What's up everybody, Jason here for jasperjasebase.com. We just sold out 2022 tops, finest baseball, 3K sprake, random teams number one, which is a total of 24 boxes guys, 30 spots in, all teams in, sure we know that commons will ship, but again, find two autographs per master box. So we're gonna have quite a few autos here. So here we go guys. Dice roller here, here's a customer name. So these customers Tristan down at Joe Pizzle got those from, straight up, sorry, I didn't get this for anything, straight up bot. And then capstone five or four and five winners are right there guys. And there's the teams all in roll. One and a four or five times, good luck. One, two, three, four and five. I know, I'm gonna shave it off probably. Unless it's good luck, maybe I should keep it for the playoffs. All right, five times, Chris Walker down at Tristan. Five times here, one, two, three, four, five. Five times, five, five, Minnesota Twins down at the San Diego Padres. I mean, this is the longest I've had it. It's almost a month now. I think I shaved it off when I went to Mexico, like on the 23rd. And I haven't done anything through it since. I have been cleaning up my beard and stuff, but just not the mustache. All right guys, so there's a five, five teams. Chris Walker with the Twins, Tristan with the Phillies, Brian with the Cardinals. Ed, you have the Blue Jays, David Elefeno with the Cubs. Ed with the Dodgers, Joe Pizzle with the White Sox. Kev with the Rays. Richard with the Yankees, Stephen with the Rangers. James, Jimmy, you have the Giants. Willem with the A's, Joe with the Brewers. Devon with the Braves. Tristan with the Pirates. Joe Pizzle with the Mariners. Look at that, last spot, Mojo. Robert Rungo with the Diamondbacks. Michael with the Rockies. Greg with the Nationals. Mark with the Royals. Jason with the Tigers. David with the Reds. Joe with the Astros. Tristan with the Marlins. Joseph Kavanaugh with the Red Sox. Ryan Harrell with the Angels. Bill with the Orioles. Tristan with the Guardians. Robert with the Mets. And then Tristan with the Padres. All right guys, if anybody wants to trade, I'll give you guys a quick trade window. That's like, that's our customer's name already. This is the customer where the shot to this was, is Enwapo, literally. All right guys, Jimmy's the only one saying Giants for trade. Anybody else want to trade? All right, let's just close it then. All right, so I have only one case here. I have the other two cases behind me. It's not enough room to put all three here. So we'll go one per case or one case at a time and then we'll continue to grab a case after that and then the next case, et cetera. Oh man, Dan and Joe got rocked from behind. I assume that Picatin and the Mariners are probably like close to 200. Oh, I don't know if they're close to 200, but if the Rays are like 117 or 75, I'd assume they're around the same price. Oh, Mariners are 270 in the Picatin team? Oh, yeah, way worth more than that then. I didn't know though. I thought the Rays in them would be almost similar. So I was thinking maybe 200, but that's what having Huli Rodriguez on your team does. Saka Delphia today guys. Well Chad, sorry about your parlay. Blind and Shiff was at the interception. I think Chad doesn't think that there were worth as much because he doesn't have a base. He was thinking like at least if you can get base, it's better, but I mean, I think the autos of course is the one thing that people wanted the most probably, but could have used that money on betting on the Eagles, Chad. I don't know how much you put, was it $20? Man, that's a meal right there. That's a filler and a break. It doesn't really matter to be Steven, just because we haven't played the 49ers yet, I like a lot of Eagle fans probably wanna play the Cowboys, just because of the rivalry and the potential chance to beat them in Philadelphia would be awesome, but I don't know, I'm just, it doesn't matter to me. Oh, Kenneth Gainwell scored. They are Jimmy and I mean, maybe. I don't know, I just see the Eagles defensive line dominating, so that's the thing. I just wanna would like to see that matchup. That's just me, but it doesn't really matter. I think both games would be a tough game anyways. All right, we've got Tray and Birdie for the Yankees and actually hold on, let me show the list one more time. And that is Yankees, who has the Yankees in this? Richard does, Mike Trout. And we've got Nolan Ornato, Hohner Stone, Gold insert. Eight out of 50. Brian, see, how's he always. And Goose Gossage, Yankees box, nice signature too. Francisco Lindore, when you accrue Silver, Xander Bogarts. We have a break schedule, Mr. Tray, that drops in the chat like every five minutes. Immaculate is not scheduled until like 10 o'clock. This is like an hour and a half break because it's three cases. Then we have a hip parade and then we're gonna work on the Immaculate filler that's sold out, then do the R&B, and then we'll do Immaculate. So that won't be for a little bit, man. I think so too, Stephen. I mean, they're more healthier in this time around than the first time, because they were really banged up. The fact that they won a Super Bowl was still even amazing because of that. Reed Deppmers to 99. And we got Shane Biebs to 25. Tony Silver and Spencer Watkins. Been seeing a lot of repeats, Jimmy. That's one thing I kinda hate about this product. Well, I don't remember if it's like that every year, but a lot of repeats I've seen. Cedric Mullins to 250. Brandon Marsh, Vidal Bruhan for the Rays, finest rookies. That is Rays as Kev. We got Matt Chapman, Trevor Story to 250. And Louise Gill, we've seen this guy a lot too, Jimmy. Out of 25, Yankees having a good break so far, Richard Miller. We got a Freddie Freeman to 150. Aaron Judge, one of three Aaron Judge. Wow, that's a very low number. Richard Miller with the Yankees. Oh, we got Gavin Sheets for the socks, Pizzle with that one. We got Marcus Simeon to 250. And Tramberg, that's our second autofim. This time that's numbered to 100. Yankees having a killer break. So far, at least in the first case. Ronald Acuna Jr., Devin with that one. Flio base. And a gold Doc Gooden Dwight, 37 out of 50. For the Metz, Robert Runkle. I don't know, that was just the first four boxes. It's the last box, and then we'll be done with the first case. And then we'll grab the second one. So okay guys, this is a three casers, so we'll take a little bit. But now that the game's over, I think more people are obviously gonna pop on and focus on some more breaks. Now, we are kind of pretty much booked for most of the night, but if you guys hold out another break potentially, I mean, I'm not, I don't mind staying a little after, of course. So, but I'm glad we got this hit break. I'm glad we got the finest done, because this is a promo break. So you guys will be part of a promo now. Have a chance to win up to $1,500. And then the Immaculate break also sold out. So that means those customers in the R&B and the filler, will also have a chance to win some money. Now the XR break is a little closer actually, but we start to do two fillers technically. So when I get done with this and go through the orders of anything, if that filler does sell out, I don't mind doing the filler tonight, but we still have to do one whole another filler. So if that didn't sell out by like 10, 45, 11 o'clock, then obviously that's something that Joe would work on tomorrow with you guys. And then it's just a lot easier. You just have to do that filler again and the XR breaks, and then knock out the collegiate football, which I feel like people would knock it out tomorrow that's the only break to unlock the break credit money. So Marcus Simeon with that one, that's Texas Rangers, Steven. And we got Yachty color to 250, Hunter Green to 150. And we got Calrallet, Finest rookies, autographs. And that's gonna go to the Mariners and Pizzle hotspot mojo. CJ from Silver. And about a Julio, this is like the fourth straight case that we've had a Julio numbered card. And that's a green to 99, 37 out of 99. And we got Bryson Stott. We got a Brian de la Cruz green autograph from Miami. Miami is Tristan, Juan Soto to 250. And we got Mark Mulder. We got a Jose Ciri to 300, Iron Buxton. All right, here we go. And a gold Austin Meadows. Nice one there for the Rays. Kevin with that one, that's a number to 50. 38 out of 50. One new Cruz, we got Jeremy Pena. Nice one there for the Houston Astros to 250. Joe with that one. Then we got Nicoladolo, Finest rookies. Alex Thomas. Then we got Aaron Ashby for the Brewers. Buena Joe. Wonderfranco, Ryan Vallade to 99. Which one is the case, Hitchhatch? I think Pizzle's a little behind. That really was like a little bit of a go Pizzle. So maybe you want to rewind or if sports are, shame beeps. Oh yeah, I thought that was two, but then someone corrected me yesterday and said that there's multiple ones in the case. So I'm just thinking it's more like that Bowman, Bowman break where like you get like those like two per, two to three per. I forgot what they called that specific parallel color, but someone said that it's more like you get a couple through a case, but I mean, it's the only one we've gotten so far. Frigga Jenkins, we got Brandon Marsh. There's a specific name for that. They just had recently introduced that like a few years ago. Jering Duran to 250. And then we got Jake Myers, Astros, that one. Then you got Steven Strasburg. Oh yeah, Kinsukore, that's what it's called. That's right, that's right, Kinsukore. That's what I thought too, but yeah, I'm happy that it is one of those Goldy. All right guys, well, there's all the autos here. A couple of vets, we've got a Gold, Calrale, Ambergy, Orange, Debtmers, you did get the Aaron Judge to three and that Julio color. So that was the first box, or first case, I should say. Let me go grab the second case right here behind me and then we'll start ripping that one. I mean, try not to say that you're wrong, but there was times where the O-line gave Danny Dines more than enough time. It's just the coverage was so good on some of your receivers at some point. That mental clock is striked and then you have our front four going after Daniel Jones. But, I mean, I think it was, I think there was some time where your line did just enough but the coverage is just too good.  But yeah, that's exactly what I was just trying to tell people is that everybody needed to realize that Minnesota's defense wasn't our defense. So, a lot of difference between both.   