippers got what they wanted. I could go on for hours, but I won't. Thanks to Jensen, Jared, Misha, and the rest of the amazing cast and crew that worked so hard on this show, but screw Andrew Dab and screw this finale. Save yourself and don't watch it. My god, that's what I sound like a little bit when I was going on my Andrew Dab tirades. And there you have it. That's how I would have written the ending. In a sense, I understand that my idea has holes and problems of its own, as do nearly all finales, but my main takeaway from this video is that there were some good elements in the actual finale, they were just hidden under a bunch of cheesy garbage. The death scene should have been tighter and more focused. The reason for the death scene should have been something less random than vampires and a really weird cameo, and Sam should have gotten more development in his life after Dean rather than a two-minute montage. The ending of Supernatural was never going to satisfy everyone. That's a given. It's only in extremely rare cases where you get a finale that pleases almost everyone. But considering that this was supposed to be the final season and they also had a little bit extra time to write that finale with the whole COVID shutdown, I feel that Dab should have spent more time on the overall narrative and the finality of this season rather than a bunch of unnecessary filler episodes and copy and pasting Marvel plot points into the script. This was the end of a relationship that spanned over 15 years. This was a show that had its extreme highs and was currently in the depths of its extreme lows. The ending of this show was completely necessary as all the steam was gone, but at the very least, the closure for the brothers and their lives should have and in some ways was the focus of the ending as it should have been. It just needed a few more runs through the trimmer. But those are my thoughts. Let me know what you guys think in the comments below. How do you guys think this show should have ended? Do you think that it was good? Do you think it was bad? Do you think it was terrible? Do you think it was great? Please give me your guys' thoughts in the comments below. Also, if you like these readings, let me know as they were actually really fun to do and some were even more to read. There's a lot of emotion going on in these comments. And while Supernatural may be over, the fandom is not. For those of you who are interested, I have been reviewing the retro episodes for the last few years now. I'm now currently on season four heading into season five, so if you would like to follow me on that journey, I will link the playlist at the end of the video. Thank you guys so much for watching. I hope you enjoyed the video. If you did, leave a like and if you're interested in more subscribe. Otherwise, I'll catch you guys in the next one. Undergrads. It's been a while, but I'm happy to say the click is finally getting back together in an all-new movie thanks to a successful Kickstarter campaign. But we are still asking for your support. To see any and all updates about the upcoming Undergrads movie, be sure to check out and like the Bring Back Undergrads Facebook page. And with any luck, we'll see you guys soon.


Hello everyone, we're excited to be here at KubeCon EU and we're going to tell you about sick runtime and some of the work that we've been doing and a little bit about what it looks like in terms of cloud native runtimes in the future. So our charter, so the CNCF sick runtime is there to help enable the adoption of the execution of all the different types of workload types that you can run in cloud native environments. So that could be latency sensitive, it could be batch type of workloads and any type of specialized workload. We also have three TOC liaisons, CNCF TOC. Currently we have three co-chairs, one of the co-chairs, and then we also have a tech lead. We meet every first and third Thursday of each month and we also have an email list for communications and as well as a Slack channel for chatting and asking questions and getting involved. So what do we do? So we have three different types of activities, we have outreach type of activities, we have supporting type of activities, we also have education, type of activities. In the case of outreach, we try to reach out to new tech projects and people working in newer technologies in the cloud native ecosystem to see what's out there and to see what the trends are and just to advance the field and make sure that we have something coming in the pipeline as far as how people are going to be running some of these workloads in the future. We also support different community members in different projects, navigate the CNCF ecosystem, sometimes it can be a little bit daunting with all the different projects. We help the existing projects through the process in the CNCF to go through the different stages of sandbox incubation and graduation. We also interact with other SIGs and other people related to the CNCF. Finally, we do some education, so we help the community understand some of these projects and where do they fit into the whole ecosystem. All of this in the hope that getting more contributors and getting more involvement from their community. So in the scope of the SIG, we have many different projects in different areas. So here are some of the logos of some of the projects that I have presented. Some of them have actually applied for different stages in the CNCF. Some of them are in graduated state, for example, Container D and Cryo and Kubernetes is the main project that started the CNCF. There are some more projects at the edge like Cube Edge or Open Yurt and other projects that allow you to run WebAssembly on your system. So a lot of different areas. More details about the scope here, so we're in different areas. We have the general workload orchestration with Kubernetes and Volcano and MetalCube.io. We also have the specific runtimes like the WebAssembly runtimes, the container image registries, the runtime shims like Container D and Cryo. Another scope in the SIG is the special purpose operating systems. Some examples of that is flat cars, operating system just meant for running containers. Also, we look at the machine learning ops and edge and AI type of projects like Cube Edge, Cube Flow, ML Flow, so some of those projects that allow you to run at the edge and run your end-to-end machine learning pipeline. Finally, we also take care of work groups. So on the fall, under the six, right now we have