 Thanks again, yeah, starting, so thanks again for spending time with us and presenting us your work. I think that the motivation for this was that a recurring thing in this group is that a lot of people are trying to do similar things and related to research, and that can be like deploying HPC like systems or patch systems or notebooks or whatever service service there communities. And one of the issues they have is not only navigating the CNCF landscape but understanding what our best practices for for these different use cases. So attending your groups presentation, I think there was kind of similar goals. And so I think it would be great if you can describe your group to our community and, and then I'm sure other people have questions. Awesome. So I have just a few slides to support the conversation, but we promise it won't be death by slides. So Simon, do you want to just kind of start us off? Absolutely. Thank you Danielle. So Danielle and myself along with John Foreman are co-chairs of the Cartagraphos Working Group. And we started to collate the model also with with Robert Glenn also who's who's been collaborating with us also. So we formed the Working Group approximately a year ago just to start working on a cloud native maturity model. I'm based in London, Danielle's in the US. Okay, so why have a maturity model? This came out of a out of something that we had all independently observed, which is that we have the cloud native landscape and the CNCF also has the cloud native trail map. And one of the first challenges for anybody encountering the landscape at first glance is first off, it's a real eye test. And then secondly, where do I start? What's my path? We'd observed that the trail map was in place, but it was very at a very high level and it didn't give much guidance and at worst it could be misleading. And so I put together an attempt at a trail map. Danielle had also produced one and likewise, John. And so we all collaborated together. The main thing that we want to illustrate with the trail map is we want to show levels of maturity and also provide a path through which people can slowly attain cloud native maturity. We also wanted to have multiple, we believe that there are multiple factors involved in this. So we really wanted to provide tools to help adopters and end users navigate the landscape and the wider cloud native ecosystem. And so as we've got there, we want to help people move from inception through to full adoption of cloud native technologies using the landscape. Next slide please. Danielle, I think would you like to? So our just for an overview of the maturity model. So we have five different stages that we, so when we were coming together, we took these different models, looked at them and was like, okay, how do we break this up and make sense of this. And so we came to the realization that there were kind of five main stages. And this is what this represents. You know, the first stage is when you're building out your environment, then you're learning how to run it and you're figuring out how to move to production. Then stage three, you're scaling for now that you figured out, okay, scale, you're going to go back and revisit things and look to improve some of the decisions you made early on. And then in five, it's all about optimization and like what tweaks you can get for measuring and your metrics and monitoring and all of that. So within each five stages, for each five stages, we also broke it down to four key themes. So people process policy and technology. So the people theme looks at, well, what do you need to do culturally at your organization in each phase of the model. So, you know, in the beginning, you need to get the people on board to decide like, yeah, I'm, I want to do cloud native. And bought in and you know, you need to then as you move through like change the structure of your teams maybe look at how who's leading adopt make sure you're adopting this DevOps culture, etc. The process again follows the five stages. And that looks at, you know, what do you need to put in place for CICD or infrastructures code like are you shifting everything left. So policy focuses on what policies can do you need to put in place what clients mandates you need to follow. And you know how can you automate this. And then technology is really where it we're suggesting like okay here are the tools you can use. So in the technology section, we have decided we would only include CNCF graduated projects or incubating projects. So we did not include any sandbox projects just because, you know, that's where people are trialing it we you know we are going to make the cut in the end. And we wanted to make sure we had a clear cut off point. We also don't talk about any commercial software. So you have to be open source you have to be in the CNCF to be included. What we're doing today, or at the moment is we're going out to each of the tags within the CNCF and looking for their expertise around the technology but also like are there areas and people process and policy where they could enhance that but in the technology section looking at recommendations for these are the technologies you need to be looking at and that may include some of the projects but they may also just include some themes around you should be looking for software to help you with this that and the other. So we did, you know the four of us who put this together spent a lot of time looking at what to include what not to include. And we know that you know four of us cannot completely cover the full technology ins and outs that's why we're working with the tag groups now on that. I'm going to skip this because what I want to do is just quickly show you kind of where the maturity model sits and we'll share these links. I can share them in the chat in a moment. But we have a GitHub repo where we have the the prologue of explaining how we went about this what we did. Some prerequisite so we basically looked at it said look you have to you know don't come to this unless you've decided cloud native is the way to go. And