It's just the first year with Dabble, you know? So, I think the next year will be a lot better. XR technically, Darren, needs to sell out a second filler. I see that that first filler sold out, the little mini pack filler contenders. I need to post a second one. So, when I get done with this break, I can post a second one. So, once that filler breaks, the second contenders pack filler, then we can break them in. But regardless, if it didn't break tonight, it would've definitely go tomorrow because it's pretty much almost sold out. And that is a promo break, so I'm sure people will buy into that too. Just, I gotta do this break first. Unless Nick does it for me if he's listening, he can post up the next one. All right, guys, here we go. Second case, Josiah Gray. We've got Jake Burger to 125. Zack Shortz, nice blue up. Uh, Brady and his daddy, no. These are all the autos. I don't know if there was a A in there or not. No, no auto. Might've got a number card or two, I don't know. Suzuki, clean kershaw. Sure, you can have Danny Dymbius in a Pro Bowl. I'll take the Super Bowl any day. Brandon Marsh, and there's that Kinso Corey. That's gonna go to the Angels and Ryan Herald. There's Nick Allen. There's Brandon Marsh again. Oh, I know, I know, man. Obviously, sure, half of these customers in the break are happy, half of them are kind of mad sad because of the teams they got right on my eyes. McCormick, Robbie Ray. And Taylor McGill, wonderfranco. We got Ryan Malcastle. This is actually not the worst sort. And since we're not shipping the vet base, I think it's more time just kind of pulling out the veteran base. This was like a three case Bowman baseball break. Yes, regards. But this is actually not as bad a sort as it looks like. Yacht and Molina. Then we got Nick Allen. Purple for the A's to 250. We got Heal Park. We got Rusty Contreras. Yeah, but that's not the most time consuming part. The sorting part of it is the one that kind of kills and drags depending on the break. Top floating in that's pretty quick and easy. I know because that's what I used to start off at. When I first started working here, I used to be a sorter and a shipper. But it was just me though. I had nobody else helping. It was just me. So when we're still working out of the garage. Wilson Contreras to 99. The sorting of the teams is the hardest part or not the hardest part, but it's just time consuming. And how about a Bobby Witt orange? 17 out of 25, beautiful. Mark Russo with the Kansas City Royals. We have at least one person here every day. Most sometimes most likely two. But I think in total, you got like four or five. Juan Soto. All right, next one guys. We have Brian de la Cruz. We got Salvador Perez. Matt Olson. We got Spencer Watkins to 25. Nice orange there as well. Color match there for the Orioles. Bill with that one. Paul Goldschmidt. Anything like upper deck packs. They've been really bad the last few years. F1 is cool. It's not that bad of a rip. I've done like multiple cases a night on Instagram but the packs are just so rough. Bowman, I think Bowman just because of the, all the paper I think is what kills me. If people didn't care too much about the paper I would just skip it. Like I was like, like I did for Bowman draft, you know? But I just feel like Bowman baseball is one of them was kind of a drag. Super Jumbo is really not that bad of a hit break because it's only five huge packs and a ton of cards but I would have to say, I have to say like Bowman or like just like packs that are rough to rip. I don't mind ripping hour long products, two hour long products. It's just, if the packs are tougher to rip it's just kind of a drag. So it's already a long break but then you're gonna make it even longer because the packs are too rough. These packs are shockingly a little bit rougher than I expected. Usually Bowman's best packs are super clear to rip. Bowman Jumbo, yeah, that's another thing too. It's like if the product sticks to the cards like Jumbo does, yeah, that's also like kind of a drag too.  I really loved ripping Bowman Chrome this year though. The hobby edition, it was great. Pats are just so clean to rip. It's not that many cards and you know, it was really good. I enjoyed ripping Bowman, Bowman Chrome baseball. There was one hockey product I did that just fell apart and it just took so long. I don't know if it was series one or one of those longer breaks. It was horrible. Yeah, I mean, eminence is easy. Like the easiest, easiest break is like, I guess it would be eminence because it's already in a magnetic for me. It's only 10 cards. Probably that's like the easiest because I was gonna say it's flawless is easy but you start at the top load, you know. Five stars are very easy break too but obviously, top loading. But even then that's quick. Five stars was really fun this year though. Clearly authentic, that's another great one. So are you ready to roll? It's in a magnetic too, for sure. Those breaks are fun, yeah. So that's something like, I don't ever really complain about ripping longer products like this if it's like an hour and a half break. Only because it's gonna balance itself out, right? It's like, we're gonna get those kind of products like clearly authentic, like Panini one football one and one basketball. So it's like, for like half a year if anything or the majority of the year, I feel like a lot of companies have kind of pushed away from the heavy based stuff. So when I have to do a bowman in that, I mean, it just doesn't bother me too much.  I would do bowman draft HTA and like bowman hobby HTA, like I would just get right up to the excessive paper. There's just no need for that. There's just no need for that. Like I said, I don't mind finest.  It's just a bowman, honestly. Just, just get rid of some of our, if you don't want to get rid of them, at least just implement like an HTA of one of those. I'm sure people will enjoy it. No, not really. I will say though, a couple of weeks back, I just like four cases of F1 for a personal's for a customer that was just buying through them. I will say though, my fingers, especially these two fingers here, because this is kind of the ones I like, I grip, right? Since the packs are so rough on F1, I will say my fingers were really sore just from like rubbing up on the packs on that. But by the next morning, it was fine, just that night. So like I said, it just depends on the pack grips on how easy or rough it is. F1, they just put too much glue at the top. These ones are very simple, as you can see. I don't really have a hard chance shake. I feel like depending on if I need someone their handshakes firm, like I'm like a split second late.  But like if I feel you like squeeze it down, I'm gonna squeeze down too, like catch up right after you. I will get carpal tunnel, that's for sure. I don't know how to really have it. There's after a while, we're like doing this all day right here, it just hurts sometimes. That's just the method of how I rip packs. Everybody rips them differently. I'm sure Nick will be there, but we're not setting up or nothing. I personally probably won't even be there at all because I work here Friday and Saturday, and then the Super Bowl on Sundays.  There was one time, one of my wife's side of the family parties, I got to just meeting like someone's boyfriend for the first time and just like grip my hand like super hard. He's like, hey, how's it going? So I wasn't even prepared for it.  But when he left, when he was leaving, he was shaking hands. I like matches intensity, it was so funny.  I was like, damn, I wasn't ready for that one. All right, Kyle Seager, that's Chad Doll's favorite player right there. We got a Javi Baez, Torque Juan Soto to 250 and Ronnie Dawson. Sasuke De La Pena with the Cubs. That's a blue to 150. Gold Luba going to Pizzle. Jake Berger, blue for the white, that's going to Pizzle. That's number to 150. I forget the number of cards on the top right or top left on the autos. Jairan Durand, Chris Bryant. Well, my wish kind of came true. Donny McNabb is starting to sign, so I don't know if he just got a contract extension or a contract signing with Panini, but he's starting to sign a lot of 2022 products. Alejo Lopez, but that's just me personally. O'Neal Cruz, Andrew McCutcheon. Bonds, I think people would love for him to sign. I think so. It's like, it's kind of like for me as a collector, yes, have those guys sign. But if you're like a guy that obviously does collect bonds but loves that he rarely signs, it kind of keeps his autograph value up, you know? So it's like, it's kind of like a bad thing because if you start signing anything and everything, I mean, think about it, like if Mike Trout didn't sign the way he did, his autograph would be worth a double triple of what it is. Although it's still a solid hit though, like now I think every Mike Trout autograph I've ever seen like sells like no more than like $200 or no less than that. You maybe can find one for like between 100 to 200. But like I said, it's just, he's on that level now. But if he was like a dude, like let's say, you know, Tom Brady or those guys that barely signs or only signs in five to 10 autographs in every product then it'd be a lot different. Mookie Betts, yeah, that's actually a good name. I haven't seen that dude sign in a while. I can't even remember the last time. Corey Seger, Cedric Mullins. But I think Bonds is one I think people would love to have. Like Griffey, you know, Griffey, we all love him. He's kind of cemented the same way. But Griffey signs a lot dude, like a lot, which you can find Griffey's for as little as less than $100 now. Oh, is that right? I didn't know if he was an upper deck exclusive. If that's the case then that's why. Josh Lowe, I didn't know that he was upper deck exclusive. Andre Jackson for the Dodgers. Mookie, Vicky's starting to sign a little bit more low then. I feel like he's been signing a lot in products too as of late. Especially now that he's like retired. Trying to think of another big time football player or like other sports that I think Tim Duncan would be a really good one to get signing. I think he would sell extremely well actually. That's actually a bigger name for basketball. I mean, because of course LeBron, Jordan, they're exclusive to upper deck. So, you know, they're only going to sign in those kind of products that come out in memorabilia, but for players, teams that are not under that upper deck contract, I feel like Tim Duncan would be a nice one.  