(upbeat music) >> We are back, approaching the finish line here at Supercomputing 22, our last interview of the day, our last interview of the show. And I have to say Dave Nicholson, my co-host, My name is Paul Gillin. I've been attending trade shows for 40 years Dave, I've never been to one like this. The type of people who are here, the type of problems they're solving, what they talk about, the trade shows are typically, they're so speeds and feeds. They're so financial, they're so ROI, they all sound the same after a while. This is truly a different event. Do you get that sense? >> A hundred percent. Now, I've been attending trade shows for 10 years since I was 19, in other words, so I don't have necessarily your depth. No, but seriously, Paul, totally, completely, completely different than any other conference. First of all, there's the absolute allure of looking at the latest and greatest, coolest stuff. I mean, when you have NASA lecturing on things when you have Lawrence Livermore Labs that we're going to be talking to here in a second it's a completely different story. You have all of the academics you have students who are in competition and also interviewing with organizations. It's phenomenal. I've had chills a lot this week. >> And I guess our last two guests sort of represent that cross section. Armando Acosta, director of HPC Solutions, High Performance Solutions at Dell. And Matt Leininger, who is the HPC Strategist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. Now, there is perhaps, I don't know you can correct me on this, but perhaps no institution in the world that uses more computing cycles than Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory and is always on the leading edge of what's going on in Supercomputing. And so we want to talk to both of you about that. Thank you. Thank you for joining us today. >> Sure, glad to be here. >> For having us. >> Let's start with you, Armando. Well, let's talk about the juxtaposition of the two of you. I would not have thought of LLNL as being a Dell reference account in the past. Tell us about the background of your relationship and what you're providing to the laboratory. >> Yeah, so we're really excited to be working with Lawrence Livermore, working with Matt. But actually this process started about two years ago. So we started looking at essentially what was coming down the pipeline. You know, what were the customer requirements. What did we need in order to make Matt successful. And so the beauty of this project is that we've been talking about this for two years, and now it's finally coming to fruition. And now we're actually delivering systems and delivering racks of systems. But what I really appreciate is Matt coming to us, us working together for two years and really trying to understand what are the requirements, what's the schedule, what do we need to hit in order to make them successful >> At Lawrence Livermore, what drives your computing requirements I guess? You're working on some very, very big problems but a lot of very complex problems. How do you decide what you need to procure to address them? >> Well, that's a difficult challenge. I mean, our mission is a national security mission dealing with making sure that we do our part to provide the high performance computing capabilities to the US Department of Energy's National Nuclear Security Administration. We do that through the Advanced Simulation computing program. Its goal is to provide that computing power to make sure that the US nuclear rep of the stockpile is safe, secure, and effective. So how we go about doing that? There's a lot of work involved. We have multiple platform lines that we accomplish that goal with. One of them is the advanced technology systems. Those are the ones you've heard about a lot, they're pushing towards exit scale, the GPU technologies incorporated into those. We also have a second line, a platform line, called the Commodity Technology Systems. That's where right now we're partnering with Dell on the latest generation of those. Those systems are a little more conservative, they're right now CPU only driven but they're also intended to be the everyday work horses. So those are the first systems our users get on. It's very easy for them to get their applications up and running. They're the first things they use usually on a day to day basis. They run a lot of small to medium size jobs that you need to do to figure out how to most effectively use what workloads you need to move to the even larger systems to accomplish our mission goals. >> The workhorses. >> Yeah. >> What have you seen here these last few days of the show, what excites you? What are the most interesting things you've seen? >> There's all kinds of things that are interesting. Probably most interesting ones I can't talk about in public, unfortunately, 'cause of NDA agreements, of course. But it's always exciting to be here at Supercomputing. It's always exciting to see the products that we've been working with industry and co-designing with them on for, you know, several years before the public actually sees them. That's always an exciting part of the conference as well specifically with CTS-2, it's exciting. As was mentioned before, I've been working with Dell for nearly two years on this, but the systems first started being delivered this past August. And so we're just taking the initial deliveries of those. We've deployed, you know, roughly about 1600 nodes now but that'll ramp up to over 6,000 nodes over the next three or four months. >> So how does this work intersect with Sandia and Los Alamos? Explain to us the relationship there. >> Right, so those three laboratories are the laboratories under the National Nuclear Security Administration. We partner together on CTS. So the architectures, as you were asking, how do we define these things, it's the labs coming together. Those three laboratories we define what we need for that architecture. We have a joint procurement that is run out of Livermore but then the systems are deployed at all three laboratories. And then they serve the programs that I mentioned for each laboratory as well. >> I've worked in this space for a very long time you know I've worked with agencies where the closest I got to anything they were actually doing was the sort of guest suite outside the secure area. And sometimes there are challenges when you're communicating, it's like you have a partner like Dell who has all of these things to offer, all of these ideas. You have requirements, but maybe you can't share 100% of what you need to do. How do you navigate that? Who makes the decision about what can be revealed in these conversations? You talk about NDA in terms of what's been shared with you, you may be limited in terms of what you can share with vendors. Does that cause inefficiency? >> To some degree. I mean, we do a good job within the NSA of understanding what our applications need and then mapping that to technical requirements that we can talk about with vendors. We also have kind of in between that we've done this for many years. A recent example is of course with the exit scale computing program and some things it's doing creating proxy apps or mini apps that are smaller versions of some of the things that we are important to us. Some application areas are important to us, hydrodynamics, material science, things like that. And so we can collaborate with vendors on those proxy apps to co-design systems and tweak the architectures. In fact, we've done a little bit that with CTS-2, not as much in CTS as maybe in the ATS platforms but that kind of general idea of how we collaborate through these proxy applications is something we've used across platforms. >> Now is Dell one of your co-design partners? >> In CTS-2 absolutely, yep. >> And how, what aspects of CTS-2 are you working on with Dell? >> Well, the architecture itself was the first, you know thing we worked with them on, we had a procurement come out, you know they bid an architecture on that. We had worked with them, you know but previously on our requirements, understanding what our requirements are. But that architecture today is based on the fourth generation Intel Xeon that you've heard a lot about at the conference. We are one of the first customers to get those systems in. All the systems are interconnected together with the Cornell Network's Omni-Path Network that we've used before and are very excited about as well. And we build up from there. The systems get integrated in by the operations teams at the laboratory. They get integrated into our production computing environment. Dell is really responsible, you know for designing these systems and delivering to the laboratories. The laboratories then work with Dell. We have a software stack that we provide on top of that called TOSS, for Tri-Lab Operating System. It's based on Redhead Enterprise Linux. But the goal there is that it allows us, a common user environment, a common simulation environment across not only CTS-2, but maybe older systems we have and even the larger systems that we'll be deploying as well. So from a user perspective they see a common user interface, a common environment across all the different platforms that they use at Livermore and the other laboratories. >> And Armando, what does Dell get out of the co-design arrangement with the lab? >> Well, we get to make sure that they're successful. But the other big thing that we want to do, is typically when you think about Dell and HPC, a lot of people don't make that connection together. And so what we're trying to do is make sure that, you know they know that, hey, whether you're a work group customer at the smallest end or a super computer customer at the highest end, Dell wants to make sure that we have the right setup portfolio to match any needs across this. But what we were really excited about this, this is kind of our, you know big CTS-2 first thing we've done together. And so, you know, hopefully this has been successful. We've made Matt happy and we look forward to the future what we can do with bigger and bigger things. >> So will the labs be okay with Dell coming up with a marketing campaign that said something like, "We can't confirm that alien technology is being reverse engineered." >> Yeah, that would fly. >> I mean that would be right, right? And I have to ask you the question directly and the way you can answer it is by smiling like you're thinking, what a stupid question. Are you reverse engineering alien technology at the labs? >> Yeah, you'd have to suck the PR office. >> Okay, okay. (all laughing) >> Good answer. >> No, but it is fascinating because to a degree it's like you could say, yeah, we're working together but if you really want to dig into it, it's like, "Well I kind of can't tell you exactly how some of this stuff is." Do you consider anything that you do from a technology perspective, not what you're doing with it, but the actual stack, do you try to design proprietary things into the stack or do you say, "No, no, no, we're going to go with standards and then what we do with it is proprietary and secret."