we gave you some, you know, when is the right time around the key for themes, and then for each one of the areas we have like the people section, which gives you okay what do you need to do at each level so here's your high level review for people, and then we broke this out into themes as we built the model so like there was an organizational change what you have to do with your teams, how you need to incorporate developer agility upskilling developers security etc. And we did mention some of the CNCN certificates you can have here. The process. Sorry, real quick. Your audio sounds really strange to me. I don't know if it's just me or just getting that. I keep getting a message that says my internet's unstable. So that's just poor timing. Unfortunately. But actually, I think everyone gets that message. I think it's a thing with this platform. I can hear you fine actually. Okay, I'm all right. Okay. It must be me in fact because you all sound like to me. Sorry. No problem. So in the process again and you'll see like some of these are weighted heavier than other depending on the content we had and what we were doing. So process follows it we go through audit logs the ICD change control, etc. And then policy and I'll just click on technology to give you an overview of that. So, you know, we put up front that it is only graduating projects. We give you an overview we talk about infrastructure application patterns and refactoring container runtime, etc, etc, etc. So, and this is where, you know, we put it in GitHub because we want people to contribute. We want to make sure that it is useful to the end user community because we want it to be guidance to help when you are navigating this journey. And that that's essentially our quick very quick summary of the cloud native maturity model we didn't want to, we didn't want to kill you with with slides so we thought we'd give you an overview and then see what sort of questions you have or if there's you know ways that you think this would be useful for your group for you know how we could promote it and expand it outside of this group. Go from there. Awesome. Thank you so much. So anyone has questions already comments. I don't know. Well, if not, I can start so I think one thing that I was thinking while seeing your presentation before and now as well is like navigating towards a goal I guess like the different different people have different needs of which components they need and how they fit together for the purpose that they want to achieve but like for is it dedicated for community or do you see more like a general guidance? We would see at the moment at the level that it's at it's aimed at the general community because and part of the challenges is that we're well aware that every industry is different. So the needs that you have within research will be quite different to the needs of finance potentially depending on what they're working on. I am aware there are similarities actually with HPC there. So, so that that's one of the things. However, one of the intentions of the model also is that while it is is general, it is a resource that is there and potentially should you wish to fork it and or create create your own model that is better suited to specific parts of research, then we really encourage that. And indeed, in turn, we would really welcome. We would love to see what you're doing with it so that we can again feed feed that back. And where we might find where there might be value for you is we've we've drawn out that the key year the four key areas as we know that cloud native migration transformation, whatever you want to call it is more than just the technology decision. So there's something there. And another aspect that could be helpful for you to is the baselines that we have those five levels and feedback that we've had from from another tag has been that that what they liked was having the potential to use it as a common baseline. And that that could be helpful for you as well. And I definitely see it as an opportunity for different groups to say we created this supporting paper, this supporting link like we created this content out here to help and so we link to it throughout the cloud native maturity model. So if you're saying, we really think this should be included. We can highlight it and go this is a supporting resource which you should read because it talks about acts. So we want to use it as a way to cross poly in the colony, all of the deep rich content that everybody is producing and their groups. At some point we started looking at. I don't remember how we call them but it was like architecture best practices which was more on the technical side of how things should fit together. But yeah, I think the policy people all of this is also extremely important. That was our big takeaway because we could have done a maturity model and technology and just call it a day but when we looked at it was like there's more to this whole space because you are changing. You're changing everything to go cloud native, maybe not everything that's extreme but you're changing a lot so you know, make sure you're thinking about these things as you go along the journey. So if we consider that an organization or might want to, you know, if you make sure that you take account of your policy environment from the beginning, don't forget about it. We've seen situations where some of those key areas have not been given the level of thought out front and that's made, meant that people have had to go back and retrofit or attempt to cater for something and waste time and resources. Anyone else? Just at what point in the process would you advise people to connect with your group or I'm still not quite sure about the interaction with the cartographers group and what that's like because we have a project that we're signing the sandbox, but at what point, reach out to do we go to meetings like what's the relationship. So, we don't want to cause more work for your group. So we're happy to join meetings where it makes sense for you. But in addition, we meet every other