I mean, now we're getting to that generation now where like Luke is obviously a big veteran that people want, Steph Curry and stuff like that. But for like the older 90s generation, it's like Tim Duncan is still one of those guys I think people would love to chase and get an autograph with his. When Panini a few years back signed Chuck, that was like a big deal. And history was signed, it's selling pretty good, which still does. Giancarlo Stan to 10. And then a, and Berge, I feel like this is our third and Berge autograph from the two cases and more color too, out of 50 for the Yankees. Great break for them, Richard Miller. And Larry Bird and Magic signed way too much. They've also hurt their value pretty bad from signing everything. All right guys, well, this is the next case right here. Nice gold right there. We got a Jake Berger, blue. Gold, that aura of excellence. Marsh, decided grades that short. Franka Refractor, Watkins and an orange. Bobby went to 25 and Giancarlo Stan to 10. That was a banging one right there guys. That was a great case. All right, let me go grab the next case really quick. Reggie Y would be, yeah, they actually, they haven't made one of those in a little bit. I thought Reggie Y would come out and like eminence in those products, which I think he has in the past. But yeah, Reggie Y, there was a lot more autographs with him like in the early 2000s. Stuff, especially at the Cut Autos. P Rose, I know, but now he's like, he's been signing like officially licensed now, hasn't he? Dude, we used to have P Rose, I don't even know if we still have him, but when we first opened our shop at this location, we used to have these like leaf, I think it was. P Rose blaster boxes, there were 15 bucks. It was all P Rose cards, right? Just different photos and shit like that, different cards of the set. And then you got one P Rose autograph in every box. And it was a blaster for 15 bucks. It's like crazy. I mean, Mike, boss of Mike always talked about stories of him just being like, give me 20 bucks. I'll give you an autograph or even 10 bucks. And he'll take like any autograph signing he can. And yeah, I mean, when you go to Vegas, he was always signing there the times I would go when I was younger. Like every weekend, just making money off his autograph. Sold him beanie babies for his daughter. Wow. Wasn't there a time too at one point that was like a reality show not too long ago like P Rose with like his like a new wife, with stepdaughter or something like that. Wasn't there a reality TV show? Yeah. I think it mainly is like basketball players. I think they still have tennis, don't they? Certain tennis players and a lot of younger players that are not in the league yet. I mean, I think they even have football. But a lot of those guys that just signed with over, I mean, a lot of these players can sign for with anybody as long as they're not a specific exclusive contract. Well, yeah, of course they have hockey. That's true. And yeah, they have golf, that's right. But yeah, a lot of those like other players, I mean, as long as you're not like Mike Trout or those guys where you're exclusive to one, then you can sign anywhere. Which I think that's what I would do, right? I mean, I don't know. If you had the opportunity, if you were like, if you were like Mike Trout, would you, would you want to have an exclusive deal with a company? Or would you rather just venture out and sign for multiple companies? I'd assume that maybe he got paid so much or, you know, to give him an offer he couldn't refuse. So I feel like if you're one of those guys that kind of ventures out, you can kind of make more money for yourself with other companies, most likely, because they're gonna want you and their products. I think I don't know if I would ever stay exclusive to somebody. Unless like the money was just so different. That you're giving me X amount of millions and I'm getting like double. That was a shocking one, Logan, but I guess Jimmy just said there's no baseball players. So I don't know where Tyler heard that. I've never heard of him being exclusive to Overdeck. So I think that would have been kind of big news, right? I mean, he could be, uh, Hyo Park, all right, last case here guys, good luck. Yachty to 50. Although there is actually Fanatics exclusives though, where you could only sign for them, but most of the time it is just memorabilia though. Cause that's their major thing that they deal with, but. But if that's the case, that means he can sign for Fanatics with tops. You know, that's the case. I mean, Fanatics owns tops now. McCormick to 99. He's just probably one of those guys that just chooses not to sign. I mean, there's nothing wrong with that, but yeah, that'd be a perfect player. As an example, we would love to see him sign. Cause I feel like his value would be pretty high, especially the last like X amount of years he's been having in the MLB. Cause that's the one thing I'd like to know a little bit more of the structure of it, but I know you're obligated like your first year. And then I think after that, it's kind of up to you or you just sign little by little. And then once you get to that point where you can get out of your contract then it's more like, yeah, I don't want to. That it's them chasing you potentially cause they want your autograph in their products. Yes, that is true. His Bowman stuff is younger stuff. Yeah. That's why I kind of don't mind players not signing a lot. Cause it just, if anything, if you collect him and you have some of his first and you know, whatever, how many years he did sign before he stopped then it does make it a lot more, more exclusive and more expensive. But that was actually a good one, Jimmy. I hadn't, I feel like that was one player that I see him all over the place, right? And I'll pick your team Dodger stuff and you know, he has relics and this and that, if anything, but never have I felt like I've seen a lot of his. Again, that's our fourth Trey Anberge. He's like Matt Manning in this product. O'Neill Cruz, Buxton, 75, but I agree. I think if bonds can sign more, that'd be pretty cool. Wander Franco, nice green. So we have a green Ahulio and then a green Wander. Well, you know what, Mike? I think I learned that Rasmus Dallin is like an exclusive to somebody. Like he signed an actual exclusive deal. And I don't think it was even the biggest, the biggest company. I don't, I could have sworn it wasn't David Adams, right? He, I remember exclusively he signed with somebody where that's why he wasn't signing anything. Cause he was in Fanatics products his rookie year, but it was just the memorabilia, just not rookie stuff, like from upper deck. But I wanna say that he signed with somebody exclusively for cards, for trading cards. There's no way it's like David Adams, was it? You should look that up, Mike. Trevor Story. And then we got another Brandon Marce, one of these Kintakora angels, that's going to Ryan Harrell, Jose Ramirez. I get the whole like Eichel and Jack Hughes and those guys when they were exclusive to, you know, somebody else at the time. And then finally when their contract ended, they decided to sign with upper deck, but Dallin was definitely one of those guys that just never did. Connor Wong, to 99. You got Jose Abreu, to 300. And there's a Matt Manning. This time Gold though, 39 out of 50. All right, Bobby Witt, Cal Relay for the Mariners. Refractor Otto, we got a Garrett Cole, to 150. That's second case of polish or no? I don't know. You can ask Nick, I'm not too sure. It's not on the. Yeah, I don't know. I mean, I'm assuming you could, but just ask him, I guess. Max Muncie. It was the same player, but it wasn't the same variation. I'll show you the other Brandon Marsh we got. It was a Aura Kintsukori and then Jake Berger. All right, here we go. So far, there's all this right here. The first four boxes, last four boxes, guys. Here we go. So I might be a little over the schedule, like by like five, maybe 10 minutes, but like I said, after this, everything else is kind of quick. It's just kind of just running those fillers to knock out the Immaculate Breaks after the hit parade. But hit parade will be pretty fast in 20 minutes, if anything, 25 minutes. So we'll make up some ground by the time Immaculate happens. It stands like a bar. Black one, yes. So you ready for tomorrow, Chad? I'm rolling with your bangles, man. For my bracket, they better not let me down. I would be perfect in our bracket here at work if I might just dumb mind decided not to change it to Buccaneers last week. I had it where the Cowboys were gonna win and I knew they were gonna win, but I just couldn't do it. I was just like, can I really dealt Tom Brady?  So I had changed it, but I've been right every other game so far. Yeah, here it is right here. Is that you, Greg, right here? The Washington Nationals, unless I'm, this is another Greg in here. I mean, I wanna say I was six for six too because I knew the Cowboys were gonna win, but I just didn't choose them because just because of me. But I was okay with them winning though, because I have them, in my bracket, of course, I had them losing this week. So I'm hoping that happens, but I just have a feeling they're not, I think they're gonna win. But I was just like, God damn it. But now I'm just a little nervous with just the Chiefs though, because that's my Super Bowl pick. And I don't know if 100% Kansas City is gonna be the best team in the AFC. Cause that was a very nasty high ankle sprain. Cause now like if Mahomes can't go next week, I still think he plays. There's no way he's missing that game. He's gonna have an MRI tomorrow, they said, but I think they're gonna shoot him over so much drugs. He's gonna play, but I just don't know how effective he'll actually be. And like I said, I was happy the Jaguars played as well as they did. Had a couple of little mistakes, but obviously the Jaguars are not the bills or the bangles, so he's gonna have to be at 100% to beat one of those teams, which he's not gonna be, so that's a little shaky. Yeah, he's not gonna be 100% though, that's for sure. Unless Mr. Miyagi just comes back from the dead and rubs out his ankle or something, I don't know, that's not gonna happen. I think it's gonna be swollen like crazy. But I guess it would be a kind of a fair deal if like you guys won this week, because if you guys still have your banged up linemen, then I guess you guys have banged up team and then my home just banged up, so. What did Isaiah Thomas do in 1998? I'll raise one. McNabb played a playoff game with a broken foot and actually won the game. I think that was like in 2001 or 2002. I don't know what Isaiah Thomas did to be honest though. I think the game was against the Cardinals too, right? Eagles game where he broke his foot. Pretty sure it was a playoff game, but I think I'm remembering now, I think it was a Cardinals. Sorry, McNabb played on a broken ankle. Yeah, McNabb played with a broken ankle. Sorry, not foot, but almost close. McNabb longest running play without getting many yards, which one? Oh, you know what? It wasn't a playoff game, sorry. This was like late November. I guess that doesn't count. Did you just say playoff game? All right guys, here we go, last four. Whoa, Peter Lonzo autograph for the Mets. Robert Runkle, Cornerstone, number to 99. Andrew McCudgill, number to 99. Julio Refractor, you got Manny Machado to 250. And a Brandon Marchado for the Angels. Ryan Harrell down to 99. And a Wander Franco numbered card. Nice one for the Rays, 54 out of 75. We've been getting some Julios and Wander numbered cards, just haven't gotten an auto from one of those guys just yet, Byron Buxton at 99. And Austin Meadows to 150 for the Rays. Kev with the Rays, got that from Capstone Filler. I'm in a good break. Corey Seeger to 250. And we got Ivan Castillo for the Padres Tristan. Giancarlo, we got Jaren Duran. All right, two more boxes, guys. We got a Eli Morgan Orange to 25 for Cleveland. Guardians that it's going to Tristan. We got a Steven Strasberg to 125. And Brian De La Cruz. Shohei Oltani to 250 for Ryan Harrell. And Brian didn't rock for it for the Giants. Jimmy with that one. Keopark, that's like our third autograph for this dude too. Lubov, also guys, this is the last box of the break, guys. Three cases down already. Good luck. Got one more auto. Marcus Sivian, and it's gonna be Diplen. And a Spencer Torkelson for Detroit. Jason W with that one right here at the end. Alrighty, folks. And there you go, guys. This was the third case. Here were the autos here. I think the biggest hit, how it had to be that Bobby Witt, right? We got Aaron Judge to three. Couple of nice Wanderer color cards as well, that Peter Lanzo. I think that Bobby Witt to 25 Orange was a pretty big one. So I appreciate you guys. That was it right there. Finest baseball three case break. Random teams number one. I don't know if we're gonna post another one of these, but if we do, jaspyscasebrakes.com is where it's gonna be. Thank you guys.