? >> Yeah, it's more the latter. >> Is the latter? Yeah, yeah, yeah. So you're not going to try to reverse engineer the industry? >> No, no. We want the solutions that we develop to enhance the industry to be able to apply to a broader market so that we can, you know, gain from the volume of that market, the lower cost that they would enable, right? If we go off and develop more and more customized solutions that can be extraordinarily expensive. And so we we're really looking to leverage the wider market, but do what we can to influence that, to develop key technologies that we and others need that can enable us in the high forms computing space. >> We were talking with Satish Iyer from Dell earlier about validated designs, Dell's reference designs for for pharma and for manufacturing, in HPC are you seeing that HPC, Armando, and is coming together traditionally and more of an academic research discipline beginning to come together with commercial applications? And are these two markets beginning to blend? >> Yeah, I mean so here's what's happening, is you have this convergence of HPC, AI and data analytics. And so when you have that combination of those three workloads they're applicable across many vertical markets, right? Whether it's financial services, whether it's life science, government and research. But what's interesting, and Matt won't brag about, but a lot of stuff that happens in the DoE labs trickles down to the enterprise space, trickles down to the commercial space because these guys know how to do it at scale, they know how to do it efficiently and they know how to hit the mark. And so a lot of customers say, "Hey we want what CTS-2 does," right? And so it's very interesting. The way I love it is their process the way they do the RFP process. Matt talked about the benchmarks and helping us understand, hey here's kind of the mark you have to hit. And then at the same time, you know if we make them successful then obviously it's better for all of us, right? You know, I want to secure nuclear stock pile so I hope everybody else does as well. >> The software stack you mentioned, I think Tia? >> TOSS. >> TOSS. >> Yeah. >> How did that come about? Why did you feel the need to develop your own software stack? >> It originated back, you know, even 20 years ago when we first started building Linux clusters when that was a crazy idea. Livermore and other laboratories were really the first to start doing that and then push them to larger and larger scales. And it was key to have Linux running on that at the time. And so we had the. >> So 20 years ago you knew you wanted to run on Linux? >> Was 20 years ago, yeah, yeah. And we started doing that but we needed a way to have a version of Linux that we could partner with someone on that would do, you know, the support, you know, just like you get from an EoS vendor, right? Security support and other things. But then layer on top of that, all the HPC stuff you need either to run the system, to set up the system, to support our user base. And that evolved into to TOSS which is the Tri-Lab Operating System. Now it's based on the latest version of Redhead Enterprise Linux, as I mentioned before, with all the other HPC magic, so to speak and all that HPC magic is open source things. It's not stuff, it may be things that we develop but it's nothing closed source. So all that's there we run it across all these different environments as I mentioned before. And it really originated back in the early days of, you know, Beowulf clusters, Linux clusters, as just needing something that we can use to run on multiple systems and start creating that common environment at Livermore and then eventually the other laboratories. >> How is a company like Dell, able to benefit from the open source work that's coming out of the labs? >> Well, when you look at the open source, I mean open source is good for everybody, right? Because if you make a open source tool available then people start essentially using that tool. And so if we can make that open source tool more robust and get more people using it, it gets more enterprise ready. And so with that, you know, we're all about open source we're all about standards and really about raising all boats 'cause that's what open source is all about. >> And with that, we are out of time. This is our 28th interview of SC22 and you're taking us out on a high note. Armando Acosta, director of HPC Solutions at Dell. Matt Leininger, HPC Strategist, Lawrence Livermore National Laboratories. Great discussion. Hopefully it was a good show for you. Fascinating show for us and thanks for being with us today. >> Thank you very much. >> Thank you for having us >> Dave it's been a pleasure. >> Absolutely. >> Hope we'll be back next year. >> Can't believe, went by fast. Absolutely at SC23. >> We hope you'll be back next year. This is Paul Gillin. That's a wrap, with Dave Nicholson for theCUBE. See here in next time. (soft upbear music)

>>Hi, everyone. My name is my uncle. My uncle Poor I worked with Geo reminds you in India. We call ourselves Geo Platforms. Now on. We've been recently in the news. You've raised a lot off funding from one of the largest, most of the largest tech companies in the world. And I'm here to talk about Geos Cloud Journey, Onda Mantis Partnership. I've titled it the story often, Underdog becoming the largest telecom company in India within four years, which is really special. And we're, of course, held by the cloud. So quick disclaimer. Right. The content shared here is only for informational purposes. Um, it's only for this event. And if you want to share it outside, especially on social media platforms, we need permission from Geo Platforms limited. Okay, quick intro about myself. I am a VP of engineering a geo. I lead the Cloud Services and Platforms team with NGO Andi. I mean the geo since the beginning, since it started, and I've seen our cloud footprint grow from a handful of their models to now eight large application data centers across three regions in India. And we'll talk about how we went here. All right, Let's give you an introduction on Geo, right? Giorgio is on how we became the largest telecom campaign, India within four years from 0 to 400 million subscribers. And I think there are There are a lot of events that defined Geo and that will give you an understanding off. How do you things and what you did to overcome massive problems in India. So the slide that I want to talkto is this one and, uh, I The headline I've given is, It's the Geo is the fastest growing tech company in the world, which is not a new understatement. It's eggs, actually, quite literally true, because very few companies in the world have grown from zero to 400 million subscribers within four years paying subscribers. And I consider Geo Geos growth in three phases, which I have shown on top. The first phase we'll talk about is how geo grew in the smartphone market in India, right? And what we did to, um to really disrupt the telecom space in India in that market. Then we'll talk about the feature phone phase in India and how Geo grew there in the future for market in India. and then we'll talk about what we're doing now, which we call the Geo Platforms phase. Right. So Geo is a default four g lt. Network. Right. So there's no to geo three g networks that Joe has, Um it's a state of the art four g lt voiceover lt Network and because it was designed fresh right without any two D and three G um, legacy technologies, there were also a lot of challenges Lawn geo when we were starting up. One of the main challenges waas that all the smart phones being sold in India NGOs launching right in 2000 and 16. They did not have the voice or lt chip set embedded in the smartphone because the chips it's far costlier to embed in smartphones and India is a very price and central market. So none of the manufacturers were embedding the four g will teach upset in the smartphones. But geos are on Lee a volte in network, right for the all the network. So we faced a massive problem where we said, Look there no smartphones that can support geo. So how will we grow Geo? So in order to solve that problem, we launched our own brand of smartphones called the Life um, smartphones. And those phones were really high value devices. So there were $50 and for $50 you get you You At that time, you got a four g B storage space. A nice big display for inch display. Dual cameras, Andi. Most importantly, they had volte chip sets embedded in them. Right? And that got us our initial customers the initial for the launch customers when we launched. But more importantly, what that enabled other oh, EMS. What that forced the audience to do is that they also had to launch similar smartphones competing smartphones with voltage upset embedded in the same price range. Right. So within a few months, 3 to 4 months, um, all the other way EMS, all the other smartphone manufacturers, the Samsung's the Micromax is Micromax in India, they all had volte smartphones out in the market, right? And I think that was one key step We took off, launching our own brand of smartphone life that helped us to overcome this problem that no smartphone had. We'll teach upsets in India and then in order. So when when we were launching there were about 13 telecom companies in India. It was a very crowded space on demand. In order to gain a foothold in that market, we really made a few decisions. Ah, phew. Key product announcement that really disrupted this entire industry. Right? So, um, Geo is a default for GLT network itself. All I p network Internet protocol in everything. All data. It's an all data network and everything from voice to data to Internet traffic. Everything goes over this. I'll goes over Internet protocol, and the cost to carry voice on our smartphone network is very low, right? The bandwidth voice consumes is very low in the entire Lt band. Right? So what we did Waas In order to gain a foothold in the market, we made voice completely free, right? He said you will not pay anything for boys and across India, we will not charge any roaming charges across India. Right? So we made voice free completely and we offer the lowest data rates in the world. We could do that because we had the largest capacity or to carry data in India off all the other telecom operators. And these data rates were unheard off in the world, right? So when we launched, we offered a $2 per month or $3 per month plan with unlimited data, you could consume 10 gigabytes of data all day if you wanted to, and some of our subscriber day. Right? So that's the first phase off the overgrowth and smartphones and that really disorders. We hit 100 million subscribers in 170 days, which was very, very fast. And then after the smartphone faith, we found that India still has 500 million feature phones. And in order to grow in that market, we launched our own phone, the geo phone, and we made it free. Right? So if you take if you took a geo subscription and you carried you stayed with us for three years, we would make this phone tree for your refund. The initial deposit that you paid for this phone and this phone had also had quite a few innovations tailored for the Indian market. It had all of our digital services for free, which I will talk about soon. And for example, you could plug in. You could use a cable right on RCR HDMI cable plug into the geo phone and you could watch TV on your big screen TV from the geophones. You didn't need a separate cable subscription toe watch TV, right? So that really helped us grow. And Geo Phone is now the largest selling feature phone in India on it. 100 million feature phones in India now. So now now we're in what I call the geo platforms phase. We're growing of a geo fiber fiber to the home fiber toe the office, um, space. And we've also launched our new commerce initiatives over e commerce initiatives and were steadily building platforms that other companies can leverage other companies can use in the Jeon o'clock. Right? So this is how a small startup not a small start, but a start of nonetheless least 400 million subscribers within four years the fastest growing tech company in the world. Next, Geo also helped a systemic change in India, and this is massive. A lot of startups are building on this India stack, as