week on a Tuesday at one Eastern. And we have that we have a bevy page two on it so that's where we're talking about next steps what do we want to do how do we want to get people involved. So you're welcome to join our calls. We're happy to come back. We, we have one tag who's going away think going through all the content and they're going to come back and either comment via, you know, make some pull request via GitHub and trying to update the content and that's how they want to do it. But we're completely flexible in that we want contributions and we want additional people to join our group, but at the same time we don't want to make more work for anyone. So, Simon, do you want to add anything to that. Yeah, I would say also quite simply, we're on, we're on, we're on Slack, we're pretty easy to find we're all listed there individually, and also our emails there. And what I would suggest is we're really keen to engage. And so I wouldn't leave it. So if you've got a project that you consider in contributing, while, while part of the, the reason why at this time our focus is really on the, the graduated and the incubating projects is because of the number of projects. And I get, and perhaps because this is a relatively general model, we know that the incubating and the graduated projects, you know, people are not really going less likely to sort of go go wrong with those. However, if we're, this landscape is changing really quickly. And so if you, if you want to say, hey, Danielle, hey, Simon, John, everybody, we've, we've got this project, we'd just be aware of it. Keep it on your radar. If that's all it is, we're happy for that as well. Yeah, yeah. Awesome. Anyone has any other questions, Danny? Do you have any comment? Don't my internet's a little bit dodgy. So I'm sort of coming and going. I'm sorry. I'm sitting on a 4G connection here. Yeah, I think this, this is really like something that we should look at to build like Daniel was saying to take it as a baseline and build on top and then see where we could contribute. I think one, one thing I was just checking the agenda from the past and we do have quite a lot of projects that come into our agenda that are in early stages of development or integration into the CNCF. So we also have like the ones from incubation and graduation that everyone depends on. As Alex said, like there's quite a bit that is in earlier stages of integration. No. Yeah, I just have, I guess, one thing I understand like whom I'm talking to, but is that in discussing any cloud native technologies, it's as a means to manage existing local resources. So there's a lot of existing perspectives of cloud is over there rather than local here. And also a matter of it's I have bare metal slurm running. Why do I need to build up all of this additional architecture and it's you wave at them that CNCF landscape and they go, No, no, this is a waste of my time. Due to complexity and whatnot, and is that how it's how you folks have pitched this as, you know, you must fully transition into CNCF methodologies and whatnot is that do you have any recommendations on not how to not scare people off. It's just because there's a, you know, a lot of work and some right skepticism, and it's with regards to using some of these technologies, you know, why not use open shift open stack rather than going, you know, Kubernetes management of stuff. So I think there. We, so this maturity model, say I was an open truck user or moving to open shift, I could use this maturity model as a baseline. I just wouldn't necessarily look at every single technology project. And one of the things that we did recognize in this is that, you know, you might take one application, and you're containerizing and you're adopting cloning even you're doing all that with the rest that you're using bare metal you're on prem whatnot you're only doing that for one part so your maturity might be at level five, for an app. And then you know the rat you're doing everything out so you can be at different stages of the model depending on what you're doing. But it's it you know it's guidelines it's helpful it's not supposed to be prescriptive because if you read this and you go, oh, this is exactly the way the CNCF says to do it like, everyone's going to debate that like you might read it Matthew and go, let's do this way earlier, and you know Ricardo you may be like no no it's an exactly the right spot. And that's you know we're, we're trying to be helpful here and give some guidelines and guidance but. And I think that the kind of other point is if you are not bought into doing any cloud native, you probably aren't going to need this maturity model right there is a prerequisite or prologue that you've decided as an organization that this is the right thing for you. I think, I think actually, Matthew that question you bring up is a question we should talk about as part of this group, just in general, you know that the platform is computing that scheduling the universe has skepticism about Kubernetes just like you're saying that's Daniel's point. This tool of cartographers is, is maybe after you've decided to buy the bullet and go into it, but but we should have that discussion separately about, you know, there's all this entrenched opinions about how you should do batch scheduling and how you should do sort of clusters for research. And you're right, people look at Kubernetes and get scared off. So, so my apologies for asking a sort of meta question in a in a guidelines talk but it's just to be like, you know, I'm interested in bring playing around with the systems is in investigating certain things, but is that it's a matter of like okay. It's, and I have no opinion on, you know, what goes where it's in the overall guidelines thing, but as I'm just sort of thinking, okay, yeah, some of this might work but it's always a, okay, always in the back of my head how the hell do I have the hell do I sell this to others. And it's having guidelines of, you know, this isn't we move over in, you know, five days, you know, go go and install and build