The recent proposal suggests that ripples in the bow shock of the interplanetary magnetic field, IMF, may cause localized high-speed flows in the magnetosheath. These jets are capable of having a dynamic pressure much greater than that of the solar wind, and they were observed by the cluster spacecraft on March 17, 2007. The authors studied the effects of these jets on the magnetopause, the magnetosphere, and the ionosphere, finding that the jets had a scale size of up to 5 Earth radii, RE, and that they caused significant local magnetopause perturbations due to their high dynamic pressure. During this period, irregular pulsations at the geostationary orbit and localized flow enhancements in the ionosphere were also detected. The authors suggest that these intermagnetospheric phenomena were caused by the magnetosheath jets. This article was authored by H. Heidela, N. Partomies, T. V. Leitnin, and others.


So good morning, everyone. Thanks for coming to my talk. So this is a talk about networking. And for those of you who read the talk description, the title is the same. The content is a bit different from what the description says. So I took some liberties. All right, so I'll explain about the talk in a few minutes, but first let me introduce myself. Put my picture up there. Not so much for you all, but for the folks that see the slides later. So I'm CTO at a startup. There are about 50 people in the startup. The startup is called Midokura. I've been there for six years, expertise in SDN for data centers. I'll come back to that in a few minutes. And previously I worked at Amazon on NoSQL databases and caching systems. I'm a software developer and architect and a team manager. Now Midokura was founded six years ago, not by me. I joined early on. It created and maintains a software project, an open source SDN called Midonet. And Midonet is open source SDN from 2014. We open sourced it. Initially it was closed. And it's integrated with OpenStack, Kubernetes, vSphere, and Eucalyptus. So down here I've, on the left, the three open source projects, OpenStack, Kubernetes, Eucalyptus, VMware obviously not open source. And then we have OEMs with Dell and Fujitsu. And we've been working for about six or seven months on industrial IoT projects. We have a customer and a partner with whom we're doing projects for smart factory and fog networking. So what does this talk about? So as I said before, my background is in data centers. And I've only recently really begun to explore what industrial networks are like. So I'm here to have a conversation, to throw some ideas out and see if they bounce back. I'm open and welcome feedback and pushback and so on. I'm happy to have a conversation, interrupt at any time, and ask questions. So I'm going to describe what I perceive as industrial network challenges, focusing on factory and plant networks, which is what I've been looking at primarily. I'm going to compare and contrast those challenges with what the data center has seen in recent years. And then I'm going to describe what kind of network I think we want. And finally, why virtualizing the industrial network becomes essential and a necessary step to achieving that network intelligence. I'll also say that if a lot of other talks have covered networking of gateways and networking of devices, I'm taking the perspective of the factory or plant network owner. So if we talk about security, I'm going to be talking about it from the perspective of an IT or an OT network operator that wants to protect their network from devices that you might be developing or gateways you might be developing. So before we begin, I'll be saying the words, maybe I'll be saying the words industrial, IoT many times. What do I mean by industrial IoT? So for me, it's a complex of things. It's a transformation that is happening. It's not necessarily a new phenomenon. The industry has been doing things like IoT for a while. What's different? You're gathering data. They've been gathering data. Optimizing, they've been optimizing. Maybe what's different is the pace at which new devices are being added to the industrial network. The kinds of devices that are being added, where they're being added, so devices that weren't previously connected are being added, and they're being added. Perhaps they belong to the OT in the sense that they monitor, they observe operational technology, but they're sometimes connected to the IT network directly. New devices are being added to collect existing data that's taken from systems that cannot be evolved, cannot innovate very fast because they don't have innovation cycles. That are short. And of course, then part of IoT is the systematic optimization of that whole product pipeline across different stages from supply to production and out to distribution. So what are the general challenges that industrial IoT brings here? So I mentioned this a few seconds ago, but there's this explosion of IP-enabled devices. Now, we do have best practices for how we develop these devices, and I heard a great talk yesterday about protecting the device from security threats. But in early wave of IoT, the devices are not very well protected, and we know about worms and malware like Mirai. And generally, solution providers, certainly again in the first generation, don't have that expertise. And their go-to-market requires them to focus on their solutions. And often we have in the data center devices that aren't protected, either because they don't have the power to do encryption or because their time-to-market required them to move faster. And from a network operator's perspective, which is so I'm a vendor. I want to sell to the network operator. And I don't think the network operator today can trust that the devices have been built correctly and secured correctly. Additionally, the problem is that even if they have, defense in depth, which I'll talk about later, requires us to secure at every layer. So another thing I've observed in my study of my recent study of industrial IoT is the solutions seem to be very vertically integrated. So solution providers tend to seem to bring devices, sensors, their own gateway, possibly a secured channel to the cloud, and then a cloud platform. That's not strictly the case across all providers, but certainly there are very integrated solutions and not a lot of interoperability across them. And please, if you know otherwise, I'm happy to take examples and go back and study. So I'll take notes as well. The technology is fragmented in the space. Lots of different protocols. Every domain, every industry, whether it's utilities, electric, power, manufacturing, et cetera, et cetera. Smart cities, connected cars. They all have their own protocols and their own vendors, their own certifications as well. The IoT is also forcing changes in the, or accompanying changes that are happening to teams. So in parallel with the IoT is ITOT convergence and industrial ethernet. So I'll just mention that briefly. Industrial ethernet and industrial IP is the use of standard ethernet and IP technology protocols to run the OT networks. Now that doesn't mean that they're the same exact devices that we use in the IT, and certainly not in the data center, because in the data center we're not ruggedized. But it's the same protocols, and there's a hope that the innovation cycle will speed up as the industry picks up the same technologies as the data center. And there's a push to break the silos between OT and IT teams. So the team dynamics change. And as you bring in devices and gateways into the factory and to the plant, there's also another interesting problem, which is who do they belong to? So I mentioned before, we've seen, spoken to people, and we've seen people putting sensors and gateways on the IT network directly. It's the OT team. It's the OT team generally that understands those devices. They purchase it. They're charged with making that project go live, but that's actually connecting to the IT. And if you ever, if as a manufacturer or a plant owner, you want to deploy your own gateways, you want to build a project in-house, then the question is, who manages that? OT equipment is traditionally very slow cycle, very slow refresh rate, no patching. Everything is tested and hardened as is. And you don't touch it, because it works. And we don't want to break availability and safety. So it doesn't move as fast. The devices that are being developed for IoT, even in industry, have different assumptions.  