people call it, and I consider this India stack has made up off three things, and the acronym I use is jam. Trinity, right. So, um, in India, systemic change happened recently because the Indian government made bank accounts free for all one billion Indians. There were no service charges to store money in bank accounts. This is called the Jonathan. The J. GenDyn Bank accounts. The J out off the jam, then India is one of the few countries in the world toe have a digital biometric identity, which can be used to verify anyone online, which is huge. So you can simply go online and say, I am my ankle poor on duh. I verify that this is indeed me who's doing this transaction. This is the A in the jam and the last M stands for Mobil's, which which were held by Geo Mobile Internet in a plus. It is also it is. It also stands for something called the U. P I. The United Unified Payments Interface. This was launched by the Indian government, where you can carry digital transactions for free. You can transfer money from one person to the to another, essentially for free for no fee, right so I can transfer one group, even Indian rupee to my friend without paying any charges. That is huge, right? So you have a country now, which, with a with a billion people who are bank accounts, money in the bank, who you can verify online, right and who can pay online without any problems through their mobile connections held by G right. So suddenly our market, our Internet market, exploded from a few million users to now 506 106 100 million mobile Internet users. So that that I think, was a massive such a systemic change that happened in India. There are some really large hail, um, numbers for this India stack, right? In one month. There were 1.6 billion nuclear transactions in the last month, which is phenomenal. So next What is the impact of geo in India before you started, we were 155th in the world in terms off mobile in terms of broadband data consumption. Right. But after geo, India went from one 55th to the first in the world in terms of broadband data, largely consumed on mobile devices were a mobile first country, right? We have a habit off skipping technology generation, so we skip fixed line broadband and basically consuming Internet on our mobile phones. On average, Geo subscribers consumed 12 gigabytes of data per month, which is one of the highest rates in the world. So Geo has a huge role to play in making India the number one country in terms off broad banded consumption and geo responsible for quite a few industry first in the telecom space and in fact, in the India space, I would say so before Geo. To get a SIM card, you had to fill a form off the physical paper form. It used to go toe Ah, local distributor. And that local distributor is to check the farm that you feel incorrectly for your SIM card and then that used to go to the head office and everything took about 48 hours or so, um, to get your SIM card. And sometimes there were problems there also with a hard biometric authentication. We enable something, uh, India enable something called E K Y C Elektronik. Know your customer? We took a fingerprint scan at our point of Sale Reliance Digital stores, and within 15 minutes we could verify within a few minutes. Within a few seconds we could verify that person is indeed my hunk, right, buying the same car, Elektronik Lee on we activated the SIM card in 15 minutes. That was a massive deal for our growth. Initially right toe onboard 100 million customers. Within our and 70 days. We couldn't have done it without be K. I see that was a massive deal for us and that is huge for any company starting a business or start up in India. We also made voice free, no roaming charges and the lowest data rates in the world. Plus, we gave a full suite of cloud services for free toe all geo customers. For example, we give goTV essentially for free. We give GOTV it'll law for free, which people, when we have a launching, told us that no one would see no one would use because the Indians like watching TV in the living rooms, um, with the family on a big screen television. But when we actually launched, they found that GOTV is one off our most used app. It's like 70,000,080 million monthly active users, and now we've basically been changing culture in India where culture is on demand. You can watch TV on the goal and you can pause it and you can resume whenever you have some free time. So really changed culture in India, India on we help people liver, digital life online. Right, So that was massive. So >>I'm now I'd like to talk about our cloud >>journey on board Animal Minorities Partnership. We've been partners that since 2014 since the beginning. So Geo has been using open stack since 2014 when we started with 14 note luster. I'll be one production environment One right? And that was I call it the first wave off our cloud where we're just understanding open stack, understanding the capabilities, understanding what it could do. Now we're in our second wave. Where were about 4000 bare metal servers in our open stack cloud multiple regions, Um, on that around 100,000 CPU cores, right. So it's a which is one of the bigger clouds in the world, I would say on almost all teams, with Ngor leveraging the cloud and soon I think we're going to hit about 10,000 Bama tools in our cloud, which is massive and just to give you a scale off our network, our in French, our data center footprint. Our network introduction is about 30 network data centers that carry just network traffic across there are there across India and we're about eight application data centers across three regions. Data Center is like a five story building filled with servers. So we're talking really significant scale in India. And we had to do this because when we were launching, there are the government regulation and try it. They've gotten regulatory authority of India, mandates that any telecom company they have to store customer data inside India and none of the other cloud providers were big enough to host our clothes. Right. So we we made all this intellectual for ourselves, and we're still growing next. I love to show you how we grown with together with Moran says we started in 2014 with the fuel deployment pipelines, right? And then we went on to the NK deployment. Pipelines are cloud started growing. We started understanding the clouds and we picked up M C p, which has really been a game changer for us in automation, right on DNA. Now we are in the latest release, ofem CPM CPI $2019 to on open stack queens, which on we've just upgraded all of our clouds or the last few months. Couple of months, 2 to 3 months. So we've done about nine production clouds and there are about 50 internal, um, teams consuming cloud. We call as our tenants, right. We have open stack clouds and we have communities clusters running on top of open stack. There are several production grade will close that run on this cloud. The Geo phone, for example, runs on our cloud private cloud Geo Cloud, which is a backup service like Google Drive and collaboration service. It runs out of a cloud. Geo adds G o g S t, which is a tax filing system for small and medium enterprises, our retail post service. There are all these production services running on our private clouds. We're also empaneled with the government off India to provide cloud services to the government to any State Department that needs cloud services. So we were empaneled by Maiti right in their ego initiative. And our clouds are also Easter. 20,000 certified 20,000 Colin one certified for software processes on 27,001 and said 27,017 slash 18 certified for security processes. Our clouds are also P our data centers Alsop a 942 be certified. So significant effort and investment have gone toe These data centers next. So this is where I think we've really valued the partnership with Morantes. Morantes has has trained us on using the concepts of get offs and in fries cold, right, an automated deployments and the tool change that come with the M C P Morantes product. Right? So, um, one of the key things that has happened from a couple of years ago to today is that the deployment time to deploy a new 100 north production cloud has decreased for us from about 55 days to do it in 2015 to now, we're down to about five days to deploy a cloud after the bear metals a racked and stacked. And the network is also the physical network is also configured, right? So after that, our automated pipelines can deploy 100 0 clock in five days flight, which is a massive deal for someone for a company that there's adding bear metals to their infrastructure so fast, right? It helps us utilize our investment, our assets really well. By the time it takes to deploy a cloud control plane for us is about 19 hours. It takes us two hours to deploy a compu track and it takes us three hours to deploy a storage rack. Right? And we really leverage the re class model off M C. P. We've configured re class model to suit almost every type of cloud that we have, right, and we've kept it fairly generous. It can be, um, Taylor to deploy any type of cloud, any type of story, nor any type of compute north. Andi. It just helps us automate our deployments by putting every configuration everything that we have in to get into using infra introduction at school, right plus M. C. P also comes with pipelines that help us run automated tests, automated validation pipelines on our cloud. We also have tempest pipelines running every few hours every three hours. If I recall correctly which run integration test on our clouds to make sure the clouds are running properly right, that that is also automated. The re class model and the pipelines helpers automate day to operations and changes as well. There are very few seventh now, compared toa a few years ago. It very rare. It's actually the exception and that may be because off mainly some user letter as opposed to a cloud problem. We also have contributed auto healing, Prometheus and Manager, and we integrate parameters and manager with our even driven automation framework. Currently, we're using Stack Storm, but you could use anyone or any event driven automation framework out there so that it indicates really well. So it helps us step away from constantly monitoring our cloud control control planes and clothes. So this has been very fruitful for us and it has actually apps killed our engineers also to use these best in class practices like get off like in France cord. So just to give you a flavor on what stacks our internal teams are running on these clouds, Um, we have a multi data center open stack cloud, and on >>top of that, >>teams use automation tools like terra form to create the environments. They also create their own Cuba these clusters and you'll see you'll see in the next slide also that we have our own community that the service platform that we built on top of open stack to give developers development teams NGO um, easy to create an easy to destroy Cuban. It is environment and sometimes leverage the Murano application catalog to deploy using heats templates to deploy their own stacks. Geo is largely a micro services driven, Um um company. So all of our applications are micro services, multiple micro services talking to each other, and the leverage develops. Two sets, like danceable Prometheus, Stack stone from for Otto Healing and driven, not commission. Big Data's tax are already there Kafka, Patches, Park Cassandra and other other tools as well. We're also now using service meshes. Almost everything now uses service mesh, sometimes use link. Erred sometimes are experimenting. This is Theo. So So this is where we are and we have multiple clients with NGO, so our products and services