only one work group, but we are hoping to get some more in the future. So Renault will talk about the container orchestrated device work group we currently have. So in the runtime scope, so some of the projects that presented, so we have this project sysbox. In this project allows you to run containers, but containers look like VMs. So in the container, you'll have something like SystemD or you can run Kubernetes or even Docker inside the container. So the idea here is that you are not running VMs that can be heavy. So in this case, you're just running containers that are generally faster and more efficient. And they can also be more portable for when you want to publish, say, your container's image in a container registry. So another project that got involved in our SIG and had a presentation is SSCM. And this is WebAssembly runtime. So WebAssembly or the community created this standard called WASI that allows you to run WebAssembly on a system. As initially, WebAssembly was intended more for the browser, but with this standard you can run it as executable as a runtime. So many different types of applications have actually come up and as possibilities. Some of these are pretty early, but there's different types that are possible. For example, embedding WebAssembly modules in SAS applications, obviously sandbox, maybe running these modules at the edge, maybe having applications with IoT where you can run them in small devices. Also some blockchain smart contracts and managing these in WebAssembly modules. So lots of different applications in these project aims to target all of them or some of them. Crossless is another project that presented. And this is also in the WebAssembly space. And they allow you to run WebAssembly on top of Kubernetes. So you can create your WebAssembly module, compile it, create your WASM file, and you can push it over to a container registry. And with this project, when you have all the components installed on your Kubernetes cluster, you can actually instantiate a pod with WebAssembly modules.  This is a very early project, but a lot of exciting things coming up in this space. Trowel is another project involved in our presentations. And this is a container image registry. And we also have some other container image registries in this CNCF and some of them in the community like Quay and the CNCF we have Harbor. But some of the differences with this project is that they aim to be more of a lighter weight image registry that can be run all the time on top of Kubernetes and maybe possibly in the future allowing users to distribute this container images across all your nodes on your Kubernetes clusters in a faster way and maybe possibly using some protocol like a P2P type of mechanism. And this project is also written in Rust. It's part of the reason why they are aiming to be lighter weight and faster. So rootless community also presented and got involved in R6. So this is a mechanism that allows you to use this username space facility in the Linux kernel where you can run container type of mechanisms as root inside a root namespace. But on the host, you will be a different user. So hence you're calling it or they're calling it rootless containers because on the host, you might be user 1000. But inside that username space, you might be root. And then as root, you can actually instantiate different containers in there are some limitations as far as handling the network in and the file system. But the community is also working on addressing some of those and they're working to tackle some of those challenges. But another space to watch out for and we'll see more of this in the future. So in another scope of the SICK, we have the Special Purpose Operating Systems. Broadtail is another project that we got a chance to see. And they allowed you to run these very lightweight VMs that have a very lightweight operating system. So essentially you can define your operating system in what they call a init file, like a v init file. And you can tell it exactly what to do inside that VM. And no need to have demons like SSH demon, shell or login. So something very lightweight and the idea here is that it's more protected and it's also lightweight so that it becomes more efficient and faster. So very interesting project and we'll see more of this project in the future as well. So also on the scope of AI, MLops, so CubeFlow presented. And this project might be familiar to many people and it's basically end-to-end machine learning on top of Kubernetes. So in essence, you can use some of these machine learning tools like Jupyter, PyTorch, TensorFlow Flow to build your models, to train them. And with CubeFlow, you can take it all the way to production. And it allows you to create all the full pipeline that takes it from training and to tweaking and all the way to serving it in some service, Kubernetes service, whether you want to run it on the cloud or so or wherever you want to run it. Open yours is another project in the CNCF that they're currently in sandbox. And this project is similar to CubeEdge and it has a main controller plane that runs in the cloud and then it has components that run at the edge. So essentially they're allowing you to manage workloads at the edge. So for specifically running these type of workloads that have become very popular now, especially with 5G. Some other projects presented in the past and if you're interested about them, you can reach out to us or you can reach out to their communities. They'll be happy for you to get involved. And we're also doing some outreach and some upcoming activities. There's been a lot of awesome WebAssembly runtimes that we reached out to some of them. There's some of them under the bytecode alliance and some projects like Wasmur, which is a WebAssembly runtime. Then you have something like Wasm3, which is in a WebAssembly interpreter. We also have projects that are currently in the CNCF and we want to get more involvement from them like K3S. And any future project or technology, for example, if you know something about quantum computing or something that might be interesting, also open to it. And I will hand it off now to Renaud and he'll talk about the container orchestrated device workgroup. Hello, everyone. My name is Renaud Gobert. I am a software engineer and a video. I've been working for the past four years on the cloud. Today I'll be presenting to you the container orchestrated device workgroup or Cod. To give you a brief overview of our group, we are a small group of device