The auto update policy isn't really even controlled by the manufacturer, the plant operator. Now let's focus in a little bit more on the security challenges. So the industry expects to be very heavily targeted. It already is. Thousands of exploits per year. And the OT technologies natively have very little defense. They were built on the assumption that there was an air gap, that they were isolated environments, that no one could go in, they weren't plugged into anything. So at the time, protocols like Modbus don't have any authentication, they don't have any encryption, and the same is true of other field buses. To make the problem worse, you can't take IT security products and use them in OT, because they don't understand the protocols of OT. They don't look inside the OT payload. So even if they can stop specific MAC addresses or specific IP addresses or UDP ports, they don't understand the Modbus commands and the Modbus parameters. So you need OT specific firewalls. So a little history here. There have been cyber attacks on industrial networks early on in 2000. And an example is the Venezuela pedevesa during the general strikes in Venezuela in 2001. The networks were attacked by disgruntled employees that were participating in the strike. However, the industry didn't become aware of attacks of the threats of malware until Stuxnet in 2010. And at that time, Stuxnet and then follow up the so called Sons of Stuxnet Malware like Dooku, Flame, Dragonfly, there's been a lot more awareness and fear in the industry. And therefore, OT specific firewalls are being developed. Not only do they exist today, vendors sell them, they're even being virtualized. And I'll come back to that later, why I care about virtualization of firewalls. Remote access is something that is needed. So this is unusual for me in the data center. Sometimes customers will give us access to go and debug our solution on their servers. But generally, they don't set up remote access because they have DevOps teams that read the manuals and know how to debug any product that they purchase. The data center is even more fragmented because in the data center, they're application teams. And application teams often own solutions that are siloed, that they themselves depend on, and therefore they will debug them themselves. In the industry, remote access is common. But managing remote accessing, revoking privileges, auditing, and so on is not well managed. We talked about auto updates again, so I'll skip that. And to the fragmented community, so whereas in the data center and in IT, we have a set of standards, a certain set of protocols, a certain openness, and therefore the security can be handled as a very large community. Since the industrial domains are very fragmented and each have their own protocols, it's harder to spread knowledge. It's harder to make advances and share. I'll come back to the auto update actually for a second, because I read of a chemical plant was making a chemical batch. And some auto update software triggered during the production of the batch. And it actually updated a piece of a component that was storing the trail for the process. And without having that trail of what changes are made as the medication is produced, the medication can't be sold because you don't know what's happened to the medication during production. So the batch was lost. So that's the kind of problem that isn't so much about security, but just stabbing ourselves in the foot. I'm mixing my metaphors. So then let's come back to this concept of the air gap, which is very interesting. So air gap was sort of a standard for a very long time. If you have a critical infrastructure, just isolate it. No one can go near it, don't attach anything to it, and so it's secure. But actually, that's been a fantasy for a long time. In fact, people take USB drives, plug them into a laptop, then take them from the enterprise, bring them into the OT setting. And the malware, things like Stuxnet and its followers, copycats, have many, many vectors of infection. And USB drives are one of them. And essentially, people in industry now argue that still talking about the air gap gives a false sense of confidence, and then just drives certain kinds of procedures under the covers out of the view of the network. If at least you acknowledge that you're going to need certain network communication, you can deal with and you can observe the trafficking to see what's happening. If you say air gap, then people go and do other things, right? They'll bring their laptop over, or they'll bring USB drives. And studies have shown that, in fact, even in organizations that think they have an air gap, there are many, many connections between the IT and the OT. Because even if you start out with an air gap, then there's some requirement that forces you to make a connection and break the air gap. And then you track that wear on paper and an Excel spreadsheet. So there's one more point I wanted to make about this air gap. Ah, yes. Yet we still hear anecdotes that in sensitive industries where the cost of an attack would be just so high if production were to stop, like oil and gas, that they're unplugging gateways that were previously connected to optimize. Because the benefits of optimization aren't significant enough to counterbalance the risk of production stoppage. So what happens to these players that are unplugging their IT from the OT? Eventually, nimbler players will keep at it and figure out how to do it. So they play with their competitiveness. So clearly, that's something that's not going to last a long time. So I'll talk a little bit about defense in depth. Defense in depth is a security posture based on fortresses. So fortresses, castles have multiple layers of protection. And the idea is that you protect everywhere you can. So not just in the technology, of course, then you need to protect across policies and procedures that employees follow. You need to protect physical assets, physically, cameras, security guards, and so on are all part of the defense in depth. And furthermore, of course, then the technology. So you want defense of the device. You have to build your devices securely. Then you want the network to protect you as well. And so on out. And clearly, separation between the critical parts of the network and the infrastructure and the non-critical parts. Something interesting in this space that surprised me. Trend Micro did a study just a few years ago about beepers used for alerts. So the systems are secure, but some component will generate an alarm. The boiler on the second floor of building two is overheated. And that alert goes through a trigger that sends an email and sends a beep. So people receive these things on their beeper. And the beeper technology is old. And it's not secured. There is no encryption on the beeper technology. So essentially, we're broadcasting. Many critical infrastructures are broadcasting sensitive pieces of information. The names of devices, sometimes some parameters, that can indicate what kind of device is there. Is it a Siemens? Is it a Rockwell? What kind of device is in what location? And a little bit about the procedures. So there's a lot of information that bad actors can accumulate, just passively monitoring your beeps. So ISA 99 is a standard in industry that helps us deal with security and implement defense in depth in the technology side. So this is standard. And there's a process to go through that there's guidance about how to do this. I just wanted to show you this picture. Imagine that underneath these squares, these rectangles, is a network. Your standard Purdue Para model network where you have the internet, the DMZ, the enterprise. And you've got some machines in each of these layers. And down here, you have layers 0 through 2 of the actual production process. So I've skipped that step of showing you that. So I apologize. What they ask you to do is essentially cut your network up into zones that share certain security characteristics and that will have common policies to protect them. So that makes these sort of bubbles. And then, those are what we call zones. And then across any zones that need to communicate with each other, you have these sort of red lines. These are the conduits. So very explicitly model what's allowed to talk to what. And this is defense in depth, applied to the industrial network. So once you've done this, you're very careful about any time you add any, only those red lines are the only communication that's allowed. And then, of course, you put firewalls where the red lines are because you either put firewalls bi-directional and you'll do whatever level of inspection you need. However deep you need to go into the package to inspect what's crossing. Or you might even do, and this is something I wasn't familiar with at all from the data center, but you can do unidirectional in some cases, unidirectional traffic using diodes. So actually, you have pieces of equipment which will only allow communication in one direction. That was news to me. I thought that was very interesting. So clearly then, you use physical means to block access in the other direction. So you could have just a stream of information moving in one direction. That said, the tools to implement this today in the network are not very advanced because these all correspond to VLANs. So you're basically going to set up a bunch of VLANs and subnetworks and IP address management for each one, routing. And all of this has to be done in some physical way. Because when you want to put a firewall here, how do you do that? How do you get the traffic to the firewall unless you have wires? So you're managing VLANs. And you're probably also using a spreadsheet to track your VLANs, where your devices are, what's connected to what. And spreadsheets are not a good tool in 2017. The zone and conduit design is spread across network switches, meaning that, and we were in the same situation in the data center up until a few years ago. And still, many data centers operate in this way. But people know. People have basically their VLANs. They have a script or they have a set of scripts that writes the VLANs. They can also synchronize. If they're advanced, they've written a set of scripts and software to manage their devices. There are many devices uniformly, but basically they're managing the configuration of individual devices via scripts. And so the intent of what VLANs, what zones, what conduits are implementing your defense in depth, that intent is mixed on the device with the actual state. And it's hard to tell the difference in an audit. What's the difference between what was meant to happen if the device has a port, or if the device allows routing between two subnets? Is that intentional, or is that a misconfiguration? And if you have a set of scripts and you've built your own system on top of the devices, then you're in a better situation. So that's the point. No distinction between intent and current state. It's hard to audit these. It's hard to change them. Because once you decide, actually, you know that zone, so if I go back for a second, you might have started where the process and the safety were in the same zone. And then you decide, well, actually safety should be isolated from process. And you have to rewire physically. For those that are lucky enough to use Wi-Fi, which to my knowledge is not very widespread in the factory and the plants, I've heard numbers like 5% of networking is Wi-Fi in those settings. I know that mobile and Wi-Fi in other settings, like smart cities, smart transportation, much more essential and used. But in the factory and the plant, not a lot of Wi-Fi. But even if you have Wi-Fi, so you save yourself the wiring, but the device configuration is still a problem. Unless you have wireless LAN controllers and you start to move towards virtualization, that's what they're doing. So I forget the name of this classic bicycle. Pennyfarthing? Pardon? Pennyfarthing. OK. The pennyfarthing. I thought it was a good example. You know, you can ride one. It's not easy to balance. Bit dangerous. OK. So and then again, hard to place firewalls. Every time you want to place a firewall between two things, you need to get the traffic to the firewall. So let me talk about my experience in data center networks. When we started in 2010, OpenStack, many of you familiar with OpenStack? So OpenStack was just getting started. I think in early 2011 got a lot of industry support. There were other clouds, eucalyptus, nebula, some others. And CloudStack, of course, I should mention. But what's happening is, as people really took on virtualization, so we went from, we had compute virtualization for a long time. We had storage virtualization for a long time. I mean, VMware much before 2010. But as people started to do cloud, what's the difference between cloud and virtualization and compute virtualization? Cloud implies self-service. Cloud implies dynamic resources. It implies dynamically scaling and all you can eat and self, not just self-serve, but also maybe self-troubleshoot. All sorts of unshackling of the application teams from the IT team. And that's why in the enterprise, many, many application teams were fleeing to the public clouds, creating panic and chaos in the IT teams and the security teams as well. And I'm not mocking. I think for good reason. So the network was seen to be in the way. The IT team in general was seen to be in the way. I remember when we launched our NoSQL database for the Amazon shopping cart, had to order machines, had to know exactly how many you expected to use, get as many as you, make sure you'd account for a bump. But what's reasonable?  