it up and we're all done. It's a process over time is definitely valuable, but material. Well, and one of the reasons I was brought into this group was because I posted a blog around the business outcomes you can expect of cloud native maturity. And that's where when Cheryl hung was that still at the CNCF she was like, hey, can you join this group because we looked at that so one of the things we are looking to do in our next iteration of this is to include those business outcomes, because it is going well hey I'm a technologist and I want to use this technology because it looks cool and fun but doesn't support the business goals is that what the leaders want and how do you communicate to, you know, your CEO your CFO that doing this is going to help move the business forward. And so, you know, I can I can dig out that blog and shoot you the link to it, but that is definitely something we want to get into the maturity model in the next iteration. And a really valuable point as well and something that occurred to me is, as you were speaking Matthew was, I think, I really like the point you raised actually and I think it is actually a really important part of this discussion. And some of the benefits might be might be less around. For example, if you've got an on premise HPC cluster that's on bare metal and works incredibly well. Some of the other some of the points that we've attempted to address the things like security and around policy and what's running on the cluster. How, how am I ensuring that only the workload that should be on there is there and that I'm not Bitcoin mining inadvertently on there. So, also, it around also around potentially what processes can we undertake to speed up releases on to that platform. So, while the platform itself may be on premise, maybe within an organization and not be within a cloud service provider and may not even use Kubernetes itself. It might open up a space for the further discussion around how's my policy looking. How do I start how do I move down down that journey and how can I provide the insurance so we're not spending money unnecessarily. Yeah, so that's an element where perhaps the other three areas may benefit organizations as well. We're working with a with an organization migrating a grid actually at this point in time to from off premise to cloud service providers and undertaking refactoring as well. So, it's been a really, you know, to to run on Kubernetes and that's been a fascinating exercise to be working on. So, I appreciate that. I think Ricardo has actually had to drop off some childcare issues. So I'm going to try and take over hosting. It's been great. So sorry about that. Do we have any further questions? Simon, I can add in our chat or emails. So if you do have questions afterwards or want to follow up with us. And again, I put all the links in the chat as well to the content. So if you review it and you want to get involved with our group or you want us to come back or you want to talk about next steps one on one. We are happy to do that. Awesome. Yeah. As Alex mentioned earlier, we've got a project with sort of independently working on which might be relevant here. And yeah, if anyone else wants to please do that. Yeah. There's no further questions and thanks very much Simon and Daniel really appreciate it. Thanks for your time. Thank you. Thanks for having us. Thank you for having us. Yeah, very much appreciate it. Yes, and obviously you're welcome to join any funny like we're here. First and third Wednesday of the month at this time. Time zone is notwithstanding. Great. Yes, apologies for that on my part. No, I had a little dig at me because I've got a long track record of messing up time zones. I think because we're in London and about half the time you're UTC and everything just works and the other time the other half you're not. And it makes it really hard. It's exactly right. I find exactly the same thing. Yeah, never write code in some time. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Well, thank you very much. Everyone else. I don't know if there's much more we've got to cover today. We could just quick note that we'll be back here. I guess let me have a quick look at the date. It's going to be on the second of Feb so two weeks today. And the topic is dealing with deprecations. So all the various things in the latest Kubernetes releases and other things are disappearing as time marches on. So if anyone has any other business. Quick question. We didn't update the Google doc with attendance. Do we still need to do that or should it be somewhere else? Good question. Yes. Normally we do. Normally I would do that, but I don't have a laptop today, unfortunately. But yes, if you could. In fact, Catherine, if you're there, if you wouldn't mind popping a link to the Google doc in the chat. Then everyone can click that and just make a note of their name and where they're from. And then we've got a record. That's great. Give me a hold, please. I'll do it. Cheers. And I think we're going to try and update any record of the Zoom link and make it be gone. Because I think we have a few people turn up there at the beginning and then come over to there afterwards. With adding your question as maybe a topic for discussion, I think it's a useful one to come back to in this group particularly. Yeah, I'm good with that. And it's a, I inhabit a, it's as a software engineer at a university centralized group. I inhabit a weird, nether space between a bunch of the computing design paradigms. So getting some sense on how to talk to people about different ones is would be useful. Yeah, I think winning people over in the HPC space is a complicated process. Jamie and Ricardo and I have planned to chat with some HPC people in Boston tomorrow, tomorrow, something like that. And similar emotions as you described from that community. And so anyway, it's just interesting, an interesting conversation to keep on bringing up in this group particularly because I think this group is a lot of people like you, who deal with a lot of historical entrenched