vendors, container runtime maintainers, and contributors, as well as community secretaries. And over the past five years, we've seen an exponential growth of people making use of devices. In the AI field, for example, with machine learning and deep learning, to do network data plane exploration or even to do encryption and decryption exploration. Devices such as FPGAs, GPUs, NICs, or even custom ASICs have become actually pretty ubiquitous in the data center. And so the goal of this group is really to improve the device support in the cloud. What that means is that you as a user or as a cluster admin, you're trying to make your experience seamless. You don't want you to switch into your nose if it's all custom runtimes, custom drivers, or even kind of tinker with your distribution's intervals. Being vendors, users, and cluster administrators and clusters that have these devices, we are familiar with the problems. And we've laid out a roadmap to try to show what are the main issues that we've been facing. The first one really is at the runtime level. It's about exploding the device to container. It's actually a really hard problem because the space is actually very fragmented. Kubernetes has a concept of device plugin, while Nomad has its own concept of device plugin. Docker has a concept of entry plugin mechanism, while Podman has a concept of hooks, and Nomad has its own concept of hooks. If you look at the different runtimes out there, it's actually pretty much the same.  And all these differences across the space makes it very difficult for vendors to provide a uniform experience and actually the same set of features across the different projects, meaning that some projects have actually different features than others. But that makes this appropriate and actually pretty high. On the Node level, when you are actually using an external device, your main kind of observation or goal here is to perform a computation that is quite slow on a CPU on that device. And typically, if you don't choose the right memory CPU device or NIC, you might actually end up taking a very slow path when, for example, transfer data from your CPU's memory to your device, which end up actually nullifying the benefits of using that device. And so choosing the right device is actually really important. And we've been doing a lot of work on the Kubernetes level through the CPU manager or the topology manager.  So finding out the actual rights, policies, extension points, and just general nods for you to indicate to your administrator, which now it is actually closer to the other, is a really important, difficult, but challenging problem. And so one of the solutions or one of the projects that I'm going to talk to you about today is focused on the runtime. It's called CDI, the Container Device Interface, and it's a unified plugin architecture for runtimes. Three things you need to know about it. It's based on CNI model, the Container Networking Interface. It describes the devices that are available in the machine and describes the operations of runtimes performed. Here on this slide, you can see a very simple example, where a vendor has created a JSON file at CCDI vendor.json that describes that there is a device that is vendor.com-flash-device on the node. It has a device type, sorry, on the node. It has a single device on the node that's called MyDevice, where the only operations that a runtime must perform is to mount the dev card one and dev card render one into the container. This is the space of a vendor. As a user, you'll be actually more interacting with your container runtime. It's actually not that different from a normal experience.  From a Kubernetes perspective, we've actually kind of created this proof of concept that shows what we're intending to do. It's based on the same model as volumes that you can see in Kubernetes. The general idea is that when you as a cluster administrator provision machines that have physical devices on them, you're also going to tell Kubernetes that you have a what we call device class. A device class is just a representation of that device, typically with the model information, for example, the PCIID. So that Kubernetes can identify which devices on which node matched that device class. So for example, think GPUs and ASICs. As a user, you are going to submit to Kubernetes a device claim that claims a set of devices, for example, three GPUs or half a GPU, and Kubernetes will internally match that claim to an actual device or a set of device. Finally, as a user, you'll be submitting a pod that makes a reference to that device claim. From there on, your pod will get scheduled on a node and you'll be able to see that device inside the container. We've also created a roadmap for CDI. By the time you see this presentation, we'll probably be in public availability with a first feature in Podman, or a first implementation being available in Podman. We've been working with different runtimes, for example, container D, Podman, in different groups, for example, HPC advisory council on how this solution, how the specification should look like. We've been showing some POCs.  We've also been working on a Kubernetes cap and you've seen in the previous slide what this would kind of look like. We are also working towards having the first version available. The set of things that we have defined are having supported at least two major runtimes. It seems to be given a Podman and container D that are going to be supporting CDI. Having a better level in Kubernetes and making sure that we are working to have at least two different plugins. From there, we'll be tagging your version with v1.co so that users understand that their plugins will actually be supported over time and we can actually lay out the groundwork for an ecosystem to build on top of this. Cod is a new, actually exciting and very new group. If you want to contribute, if you have ideas, we'd love to hear from you. Feel free to drop into our Tuesdays by weekly meetings. If you're working with our specifications with our projects, let us know either by dropping a meeting or even sending an email to say runtime. We'd love to hear from you. That's it for the SigRuntime presentation. You can read a lot more on what we're doing for SigRuntime or Cod on the cncf.io mailing list. You can reach out to us on SigRuntime on the Slack cncf. You can also look up some of the main information on our GitHub. Feel free to also join the SigRuntime meetings by weekly on Thursday and give us some feedback. Thanks for attending.