are available on Android IOS, our own Geo phone, Windows Macs, Web, Mobile Web based off them. So any client you can use our services and there's no lock in. It's always often with geo, so our sources have to be really good to compete in the open Internet. And last but not least, I think I love toe talk to you about our container journey. So a couple of years ago, almost every team started experimenting with containers and communities and they were demand for as a platform team. They were demanding community that the service from us a manage service. Right? So we built for us, it was much more comfortable, much more easier toe build on top of open stack with cloud FBI s as opposed to doing this on bare metal. So we built a fully managed community that a service which was, ah, self service portal, where you could click a button and get a community cluster deployed in your own tenant on Do the >>things that we did are quite interesting. We also handle some geo specific use cases. So we have because it was a >>manage service. We deployed the city notes in our own management tenant, right? We didn't give access to the customer to the city. Notes. We deployed the master control plane notes in the tenant's tenant and our customers tenant, but we didn't give them access to the Masters. We didn't give them the ssh key the workers that the our customers had full access to. And because people in Genova learning and experimenting, we gave them full admin rights to communities customers as well. So that way that really helped on board communities with NGO. And now we have, like 15 different teams running multiple communities clusters on top, off our open stack clouds. We even handle the fact that there are non profiting. I people separate non profiting I peoples and separate production 49 p pools NGO. So you could create these clusters in whatever environment that non prod environment with more open access or a prod environment with more limited access. So we had to handle these geo specific cases as well in this communities as a service. So on the whole, I think open stack because of the isolation it provides. I think it made a lot of sense for us to do communities our service on top off open stack. We even did it on bare metal, but that not many people use the Cuban, indeed a service environmental, because it is just so much easier to work with. Cloud FBI STO provision much of machines and covering these clusters. That's it from me. I think I've said a mouthful, and now I love for you toe. I'd love to have your questions. If you want to reach out to me. My email is mine dot capulet r l dot com. I'm also you can also message me on Twitter at my uncouple. So thank you. And it was a pleasure talking to you, Andre. Let let me hear your questions.

>> from Seattle Washington It's the Q covering AWS Imagine brought to you by Amazon Web service is >> Hey, welcome back there, buddy Geoffrey here with the Cube. We're in downtown Seattle Day Ws Imagine Edie, you event. It's their education event and every education Everything from K through 12. The higher education community College Retraining after service is a really great show. It's a second year. We're happy to be here. We've got somebody has come all the way from Spain to talk about his very special company. It's Ignasi. Nuclear is he is >> the CEO of click dot edu. Yeah, nice. You see? Welcome. >> Thank you are way really pleased to be with you. >> Great. So tell us, kind of what is clicky? Do you What? What is kind of your core value? >> It's ah, platform that makes all the things that the school needs seeing atleast in Spain. So it's a miss system also on elements also the communication with the family that Petra is Ah Wei Tau financial the school and also a lot of things that they are related on >> right? And you've been around for a while. So when did the company started? How was kind of some basic numbers on how many customers do you have? Could you operate in a lot of countries? A lot of schools? >> The as we have schools working with us already in all of Spain, Also in Chile, Colombia, Arneson, UK. On also in a little country in Europe that is called Andorra. So we're really happy because you have more than 1,000,000 off users working with us. >> 1,000,000. Congratulations. And is it mainly do you specialize between, say, K through 12 or higher education? Or we're kind of all over the place? >> Yes, we're focusing K 12 schools. So the one off the important parts are the communication with parents on dhe to follow all the things that the student. That's >> right. So you guys have a very special thing that you're announcing here at the show is really focusing on Alexa for K through 12 which nobody else is doing. That's really something unique that you guys, How did you get in that? What did you see in voice communication and Alexa that you couldn't do in the platform before that? You really saw the opportunity? >> Yes. All the people say is that >> the future or the present Now is the voice on all we will communicate by boys in the future over Internet. You see a lot off young guys doing all the things my boys know, right? Texting, etcetera. So we thought that it could be a nice idea that the communication between parents and also for a students to the school and be on in the other way, could be could be by boys. So we imagine how to do >> it on. We did it. It's really knew. >> When did you start it? When did you start that project? >> This project we began three months ago, >> three months ago. So, >> yeah, it's really, really knew the boy's idea, right? It was in >> a show that I have seen. Ah ah, law. A lot of people were talking about that, but there were, at least in Spain, in the Spanish. Nothing about so with it, we can be the first. So >> we leave. That's >> great. So before we turn the >> cameras on, we're talking about some of the issues that you have in one of the ones is integration to all these systems because, you know, I have kids. I might have multiple kids in a couple different grades. You have kids and a fine looking for access on their homework or their test scores. You know he's got integrate with all those different back ends to keep things private. But you're kind of in a good spot because your system is the one that's on the back end, right? Yeah, so that worked pretty well. And then the other piece, he talked about his two way voice. I don't think a lot of people think in voice communication, yet it's still more of an ask and get a reply asking and get a reply. But you guys are actually pushing notice vacations from the school, out to the families using voice. How's that working out? You know what are some of the use cases? Yeah, >> it's like it's like the parent can ask Toe elixir, for example, What's a home or for tomorrow for one of your son or daughter on DA on The Echo tell you about that. So it's really impressive, because in that moment the system goes to the school system to get that information on our system. Yeah, on Alexa translating voice So it's It's It's funny >> I just think it's funny that I get e mails from all my digital assistants telling me, suggesting things that I should ask them because it's really not native yet as as an interface to work with these machines. But, well, he's mentioned that the young people voices much more natural. So I wonder if there's been some surprises or some things you didn't expect in terms of people comfort level with voice as a way to communicate with me. >> Say, I think it's, ah most natural way also for us that we are not not if but off course. So we communicate better by boys and writing or texting. So, so off course. It's the future because it's another away. So the use off that systems goes up because off that. So I think it's the most the most thing that for for causes more surprising, >> right? And so will you guys supply the Alexa? It's for people's homes. Or is it something they can tap into their existing Alexa Yeah, >> uh, usually, ah, the case for using that is in your home or else on your phone so you can install licks on your phone and you can ask them. I'll see if the UK fun ankle, >> but handle it. But how do I look? How do I hook my existing echo? Yeah, yes, I bought into the school system. >> Yes, because sometimes some universities are They pulled their A coin. I don't know in the university, or but you can use your echo that you are using it for other things. Listen, music me Listen, missing music or whatever >> and you >> can use the >> same. Yeah, you can. You >> only have to, like, download an >> app for >> your phone. There >> is more less is the same us Alexa to >> install, click in the Web or a skill that it's cow. It's called right, and then you >> have it. So what's next? What's on the road? Map on the voice specifically, Where do you see this kind of evolving over the next little while? >> Yes, our our next goal in the parties that they can use the teachers in the school. The boy systems also so for doing what they do every day in ah Maur writing or whatever, we can do it by voice. For example, interview with the parents, a transcript or, for example, to say that somebody hasn't come to the school or toe tell to the Transportacion that something is company. These kind of things is what we are. Imagine it's in our next things that we will do it with voice. >> It'll be Lexa in the classroom, hoping, thinking, Yeah, right. What about privacy? I would imagine knows funny. In the early days of Cloud, security was a was was not good of the show stopper. People were concerned about 10 years later. Now security is a strength of cloud, right? It's probably more secure than most people's data centers or disgruntled employees. I would imagine privacy and security. This is probably pretty top of mind in the school district as well as a lot of personal information. Are they comfortable? Do they kind of get the security of cloud and cloud infrastructure, or is that still sticking point? >> You know that in Europe there are really strict low of our protection off that right, so we are really concerned about that. So we are talking with the school's what kindof systems. They will be comfortable because you want to use it, so we'll have to find >> the clue to do that. But It's really >> important, I think, all over the world, but in the stage or in Europe who are really concerned about that. So we'll see how to find it. But we can create a private skill, right? Yes, because there are birds shown off, Alexa, that is for business. So you can create your provide things on. You don't have to be for that. Somebody's listening. You >> right? All right. So the last last question here at the conference and you come last year? >> No. So what do >> you know? Just your impressions of the conference Has it nice to be with a bunch of like minded, you know, kind of forward thinking educators because because education doesn't always get the best reputation being kind of forward looking. But here you're surrounded. So I just wonder you could share some of your thoughts of the of the event so far. Yeah, >> I think this guy no five ins give you more motivation on you. Increase your you're way t to see that there are a lot of people that is pushing to innovate and do the things different. So really, really interesting to goto some machine learning. Ah, suppose is shown about California. What? They are doing that right? So I'm really interested. >> Good. Get all right. Look Nazi. Thanks for taking a few minutes. And, uh, congratulations on that project. That's really crazy. Thank >> you for your interest in. >> All right, >> Jeff, you're watching the Cube. Where it aws Imagine in downtown Seattle. Thanks for watching. We'll see you next time.