And each of these takes time. It's a ticket filed in a system. So people move forward with cloud. And cloud freed them from that. Because in cloud, you could just go to an interface and cloud management system. And you could ask for the resources you wanted. But network wasn't really focused on initially in cloud. So we solved some problems, but we introduced others. Security was not looked at at all. And in fact, as services and microservices have become more and more popular in the data center, and we're seeing more and more these monolithic applications being broken down, we haven't really accounted for East West security. Because people are starting to do that today. But many systems are still not secure. Many microservice architectures, service-oriented and microservice architectures, aren't secure East West. So once an attacker gets in, attack can very easily propagate East West. So what happened was the number of applications, how dynamic they were, the business value that they introduced for a fast innovation cycle, for the competitive advantage, all of these things pushed the network in IT to become application-centric. So I'll focus on what we at Mirokura primarily thought about. So we were primarily looking at the network. We found that compute virtualization was working pretty well. Storage virtualization is still a problem. But we chose to focus on network virtualization. And primarily, our pitch to the community was decouple the physical network from your intent, your logical network, your application network. And this is not a pitch that all SDN vendors took. And I'm not saying that it's the right one. But it's one perspective. Our perspective was that you could build a physical network very easily. Easily, if you have employees with the proper skill sets, you can maintain, expand, evolve physical networks for scale, for stability, for both scale in servers and scale in bandwidth. But in order to give people that sort of agility that they wanted, you want to decouple the logical network and let the logical network be driven by APIs. And the logical network, therefore, had to have concepts like, of course, Layer 2 and Layer 3, switches and routers. But not just, you could do load balancers, source NAT. You could service chain firewalls and deep packet inspection and things like that. And along with that, then you also need to be cloud consistent with the cloud. So self-service of network, but also self-troubleshooting. So what do I mean by self-troubleshooting? Certainly, in the early days of SDN and the data center, very hard to debug these new SDN tools and technologies. Instead of using standard tools, you had to go read someone's manual. Your network engineer's training didn't apply. And the application developer doesn't really know much about networking. So that was a problem. And we were still very much tied to IP addresses and MAC addresses. And maybe Kubernetes and other container technologies have shown us in recent years that IP addresses don't really matter to application folks. Application folks just want the data to move. They don't want to know about subnets and routers and routing tables or what have you. But another thing that was tremendously powerful was micro-segmentation. We could actually give, and this is just standard today, that in the data center, every VM, every server, every container can get its own firewall. That's the concept of micro-segmentation. And that firewall can have a set of rules that is dependent on a set of tags, for example. So regardless of placement of the workload, it will have a firewall rule set that is consistent with the other parts of its tier in the application. And then I mentioned before, we were very much stuck on the physical modeling, the physical world, and the logical layer. Intent-based policy was an attempt to get away from that, and it succeeded to some extent. It hasn't been widely adopted yet, but this is where Cisco ACI is very strong and others, where basically you just say, I've got this group of endpoints. I've got this group of endpoints. I'd like them to communicate over port 80 HTTP only. And that's the contract. So you have endpoint groups and contracts. And so you can get away from understanding the network the way a network engineer does. You shouldn't have to debug the network that way. So that's what we did in the data center. So let's talk about differences. There are many, and please chime in. I'm sure I've forgotten many of them here. So the hardware refresh cycle in the physical world, in the factory, 10, 15 years, sometimes longer, it depends. It depends. There aren't any DevOps. Priorities are different. Priorities for security are different. So in the factory, you want availability, above all else, safety of the equipment for employees as well. In some industries, you just can't stop production. You've got oil coming in large quantities. Your valves and your storage is better be ready to receive that. You've got a bunch of electricity being generated, et cetera. In the IT, in the data center, data integrity, data confidentiality, it's all about the data. Speed of deployment. So I spoke to, what was a great example was, I spoke to Walt Disney Company. They described it as an application scale problem. So at the time, I remember them quoting something like 600 different applications running on their platform for various games and things that they were doing. So imagine managing 600 applications. How do you do that? I'm not sure that applies in the factory. I mean, I'm not sure you have a problem where you have many IoT vendors. But I certainly have heard that a factory has five or six different IoT vendors, each of which has its own device onboarding and device onboarding procedures and their own pane of glass for managing their solution. And then the speed. So clearly, in the data center, every application team wants the ability to deploy as fast as possible. Get out of my way, why should I have a window? And it's my piece of the website. And I can update it without taking down anyone else. Why do I have to wait, and so on? And by and large, companies have managed to do very fast deployment. So all of these things don't really hold. The factory is certainly much more static. So looking at all this, does the factory need to change? And I'm still arguing the factory needs to change. Primarily because I think we can do security better if we virtualize. I think we can place firewalls anywhere we want if we can virtualize. I also think that the team dynamics changing is also an important thing. I hear about technicians who go to install a device, a new device, a new sensor has to be replaced. So they don't really understand what they're doing. They're given a set of instructions. They plug in, and they call the IT person in a knock. And this goes back and forth. The IT person in a knock, it's not their solution. They say, no, I'm not getting any packets from that. They wake up the OT guy that designed the solution, and they get some manuals out. And this process takes hours. And if it doesn't work out, the technician drives home maybe from a remote location. And they try again tomorrow. And that's very costly. So what is it we want from our networks? So the first point I make here is, network should allow you to layer the policies of different teams and different perspectives. So the central IT team certainly wants visibility. They want governance. They want to see what's happening. And they want to impose standards. That doesn't mean that they want to carry the whole weight of the world on their shoulders. They don't understand the nuances, the details. So what you need to be able to do is give them that visibility and then impose your own on top. Impose your own additional requirements. And as a solution vendor, for example, or an OT team, look at the solution yourselves and see what's happening at the packet level. Because we are often at the device level. We're looking at data flows. We're looking at the temperature readings. We're looking at the humidity, acidity, whatever levels affect your process. But what about the health of the network itself? Are you looking at that? Are your devices doing something they shouldn't? Like in the case of the Mirai malware that in October was sending out DNS requests to Dyn. And so this is what I call self-service and self-troubleshooting. That if you allow people scoped visibility, so I have this IoT solution that I'm responsible for. So can I look at how it's behaving? How much data are my devices sending? Just my devices. Who are they talking to? Because remember that not always are the devices, especially if they're IP enabled, devices are not always only talking to the gateways. So for one thing, the gateways themselves aren't trusted from the operator perspective. And then the IoT devices, if they're IP enabled, they're just connected to the factory network. They talk to the gateway, but they might also talk to anyone else they want to talk to, and who's to say that the gateway itself is only talking to the cloud. Encrypted links, so you can do encryption, but the network should do encryption as well in case your encryption gets broken, or vice versa. You do encryption because the network encryption might get broken. Even within a zone, by the way, it's not even clear to me that devices within a zone always talk to each other. You have some zones where some things talk to each other, but