and working systems. And should they move to Kubernetes? What's the big idea? Why do this thing? So I would love that topic to keep on coming back up. The other thing, sorry to take a little bit of this, is that I originally come from the high throughput computing space. So is that I'm also learning the history of HPC. I'm currently based in the UK and trying to learn the history of the various technologies and preferences and whatnot. So is that there is some overlap of my boosterism of containerization and distributed computing to cloud perspectives. But is that in other technologies is somewhat different. But I'm effort through the UK RSC group and some other orgs, trying to get at least a little bit of dialogue in Slack channels to be like, because everybody has somewhat of a habit of siloing themselves off. Communities build up their tools, their expertise, and it makes perfect sense. But is that I do wish we'd be a little bit more familiar, and it's sort of at ease in talking to each other, rather than say defensive and or evangelistic. What do you mean? We love talking to people. More it's the frustrations of HPC. Well, most of my experience is talking to HPC folks who are profoundly skeptical. And is that a previous conversation I had with, oh goodness, I can't remember who was on the working group Slack channel, was people should come to KubeCon. And is this to be like, well, yeah, but is also a matter of, you know, it'd be good to meet people where they are, not necessarily just invite them to where you are already. And is that it's, I grant that there is a lot of going and talking to people. It's about stuff, but just the interactions is often, you know, come to me. I don't know if there are regular, like, is there visits to ICS or ISC or SC for this research group, you know, at a particular time, or one of the, or PERC, or various other things. It's just a matter of, you know, go meet the people where they are. And it's as well as invite folks to come see the cool stuff that you have in your garage. And it's, it's not this, you know, disparage the active efforts. It's just, I think that would be just useful as well. Maybe that's just also my corner of Southwestern England that I'm, that I get that and it's not the case in other locations. No, I think it's, I think you're accurate. And the HPC community, I think is absolutely a very, very specific group of people, you know, yes, I think they're siloed off into their own little universe for various reasons. So, but I'm not quite sure what you were suggesting in terms of connecting. Well, it's just like, people can come to tutorial workshops and it's of, in a bunch of this stuff, this wonderful group, is that has there been this working group hosting a booth or a workshop at a major HPC conference, just off the top of my head? This isn't, you know, a, you know, perfect solution, but is that this, this is, you know, a, we're not scary. Here is the cool stuff while you're going around looking at the 512 core processor thingies, you know, out by. I see what you're saying. Jamie, we've never discussed that as part of this working group. I don't think, have we? But it might be interesting to think about. I mean, we're often at other conferences besides the CNCF stuff. So maybe we should think about going as MS areas of this research user group, getting a booth and doing that kind of a thing. We've only ever done that. You've gone from memory. It'll be good to go. So it's on the other side. Spread the word a bit more. Yeah. I wonder whether what's his name again? There's Cheryl's replacement. Bill Morgan. Bill, I thought there was another person. I forget his first name. I thought Bill was nothing in a while. Could that be Ihor Tvoretsky? No, I know who you mean. It's our current CNCF rep, I think, as he is looking at. Yeah. Boob, I think is his. I think it's my good point. Okay. Anyway, I wonder whether any one of those characters can help us with funds and things like that for setting up booths at other places. Yeah, we can get into those details, but it's a good idea. Especially on the things that we already plan to attend. Any one of us on that front, are you headed to any of those things? So it's, I am, I am, you know, poor at a new, at a new group. But it's that I'm, you know, in my own little corner is that I'm going to be running a workshop, a small workshop next year. And it's not nearly as big conferences, but one of the things I'm thinking about was to make it both appealing. It's in high throughput, but is that to make it appealing to both HVC and cloud folks as well in terms of administration, in terms of relevant maybe CNCF technologies that are applied to high throughput computing. And one of the things that I'm thinking about is that it's just been on my mind about, you know, how can I, how can I once sell my meeting outside our normal bubble? And also I think it could be potentially really advantageous to just be melodramatic to go into enemy territory. And it's, and, and is that to really say, hey, you know, no, we are people like you, you know, providers, this is how we manage our stuff. I think it's good to actually, I would, I would like to be able to go to say one of these, to say ISE, but sadly, my current work schedule does not, it's not a lot. Maybe let's, let's keep that on as like a standing item to keep on talking about, because I think for this group, you know, we, we want to be reaching out to more people and in particular, sort of interdisciplinary realms, because for this group in particular, that's important. So it's wonderful that you bring it up. Let's keep on talking about it. Thank you for being accepting of that. No, I think it's great. Cool. Right on. Anybody else? Albin? Timothy? Final call. Nope. Just hanging in the background. Cool. Cool. Nice to see you there. Cool. All right. Well, we'll probably wrap it up there then. Thank you all for joining and see some of you in a couple of weeks and thanks again for presenting those. Thank you. Yeah, thank you. You should. Hopefully, thank you all soon. Bye bye. Bye.