>> Announcer: Live from Orlando, Florida, it's theCUBE covering PentahoWorld 2017. Brought to you by Hitachi Vantara. >> Welcome back to theCUBE's live coverage of PentahoWorld brought to you by Hitachi Vantara. I'm your host Rebecca Knight, along with my cohost Dave Vellante. We are joined by Derek Mathieson, he is the group leader at CERN. Welcome, Derek, glad to have you on the show. >> Well, glad to be here, thank you very much. >> So, CERN, which is of course the European Organization for Nuclear Research. And you know we think of it as this place of physicists and engineers working together to solve these problems. And probe the mysteries of the universe but in fact, CERN is a technology organization. >> Absolutely, I mean, I think that's the- CERN has this reputation of being exclusively physics. I mean, it is the world leading particle physics laboratory. But in fact, in the end, yeah, we're an infrastructure organization who provides all the technology, all the science. And all the scientists and engineers come to CERN to do their work. But CERN itself provides the facilities. So, our main focus, in fact, is technology. Computer science, civil engineering, construction. I mean, we built cathedral size concrete structures 400 and 50 feet underground, 17 mile long tunnels. I mean, this is civil engineering in the grand scale. And that's actually one of the major focuses. Is that CERN, although it's a physics organization, one of the difficulties we have as an organization is to explain to people, in fact, what we're looking for when we're recruiting. When we're contacting other universities. It's all about the fact that we're not looking for physicists, we're looking for engineers and technology specialists to come and work at CERN. >> So talk to us about some of the new, exciting projects that you're working on there. >> Oh, I mean, there's a lot going on. Obviously, the reason I'm here today is all about the work that we're doing with Pentaho. So we're, you know, building a new data warehouse. My group's actually responsible for the administrative computing of CERN. So basically running CERN as a business. I mean this is, there's a budget of around about one billion U.S. dollars. Going into CERN every year, in order to do all this physics research. So obviously we have a responsibility to treat, be faithfully to these tax dollars, carefully and you know spend them wisely. So a lot of my work is to make sure that we have the appropriate infrastructure, controls and proper technology there. To make sure that it's used effectively and wisely. >> So paint a picture of that infrastructure for us, if you would. What's it look like if we took a peak under the tent? Well, I mean, it's what quite nice about it is with the technology infrastructure that we have. So we have a huge computer center. There's a hundred thousand CPU's in our computer center. That's mainly used for doing physics but because we have all this infrastructure there, we can use part of it to also run the administration. Which gives us the ability to run a real world class technology stack to actually run the organization. So we have a huge data warehouse. Which gives a very rapid response to the physicists and engineers who actually want to go on and do their work. My job is to make sure that the administration of CERN doesn't get in their way. So we want to provide them the facilities so they just get on with their job and all the other things to do with actually running the organization are my problem and the team that works for me. And good examples is that CERN literally sits on the border between France and Switzerland. So we have, you know, we care about things like, there's 80 different customs forms that we have to worry about on a daily basis just as we move materials around the site. So we have such an usual organization but it's unique in the world. And that's what attracts people to work there is all these new challenges that we got. It's really a fantastic place. >> And the view is pleasant I bet. >> Oh yeah. (all giggling) >> Okay, so tell us more about the infrastructure. So you talked about this really fast data warehouse. 100,000 CPUs, is it all sort of on prem? Is it a mix sort of on prem and the Cloud? What's the data warehouse, you know, give us a sense of what that infrastructure is. 'Cause people hear data warehouse, they think you know, kind of old, clunky data warehouse. You're talking about this super high performance. >> Exactly, in fact, that's one of the challenges that we face is. We've got scientists who are used to dealing with high volumes of data with high fixation. Our particle detectors produce around 2 petabytes of data per second. So they're used to dealing with large amount of data. So immediately when they started looking at the administration of the organization of the same high expectations. They want it to be fast, they want it to process the data. Large quantities of data, very quickly indeed and give the answers (snaps) in a split second. So to do that we have to obviously put quite a lot of hardware behind it and also use good technical strength as well. We're quite big users of Oracle at CERN. We have a big Oracle database which is for the principle, where we keep most of our data. And then we use Pentaho on top of that in order to do all the deporting, the analytics, the building the Cube, so all this kind of thing. And their user base is very transient. So there's around fifteen thousand people who're actually working at CERN at any one time. Half of the world's particle physicists work at CERN. >> Rebecca: Wow. >> So, they're coming and going all the time. They don't want to worry about how to get the data. So it has to be there, has to be there right away. Has to be easy to use and easy to understand. These people live and work and breathe particle physics. They don't worry about the budget and the details about how to do all this stuff. This is something where the accountants have to get there. Get it in such a way that it's easy for them to do the right thing and make sure that we stay compliance with the various regulations. And make sure that the organization continues to function as a business while still getting on with our primary mission of particle physics research. >> And that infrastructure is primarily on premise, that correct? >> It's on premise, the vast majority of it. In fact, one of the, we have two main data centers. So there's one physically located at Cern in Geneva. And then there's another one over in the (mumbles) institute, in (snaps) >> The other place. >> The other place. (both laughing) >> Okay. >> Yep. >> And that, presume, because you've got such volumes of data. You can't just be moving that stuff around up into the Cloud. >> Right, in fact yeah, we have a lot of high speed data links between the different data centers in order to. We have a copy of quite a lot of the data in fact. The principle physics data is copied, not only at CERN, which is what's called a 2-0 site where we have all the data to start with. But we also copy it to I think it's around about seven different institutes around the world. So they have a first-line copy as well. Altogether we have a network of around a hundred computer centers working for CERN in some way or other. That's part of what we call the LHC computing grids which is (mumbles) a planetary data center in computer infrastructure to do all this processing of the LHC data. >> I'm going to ask you to go back to about the organizational structure. I mean, you described this office situated on the border of France and Switzerland. Where half the world's particle physicists work. What is the culture like? And how do you get- and as you said also the administrations job is to really get out of their way so they can do their thing. What is the culture like there? How do people work together? How do people collaborate? What do you do when there's disagreement? >> I mean this is one of the unique aspects of CERN. Is bringing people together. There's around about 90 different countries represented at CERN. Around about 100 different nationalities, all working on site. It's very much like a university environment. We have a canteen where people will come in. Their always saying that probably most of the physics and most of the science discoveries are happening within the canteen as people meet together from all over the world. We have countries, India, Pakistan, have just joined as associate members. We've got 22 member states. Mainly around Europe but now we have a policy enlargement. So we're actually trying to make the organization even larger. Touching more countries around the world. United States is an observer now within the organization. So they actually participate in the CERN council