it shouldn't be all open. Sometimes we have to, because the protocol requires it. But often in Ethernet IP networks within a zone, we just say, well, it's all the same components, it's all the same type, it's a bunch of web servers. They can talk to each other. That should all be locked down. So we should be moving to a network that only allows whitelisted traffic. The audit trail, so kind of standard in SDNs in the data center now is that everyone has a record, a historian, that knows all the flows that went through the network, all the actual network flows. Each is logged. This is just IP fix or net flow, but it can be much more detailed. But they also know all the changes that happened across all the devices in one place. You can achieve this in many ways. You can do this through logs. But having to build this yourself is not convenient. SD1, so if you do have a gateway, how does it get connectivity to the internet? What kind of channels, can it use mobile, can it use WAN, can it create its own private WAN over public internet? Sorry, the single pane of glass. Oh, I put single points of failure. That's my, OK, sorry for that. OK, so more characteristics about the network. So the network should be very prescriptive. Only allow very specific flows, only the ones that you know are safe. And maybe you can learn that. So nowadays, we can observe. We have tools that allow us to observe during a time and then map that onto a policy. And that's the policy. That's normal. That's the only thing you allow. Then you might make a mistake. So if you think you're going to make a mistake in doing that, and especially if you're trying to do this in a brownfield environment, then you better also support dry runs. So you can have, virtualizing allows you to turn your firewalls and your network policies into a dry run mode where they're just logging. I would have dropped that. I would have allowed that. At any discrepancy, they can alert on, or they can log, and you can study that before actually setting the policy to active and pushing into production. Easy rollbacks. Easy rollbacks across all the set of devices. Now, some of these things people do implement. As I said before, people write a set of scripts. I'm not going to go device by device. I learned my lesson last time. I mean, classically, they say, well, I know. I remember the time when I had a problem, and I had to go, maybe not, this doesn't happen so much anymore, but people had to configure one device at a time to find the problem, synchronize them, find which one is not configured correctly. So they wrote a set of scripts. But that's not standard. And they have to evolve that themselves. And who has time to keep track of that set of tools built in-house? Finally, context-based means a lot of things. So you want context-based, a lot of things. Context-based prioritization. I've got a bunch of cameras. Actually, we have this use case. In the Smart Factory project we're doing, the customer wants a bunch of cameras and sensors to be on a separate network, isolated from the rest of the equipment. And so you're streaming all this video, but you're not looking at it all. So the video you're looking at should get higher priority than all the other video. So the network should provide you an API so you can say that video right there, that's what I'm looking at right now. Similarly, context would include things like location-based policy. I can look at the video if I'm in the room. I can't look at it if I'm outside the room. You have situations like that as well. And of course, the network should be aware of identity. So integrated with identity. You don't even provision the link if the device is not authenticated. Of course, this can't be, this isn't true of everything, right? You don't have devices that can do that. Especially if you have legacy devices, you can't always do that. I have five minutes left. Is that right? Try to wrap it up. Let's see, where am I? All right, so a few last ones. So like in the data center, I'd like to see the network move away from policies that are based on addresses. Because addresses can change. They can be spoofed and so on. Let's do policies based on authentication and metadata. But who puts the tags? So we need some intelligence around tagging workloads. And then want very fine-grained control over how you implement security. So again, we don't build firewalls at Mirokura. We do the virtual networking. It's the plumbing, the redirecting of traffic, the implementation of this logical topology on top of a physical topology. So what we're enabling you to do is to basically, flow by flow, if you need to, redirect traffic to some kind of virtualized device, or sometimes physical device, so that it doesn't matter what your actual physical topology is, you can get the security you need when you need it without sending someone to the factory to Rewire or someone to reconfigure your devices. And the integration step is that if it is virtualized, you do want to have some sort of scheduler. And this is where Fog comes in, some sort of scheduler that says, I've deployed the DPI, the deep packet inspection, on that Fog node. So that's where you should be redirecting the traffic. And so we've done this in the data center where there's integration between service chaining systems, service chaining APIs, and workload schedulers. And this speaks to network function virtualization and then remote access. So we've seen a lot of people provisioning VLANs on the fly, ad hoc, to let someone in. If they're a little bit more advanced, they'll use a wireless LAN controller, can do that nicely. Or sometimes the device itself calls home and sets up a tunnel. And then they have SSH and all sorts of things. They solve the problem for themselves, but then you no longer control what's going on there. So my conclusion is that we need virtualization in the industrial networks to get all those benefits there. And then there are some things about how do you do it. Do you want to use overlays? Do you want to do encapsulation tunneling? There's a cost to it. We've had this debate in the data center and it goes back and forth. It's more efficient in the fabric. Oh, but there are advances in programmable NICs and Linux is getting faster at processing packets. So this will go back and forth. It doesn't matter very much because at the end what you want is whether it's done with overlays or not. At the end of the day you have a logical topology on top of a physical topology. And you don't have to, you can manage the physical topology without worrying about the logical and logical adapts. And then how do you actually get the packets in the first place, especially in brownfield environments? This is the problem we're tackling right now, which is where do we live? Do we live, does this virtualization technology live on a gateway? Does it coexist with some other software on that gateway? Or do we deploy new devices? Do we do bump in the wire? So maybe upstream of a switch, we do bump in the wire in certain VLANs we handle and the other VLANs we let the legacy system handle. So these are all challenges that we're sort of facing now as we, or questions we're asking as we develop our smart factory solution and our fog solution. Since I'm running out of time, I'm going to skip this because I said a few things about fog and industrial internet. Just a few words about this. So what role for open source in all this? There's clearly a lot of projects that address some of this, but mostly the open source has been on the device side, the solution side. But in open fog and the open IF map and open ICS, you have projects that are more on the factory operator side. But you have these questions I'm asking, can the gateway do network virtualization? Or can the gateway itself be virtualized and run in a fog so that I don't have to deploy many, many gateways? The gateways currently handle a certain amount of security. How does that interact with a system that's really just trying to focus on security? Or the gateways each have their own device management or they're tightly coupled with a cloud that has its own device management and so you can't get device management across different solutions. That's very hard for an operator to deal with. So let me stop there. And I think we have a minute for questions, so apologies for that. Yes? I'd say the Wi-Fi solutions are doing the best here. But if you look across the entire network, no. Yes? Right, although they'll talk to you about our air gaps, or they'll talk to you about the defense in depth project they did last year. So that was a system at the time. But up to the most recent audit, they'll know the situation up to there. Ah, no, no. And in fact, this is sort of what's, so I think ExxonMobil now has a project to sort of try to understand and standardize this level of threat. Yes? Well, the standards in each industry do take care of that. There are very clear guidance about what level of protection you should achieve in each domain. So you mean in terms of security, how secure are the gateways, right? So the open-source projects do pretty well, I'd say. But people do their own gateways. And the gateways are, you know, so there hasn't been up until recently, there hasn't been any, a lot of collaboration. So everybody does their own gateways. Security's an afterthought. So we've spoken to small vendors doing their own solutions that had to have their own little gateways. And they might write their own protocols sometimes. They'll write their own wireless protocol to save on a little bit of power. How secure is that compared to an open-source solution, right? Or they don't know about trusted computing platform approaches or they just don't have the time to implement, right? Because they're trying to sort of, they're competing on features, right? So the little security afterwards. And the buyer doesn't always have, for example, smart city or the buyer isn't always able to evaluate how secure the system is. Today, mostly the sensor vendor builds a gateway to sell with their solution. Today, yes, because essentially you don't trust that, you don't wanna share a gateway. Or there's been no, there's no force that helps you coexist on a gateway with someone else. So if something goes wrong on the sensor, you know how to fix it, what if something goes wrong on the gateway, who do you blame? How do you point fingers? And there's no currently no solution to that. You need someone to take responsibility for that. So EuroTech and Red Hat have a partnership now to sell gateways that can be multi-vendor. And Red Hat will support that gateway. Sure, I don't know much about it. I've heard about wireless hard, I've read a little bit. But so on the southbound side, the protocols do have good security. I'm not contesting that. Okay, we're being invaded. So well, if anyone else has questions, I'll be here for a few more minutes. Thank you very much. Thank you.