and they're also major players in some of the large LHC experiments as well. But yeah, on a day to day basis, I'll be sitting in the restaurant and there will be Nobel Prize winners. We have our director general, she will be there as well, having lunch with everyone else. So it's a very much a leveling organization where everyone feels free to speak to each other. And discuss the matters of the day and particle physics. >> So what do you guys talk about? >> (laughs) What's the canteen conversation? >> I think this is the utter geek speak usually. That's the main problem in CERN is that people are passionate about what they do. So they come to CERN, they love what they do, they talk about it all the time. So, I mean, people will be talking about the latest generation of the CPU architecture, GPU programming. How do we do simulations with petabytes of data? This is lunch time conversation. And evening and everything else. >> So you're not talking about the a football game, right? You're talking about this sort of, talking shop mostly right? >> There is a football team, there is a rugby team as well. There's real life as well at CERN but yeah, I mean, most people are there because they're passionate about what they do. >> Obviously you're listening to those conversations you must pick up a lot of it. >> Yeah, I know, I mean, I think it's if you work at Cern and you're at a dinner party, someone laughs, "Oh you work at Cern, tell me all about physics." So you pick up a bit about it of course. Everyone can speak a little bit about what we're doing at Cern and I think that's an imperative because we work there. Of course you hear about what's going on and understand a little bit about it. But I would never claim to be a physicist of course. >> Rebecca: You can fake it though. >> I have lunch with physicists, I'm not one myself. >> How 'about Pentaho? You painted the picture of the infrastructure before. Where does Pentaho fit? And how are they adding value? >> We've been using Pentaho now for the last few years. We started, I mean, what really attracted is actually this combination of open-source plus propriety software. We like the core and the open-source nature of it which it very much fits with the values of CERN as well as being an open lab. And sharing everything that we do. So we started, as I say, with Pentaho a few years ago. Now, it's a core component. It's a core strategic component of the administration and also used in other areas as well. So it's also used in some of the more technical infrastructure areas in terms of: how do we actually run the lab? Parts of the infrastructure in terms of monitoring the different parts of the accelerator complex. And even in terms of, you know, the maintenance of the buildings, all of that. So it's really, you know, core within the organization as a core component for us. >> So, CERN is an organization then as- I'll use the word insistent, if you will, on open-source as a component. So that puts pressure on companies like Pentaho to pay attention to the next project. Maybe contribute, maybe not. But it certainly integrate. Score card, how have they done on that? What would you like to see them do better in that regard? And what kind of open-source projects do you- and you may not be able to answer this. But, might your organizations see in the horizon that you want Pentaho to capture? I mean, obviously 8.0, you've heard about, Spark and bringing in Kafka and the like. But maybe you could comment. >> Absolutely, I think this is one of the eighters who's really attracted us was the open-source nature. And certainly Pentaho's movement in that direction particularly, I think, was the integration with Hitachi as well. They're seeing many other projects now being integrated within to that sort of pentacle world. This is something that was interesting to us. Of course because of our Cloud based infrastructure. The idea of scaling up and scaling out. And they're going with the open-source projects to particular and the patchy projects. Which was really interesting to us as well. Something that we've been working on a bit ourselves. And now to hear that Pentaho was doing that as well. That was great, a good piece of news for me because it was something that we have been struggling with is basically spreading out. We've got fifteen thousand users. We want to have a dynamic infrastructure where we can actually provision more service where necessary in order be able to take load when we need it. But at the same time we don't want to waste the resources when they're off doing something else. >> Over the course of last decade, let's say, has there ever been a tendency for- 'cause you've got so many alpha geeks running around. To say, "Hey, I can take these open-source components and kind of do it myself." >> Derek: Yeah. >> "I don't need the Pentaho load bouncer, I got yarn to negotiate my resources. Look what I built." And so, how do you manage that? >> No, I mean, you're absolutely right. It's a problem here there's always the risk of the naught of engineer syndrome where, "I could do it better." And we have to pressure against that. But, I mean, I think the important of the issue is take the bigger picture. If it's already done well, we don't need to do it again. Build on top of it, make something better on top of something that already exists. And that's the thing, that's the message that we can give to any of the engineers working at CERN. Is, "You can do so much more if you already use the infrastructure that's already solid." And that's part of this, you know, reuse, of course. Open-source software allows us to build on things which are already solid. We don't need to make another one of them. We'll make something on top of it. That's a primary message that we try to give. >> So here we are at Pentaho World and you're with a bunch of other practitioners. Sharing best practices, talking about how you use the product, learning from them too. What are some of the take aways? And how much are you actually talking to them versus talking to the Pentaho product people? >> We did a presentation yesterday. The focus of our presentation was managing Pentaho. So, one of the things that we've been using now for a number of years is you have to have an infrastructure to be able to actually take care of all the different artifacts, all the different reports. We have many, many different user who want to be able to use Pentaho at the same time creating their own artifacts. I mean we have to have some way of managing to actually manage all this landscape. Although Pentaho has got some tools necessary, that was one of the areas that we felt we could add some value in there. So we've been building on top of the existing Pentaho APIs. Building an infrastructure to make it easier to support for other people. And what was quite nice is we were speaking to some of the other attendees. And that's exactly the kind of thing they've been worrying about as well. And there was even some presentations of people doing a similar approach in their own organizations. On how they were actually trying to build some kind of architecture on top of Pentaho just to manage the whole thing. When you have hundred of reports and hundred of artifacts and very complicated data warehouse cubes, you need something on top of that to actually just manage the whole thing. And that's something that we've been focused on. And I see other people are doing the same kind of thing. So I can imagine that Pentaho will be taking note of this and probable incorporating some of the ideas. >> It's sending a loud and clear message to Pentaho, yes absolutely. >> How about the event? You've been to at least two or that I know of. I don't know if you were at the original. >> I've been to three altogether. >> Okay, so you've been to, I think all of them, right? >> I could have been all of them, yeah. >> I think the first one was 14, I think, I'm pretty sure. Things you've taken away? You know, interesting conversations? >> I think it's the main reason we come in. It's a long way for us to come all the way from Geneva to come here. It's really important for us to touch base with other people using the product. It is an open community, people do like to talk to each other about, you know the new things that are happening within the Pentaho community. And I think face to face contact, in the end, is very hard to beat. And we're coming to an event like this you actually get the opportunity to speak to people over lunch. Or in the evening events you can talk to them and actually find out what it's really like to use Pentaho. >> Great, well thank you so much Derek for coming on theCUBE. >> Thank you very much. >> I'm Rebecca Knight for Dave Vellante. We well have more from Pentaho World just after this.

>> Narrator: Live, from Washington DC, it's the CUBE, covering .NEXT Conference. Brought to you by Nutanix. >> Welcome back to Nutanix NEXTConf everybody. #NEXTConf, this is theCUBE, the leader in live tech coverage. We go out to the events, we extract the signal from the noise. My name is Dave Vellante, and I'm here with Stu Miniman. Stephen Hadley is here. He's the former US National Security Advisor, and currently with RHG, who is an advisor to Nutanix. He's an expert on national security and foreign policy, and public policy. Stephen, thanks very much for coming on theCUBE. >> Nice to be here. >> So very important topic. One that you just can't talk about enough. So lets start. We're here at this sort of infrastructure show. We're up-leveling it now to this very important topic of security. There's so many things that are going on. We interviewed Pat Gelsinger on theCUBE five or six years ago and asked him, is security a do-over? He had a one word answer. Yes. So, where are we at? What's the state of cyber today? >> Well, let's talk in a couple respects. You know, one of the things that's been interesting to follow your industry, and I'm not a technical person. But, interesting following your industry, a lot of what was done, social media and all the rest, started to be fun. It was almost a toy. And what has happened, is you now have become, this industry and the services it provide are a international, global, and national resource. And is at the center of how we do business today. And it's been interesting to watch the industry deal with that challenge. It started out, what do you do about child pornography that gets onto the various sites and the like? Then it got to be, what do you do about terrorism? Now it's, what do you do about false news? And it's been interesting to see the industry, and I think very effectively, start to respond to what are the responsibilities they have to their users, in these various troublesome areas. And what are the solutions, technologically and process-wise. And I think the industry is taking the lead, and I would encourage them to do so, because I think the industry needs to define the solutions. If you wait to Washington to define the solutions, we'll get it wrong, as we usually do in Washington. >> Well, so let's come back and talk about that. But, I like to think of three categories of cyber threats. You've got the hackers. Like you said, maybe it's child porn or something else like that. You've got criminals, organized crime. And then you've got state-sponsored. Where do you feel the industry, that you've just sort of said, the industry really has to lead. Where do you think the industry should put its focus? Should they think about the attackers? Should they think more about the defense? Is that a right way to look at it? Those sort of three categories of threats? >> I think those are three categories. They are different kinds of threats. I think the industry is going to have to deal with all of them. I think the principal focus is going to be on defense. There has been a discussion in the literature, should companies have the ability to go on offense? And to respond to cyber attacks, by trying to reach out and hurt the attacker. That's a tricky question. And I guess, as a national security type, my instinct is, the industry needs to lead on defense. The government needs to think about offensive responses. I think particularly since one of the problems you've got in this business is the attribution problem. Someone marches into your country, you know who's doing it. If you get a cyber attack, it's not clear who the enemy is. And who the attack is coming from. And it makes the issue of response very difficult. Secondly, the problem of collateral damage. As we saw, beginning with Stuxnet, and in these latest attacks. You try to hit somebody over here offensively with cyber, and turns out your hitting users in 150 countries. So I think the industry's responsibility is to defend and to try to prevent their systems being used by various nefarious characters. The issue of how to respond to cyber attacks, I think is much more a state function. A law enforcement function, in terms of ordinary criminals and the like. A national security function, in terms of nation states. >> Well Robert Gates in theCUBE last April said that even governments have to be very careful about using cyber as an offensive weapon. You mention Stuxnet, and we saw what happened. But there are no standards with cyber war. With conventional warfare there's the Geneva Convention, there's standards that we can apply. With cyber it's the Wild West. So, what is industry's role in terms of creating those standards of cyber attacks? >> I think industry can inform it. I think it's going to be difficult for industry to take the lead. And I think one of the, my response would be, one of the problems is, cyber attacks, the attackers pay no penalty with cyber attacks. It's hard to find. It's hard to prove. And there's no responses. And, there's a whole question of what is the right response? So for example, some years ago, over eight 10 years ago, Russia pretty clearly took down the Estonian government, which was a real E government. Now NATO is, Estonia is in NATO. NATO, one of the pillars of NATO is an attack on one, is an attack on all. Was that an attack? Huge debate within NATO. Was it an attack, was not an attack? Nobody died. Traditional measure of where you've been attacked. On the other hand, a government was almost paralyzed. What's the right response? Do you have to respond only in cyberspace? Would you think of responding conventionally, through conventional military power to a cyber attack? None of that has been worked out. And, as a consequence, nobody pays any price for cyber attacks. My own view particularly with respect to state-sponsored cyber attacks, is until the country pays a disproportionate attack in cyberspace, for a cyber attack, you won't get them to stop. But as you just talked about rightly, it's very hard to respond in cyberspace, because of the unintended consequences and the cyber collateral damage, if you will. My hope, the way out of this, is, as you've seen in these last attacks over the last week or so, which were targeted, I think the most recent one was targeted on Ukraine, and ended up affecting 150 countries. I would hope that some of these at some point are going to bring the international community to it's senses. And people are going to basically say look, we're all vulnerable. We're all at risk. The United States is more dependent probably than other countries, but China isn't too far behind. And for the United States and China to start leading an international conversation about developing the rules of the road. I think that would be good. I think though there needs to be a panel from industry, that supports that effort. Or my worry is the governments will get it wrong, and will impair the growth of the industry, which is bringing so much benefit to the global community. >> Really interesting point. A couple of years ago, we interviewed the President of ICANN. The organization that >> Stephen: Yeah, I know him. >> oversees the entire internet >> Stephen: Good guy. >> Stu: Fadi, and he was really concerned that companies like China, and Germany were going to say, we're going to have our own internet. We're just going to wall things off. Kind of goes against what you're saying, is we need to work together. We see, dissonance between private corporations, and governments now. How do we get globally working on technology, working together? Rather than fragmenting more. >> And you make a very good point. It's working together on the basis of our principals. Look, our view is that a global internet, free access for everyone is a powerful political statement, and can be empowering of individuals. So it is a small d, democratic institution. And it is an enormous economic power. It would be a tragedy if individual countries start to Balkanize the internet. And start to make them national systems. Because you know the countries that will do it, are countries that are authoritarian, and will convert a device that actually empowers individuals to be a device by which the state controls individuals. Secondly, it will risk cutting them off from the global community. Which will have economic consequences, much less social consequences. So, I think it is important for us to try to take the lead and start that conversation, and to do it while we're still talking about a global internet, and really haven't lost that. So this conversation needs to start sooner rather than later. >> You're the Chairman of the United States Institute of Peace. I have to believe that there is some parallels between the work you're doing there, and what we were just discussing. Trying to get cooperation across communities. >> There is, in this sense. One of the things that USIP has found is, and when I was in government I always used to think about what governments can do to resolve conflicts, end wars and preserve peace. And that's sort of top-down government policy. What US Institute of Peace is doing, is bottom-up. Facilitating groups, civil society, and peace-builders and peace makers, in war-torn communities to begin to resolve the ethnic conflicts, the tribal conflicts, the religious conflicts that are really the kindling, and the fuel for conflict. And through an affiliated organization of the USIP called Peace Tech Lab, technology people are coming together with civil society people and saying, what are the tools you need that we can put on an app, and use on an internet platform that will allow you to do your bottom-up peace building work? And it's very powerful. So for example, election violence. Always a big problem. There are civil society groups using technology that we're able to monitor through social media the first signs of electoral violence, and bombard them with text messages and the like, to try to bring down the temperature. So, what we're seeing at USIP is, there is a bottom-up component of peace building that can be technologically enabled, to allow people to try to maintain peace in their communities. It is the new frontier in some sense, for the work of the US Institute of Peace. >> So, with Stuxnet we saw that malware had the potential to kill people. Maybe in and of itself, that malware didn't kill people, although people died in that whole dynamic, with two nuclear engineers in Iran. My question is, and Stuxnet is 15 year old technology. >> Yeah, I don't think it's Stuxnet was responsible for any of technicians. >> Dave: No, right, so let's clarify that. >> There was a separate. >> And it was associated with that whole initiative, and. >> There was an effort to set back the Iran nuclear program. >> Yes, right, but it wasn't the malware itself. But the malware was demonstrated to do damage, and it could theoretically, and probably in practice, kill people. And it's, as I say, 15 year old technology, and just scratching the surface. So, god knows where we are today. You may know, I don't. But you've sort of put forth this notion that countries, states need to come together, and sort of address this problem. My question is that, I'm inferring that the US has a lead. And as the leader, with the best weapon, what's the motivation for the United States and other countries, who are the "haves", to work with the "have-nots", and actually create these standards? Is it because we have more to lose? I wonder if you could comment. >> I think it's vulnerability. I mean look, we're more dependent on the internet. We're more dependent on cyber systems. Look, to your point, if you bring down and get into the control systems that allow you to shut off the water filtration plants, and bring down the electric grid, a lot of people are going to die. They're going to start in hospitals, and it's going to get worse. So, what is the task? The first task is, and we've known about this problem, of the vulnerability for critical interest structure since the 1990s, that the first studies were written. Government has been slow. Quite frankly, industry has been slow. And it's, I think that train is finally moving. Some sectors are farther ahead. The financial sector is much better and further along at hardening their infrastructure against cyber penetration. But we still are very vulnerable through control systems, in our water system, electric grid, all the rest. And of course, the internet of things, has only multiplied the portals through which people can get into these systems. So there's a huge task of defense. And hardening that needs to go on. And that's a responsibility of industry, and government working together. It can only be done if industry and government work together. That's the process we need within the country. Secondly then, can the US lead in a process to try to develop rules of the road that provide another layer of protection? But it's got to start with hardening our infrastructure here at home. >> I got to ask you about fake news. Fake news in Russia. Is Russia an adversary? Should they be perceived, from a diplomacy standpoint, should we be antagonistic? Or should we try to be more friendly? As it relates to what's been going on with fake news. I wonder if you could tie those together and give us your thoughts. >> Well look, one of the things that's different about Russia today, is what we've seen in the election. This effort through hacking, through disclosing emails, through probing our electoral infrastructure, through a variety of things the Russians are doing. They intervened in our election process, in a bigger way than we've ever seen before, and they're doing the same thing in Europe. That is a new problem. We need to get to the bottom of it, to know what happened. People do it from the standpoint of retaliating against Russia. I think the bigger problem is we need to harden our electoral infrastructure. Our electoral infrastructure turns out to be critical infrastructure that we have to harden, just like our electric grid, and our water supply systems. And you know, fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. If we don't harden our electoral infrastructure so this cannot happen again, next time it happens, it's our fault. >> So kind of a cyber Star Wars. Is it, we don't know if it's technically feasible. That's not your area of expertise, that's industry's problem to figure out. >> Stephen: Yes sir. >> Stephen, you are a fantastic guest. Thanks so much for coming on theCUBE, really appreciate your insights. >> Stephen: Delighted to be here, thanks very much. >> Alright, keep it right there everybody. We'll be back with our next guest, right after this short break. This is theCUBE, we're live from Nutanix .NEXT, NEXTConf Be right back.