Okay, in this video I want to show you how to enter a long call vertical spread. So as you see on the chart here our market assumption when we put on this trade is bullish meaning we want the stock to go up. It's best to put these on when implied volatility is low. The optimal time frame, just like most of our trades, is 30 to 60 days to expiration. Looking for a profit target of about 25 to 50% of max. So we want to manage this trade. We don't want to wait until it goes to expiration. We want to manage it at a percentage of max profit. And the downside risk is defined. So this is a defined risk trade. We'll know exactly what that is when we put the trade on. And of course this is bullish so the upside risk, there's no risk to the upside. It's only profit to the upside. And the probability of profit on these trades is about 50%. It's about 50-50. So these are purely directional trades. You're not gaining the high probability like you are on some of our other strategies. However, you can use this trade A if you have a strong directional assumption that you think the stock is going to go up. You can also think of it as like a stock replacement. So instead of putting up a ton of capital to buy the stock, you can simply get in the trade for a lower amount of buying power reduction by using this strategy. So the trade setup is essentially we're going to buy one in the money call. And anywhere from the 55 to 75 delta range works well. And then we're going to sell one out of the money call, kind of in that 15 to 40 delta. And really we want these strikes to be equal distance away from where price is currently trading. And we'll get to the platform and I'll show you what I mean. As far as a note, so theta can be positive if price is higher than the breakeven point. And theta can be negative when price is lower than the breakeven point. I'll also show you what we mean on that. So let's go to the platform and take a look at an example. So the example we'll look at is in Tesla. So as you can see, Tesla had a huge run up and now it's since pulled back. And what will happen sometimes when stocks make huge runs like that and then they'll need to take a breather and people need to take profits. The stock may not be done running to the upside, especially when it was so strong. Now it could very well keep going down. There's nothing to say it can't. But to me, this is a good entry point. After a strong stock makes a little bit of a pullback, a lot of times it'll continue on. So what the trade is basically saying is that when price is right now, sometime between now and expiration, it's going to trade a little bit higher. So I think that's a good bang for your buck. So there's no other technical analysis or any garbage, no trend lines or support resistance or those things that only work about half the time anyway. We don't use those at navigation trading. Really this is all about just adding this position to our portfolio. The other reason I like it is because I want some long delta in our portfolio. So I want some bullish directional exposure in the portfolio and so this is a good stock to choose potentially. So if we go to the trade tab and so the first thing, so we're going to go to the call side. We're buying a call vertical and essentially what we'll do is first we want to find the, first of all, let's see where price is at. So price is currently trading at about $250. So we want, we want strikes that are equal distance away that are in the money and equal distance away out of the money. So if it's trading at $250, let's look at the $240 and the $260. So that would be 10 points away on either side. So let's go to the $240 and we'll simply buy vertical. Then we want to adjust this down here to reflect the strike that we want, which is the $260. And the reason this isn't so definitive, I mean I could do the $245 and the $255 too. And once you analyze the trade, then you can make a better determination of which exact strikes you want to be in. Really the key up front is just making sure that you are equal distance away to the downside and equal distance away to the upside. So we've got $240 and $260. So let's right-click and analyze this trade. And so here's what we've got. So as you can see, and then you want to, it's already set, but you want to set that, set your slices to break even. Now it goes off the screen, but just choose the expiration date, which in this case is $422. And make sure this calendar up here says the expiration date as well, so $422. So we've got our line in the sand, kind of where we're at right now. This is the break-even point. And as you can see, the probability of being profit is around 50%, and the probability of loss is around 50%. And so our max loss with just one contract is $998. And our max profit is a little over 1,000. So it's a pretty much 50-50 deal. We're just hoping that the stock goes up. And then we can capture that for a percentage of max profit. So let's go ahead and get the trade. The other thing I wanted to mention, as I said on the slide, is that theta can be positive when price is higher than the break-even. So to this side. So if we click and drag the hash mark, watch the theta number here. That'll start going positive. Meaning every day that price is above our break-even, we'll be collecting that theta. So theta's working in our favor, just like an iron condor or a strangle or any of our income strategies. Now if price moves down below, you can see theta gets negative. Because then theta is working against us at that point. So just keep in mind, just something to watch and just understand that theta will be positive if you're winning in the trade. And it'll be negative if you're losing. So that's really important just so you understand how it works in conjunction with all your other positions. And you always want to be net positive theta so that you're earning that income every day that you're in the trade. So let's go ahead and place the trade. I like to click off that just to see where the current price is trading. Because the market is open. So we want to know where price is. So we simply right-click, confirm and send, and we got filled at $9.99. So now we're in the trade and we will wait to see if we can get an up move in Tesla. If we do, we'll manage it for a percentage of max profit. If it goes against us, we're simply going to, we're going to take the loss that it gives us. With defined risk trades, we don't really adjust those. We really need to just be comfortable with the amount of risk that we have in the trade. So I'm comfortable losing $999 on this trade if Tesla goes against me. And that's how you have to be with defined risk trades. Because of transaction costs and other things, it doesn't really make sense to do any adjusting strategies or rolling. So we're looking at this as simply a win or lose trade and so we'll see what happens. I want to talk about how to close a long call vertical. So I'm not going to go through how to close every single strategy in the course. Because it works basically the same in every situation. But I did want to show you one example just to give you an idea. So remember we put on a long call vertical in Tesla because we had a bullish assumption, applied volatility was low, entered it with between 30 and 60 days to expiration, looking for a profit target between 25 to 50% of max profit. Downside risk is defined. So we knew exactly what our risk was when we put the trade on. And on the upside, obviously no risk because we're making profit as the stock moves up. And with a long call vertical, it's about a 50, 50 bet, it's about a 50% probability of profit. So really we put these on when we're just looking for that directional position. And we're looking at it to add long delta to our portfolio or if we just have an assumption that that stock is going to move up. So let's go to the platform and take a look. So on Tesla, we put this vertical on back on March 2nd. Today's the 16th, so 14 days ago. So two weeks ago, we put this on and if we take a look at the charts, we can see, put it on when it was right around here. And we were looking for, it had this huge move up, had a little bit of a pullback, and we were looking for a little bit of a continuation move. So there's no technical reason to do this. I didn't magically say at this point it's gonna reverse. What we did is we're simply, based on some other positions in our portfolio, we were looking for some long positions and a lot of times after a huge move and then a little pullback, a stock will kind of continue on its way. And so that's what we were looking for and that's what happened. As you can see a couple days ago, had a big move up and it's moved up a little bit since. So if we take a look at our analyze tab, you can see this is where we're at. This is where price was when we started. And it has since moved up from there. And so look at our max profit is a little over $1,001, let's just call it $1,000. So we wanna make anywhere from $250 to $500, right? 25 to 50% of max profit. We're at the profit of about $323. So that's about a little over 32% of max profit. So good time to take this off, we'll bank this profit and we'll redeploy that capital into another trade. So to close the trade, if you've seen any of the other courses I teach, real simple, simply highlight, so you click on one leg, shift, highlight the entire position, right click, create closing order. And we're gonna sell the call vertical because we bought it to enter. So we're gonna sell it to exit, your order queue will pop up. The spread is between 1240 and 1325. So we probably won't get filled right at mid-price. So let's kick this down a few cents, get confirm and send and see if we can get filled at that point. Looks like it's not quite trading there either. So we can go in and cancel replace. And let's move it down to about, price is moving around a little bit on us. And you can see it jump down. So let's go down to 1295. And this is part of the game that you play. And so we ended up getting, we put it in at 1295. Got filled at 1316, which is great. So take a look at our monitor tab now. You can see we bought it for 999, sold it for 1316. We just did one contract in this example. So if we pull up our handy dandy little calculator, all you gotta do is take 13.16 minus what we paid for it, 999. That gave us a profit of $3.17. Multiply that times 100 because each contract represents 100 shares. So we made $317 on this trade. So good trade in just a couple of weeks. That's how you close a long call vertical spread. Hope that was helpful. See you in the next lesson.