>> Announcer: Live from Las Vegas. It's the Cube. Covering Knowledge 16. Brought to you by ServiceNow. Here's your host, Dave Vellante. >> Welcome back to Knowledge 16 everybody. This is Dave Vellante. It's our pleasure to have Dr. Robert Gates here, American statesman, scholar, author, and the 22nd U.S. Secretary of Defense, Dr. Gates thanks very much for coming on the Cube. >> My pleasure. >> So we just came over. We had a nice walk over from the CIO event here at Knowledge, you were speaking on leadership. Your book, A Passion for Leadership, which I can not get on Amazon so I have to carry it around with me. It's nice, it comes in handy when we're on the Cube. First question. Are leaders born or are they made? >> I think that they are not necessarily born, but there are certain aspects of leaders, of leadership that I think cannot be taught. If your empathy with other people, character and honor. Courage. Sincerity. A liking for people. A vision. I think these are things that are very personal, you're not necessarily born with them, they develop during the course of your life. But I also believe that they can't be taught in a university. >> Now we were talking on the way over, I mentioned that there's no co-author on this book, you told me you write all the books yourself, do all the research yourself. And you said one of the things you're proud of, I'll let you explain it, there's been no factual, claims of factual error and you do all your own research, is that right? >> Well it's one of the benefits of the IT revolution is access to a lot of databases and things that even a non-technical person like me can use. >> So how much time does it take you to write a book like Passion for Leadership or...? >> I would say that that book probably took about 18 months. Two years. The previous book, Duty, the memoir of my time as Secretary of Defense under Presidents Bush and Obama took longer, but it's got a lot more factual information and a lot more synthesis of information. And this really was more all out of my head in terms of my experiences over 50 years in public service. >> So you've served eight presidents, six of whom had a great sense of humor. Why is it important for leaders to have a sense of humor? >> Well I think a sense of humor reflects balance. It reflects a perspective on the world that is healthy. And people who don't have, well to be specific, as I often joke, I mean the two presidents that as far as I was concerned had no discernible sense of humor were Richard Nixon and Jimmy Carter and I leave people to draw their own conclusions in terms of the outcome for those presidents. >> Now in thinking about some of the concepts that you put forth in your work on leadership, one of the things that struck me is when you came in as the head of the CIA, that was obviously a tumultuous time, the Soviet Union was splitting apart. You're an expert in that field. You had to have intense focus, and the same thing when President W. Bush asked you to come back as Secretary of Defense. The focus was on Iraq so you had intense focus on the Soviet Union in the first example, and Iraq in the second yet you had so many other tasks that you had to do. Help us understand how you balance that need for focus which many of us in the start-up community have to have with all the other tasks that you have to do, how'd you adjudicate? >> Well I said as I write in the book, you have to, sometimes you're faced with a situation where you need to make immediate changes and take immediate steps to deal with a crisis situation that's in front of you. But sometimes, simultaneously, you have to be making decisions about the long-term future. So for example, when I became CIA director in 1991, we were literally five weeks from the collapse of the Soviet Union. So it was not only how do I provide intelligence support for the president in terms of what's going to happen when the Soviet Union collapses, what happens to 40,000 nuclear weapons, will there be famine, will there be riots, et cetera, et cetera. But also the longer term task was how do I reorient the entire American intelligence community away from this singular focus on the Soviet Union that we'd had for 45 years to deal with a world where there many more and different kinds of challenges. So I was dealing with both a short-term crisis and the longer term issue. When I became Secretary of Defense, we were, for all practical purposes, losing two wars. In Iraq and Afghanistan. So my focus entirely as Secretary of Defense was on how do we turn those wars around. The president had made what I thought was a very courageous decision to surge troops into Iraq, so how do I get them there. The decision is one thing. Getting 30,000 troops there with their equipment and getting them into the fight and providing them the support was quite another. And then we also had the war in Afghanistan, so there was a singular focus there and as I write in the book, it was only when President Obama asked me stay on that I then broadened the aperture dramatically in terms of how do we change the way the Department of Defense gets managed and how we manage big weapon systems. How do we ring overhead out of our costs and take the longer term view of repositioning the defense department. >> So when you think back to 1991, you had to make a lot of predictions, you and your colleagues. About what would happen with the Soviet Union. And while I'm sure there was a lot of data, we talk a lot on the Cube about big data and big data analytics. How has data changed the decision making process in government at that level? Or has it? >> I think when it comes to intelligence, data provides you more information about capability. But big data and technology still cannot help you when it comes to intentions. I always liked to say that in the intelligence world, all the information we want to know can be divided into two categories. Secrets and mysteries. And unfortunately the mysteries are the big things. Will the Soviets invade Czechoslovakia? Will they invade Afghanistan? Is China prepared to go to war over the South China Sea? And there is no data that can help you answer those questions. You can, the data can help you identify the capabilities they can bring to the problem. Or to the issue. But in essence, when it comes to figuring out what other leaders will do, sometimes figuring out what our own leaders will do, there is no data that can help you solve that problem. >> I want to change the subject, ask you about term limits. And specifically my question is, do you think corporations should have term limits on their executives? >> I think these kinds of broad rules are a mistake. I think that there may be certain companies where that has value, but on the other hand, you've got leaders, and I write about 'em in the book, who've been leading institutions, whether it's a university or a company for 20 years. And they are still the most restless, the most innovative, the most entrepreneurial people in the company. Even at 75 or 80 years old. So to have some kind of a general rule that says everybody has to leave, I think is a serious mistake. I first joined corporate boards when I was 50 years old. After I retired as CIA director. I thought age limits on boards then were crazy. And I was the youngest person on virtually every board I was on. But I would see somebody forced to rotate off at 70, who at 70 was making a bigger contribution than a lot of members of the board at 50 or 55. So I think these general rules are a mistake. I think it has to be very company-specific and personality-specific. >> Well in the technology industry obviously you have some big names like Dell still around and the other Gates who did quite a good job and so forth. What about at lower levels within the organization. Still senior but what's your philosophy in terms of mixing things up, putting executives in different roles? Giving them a flavor for whatever, running finance or information technology or logistics, et cetera? >> Well let me frame it a different way. I would tell rising military officers that they were not, as Secretary of Defense in my view, they were not competitive for senior command if artillery was all they'd every done. Or if flying helicopters was all they had done. Or supervising people who flew helicopters. I wanted people who had a breadth of experience, who knew different aspects of the defense establishment. So they had a broader perspective of the various challenges that we faced. So I think for someone who is going to aspire to the most senior positions, having some exposure to the other parts of the organization is valuable. By the same token, it seems to me, it doesn't make any sense to take somebody who is a CFO and who has a particular skill and then put them in charge of the production line or something, I don't know, I've never run a private company but it seems to me you have to be pretty careful about that. Of taking somebody who is in a technical specialty and then trying to get them to do something else. But once you rise to a certain level in an organization, if you want to have the big job, it seems to me you have to have a variety of experiences that give you a broader perspective. >> I feel I want to talk a little bit about cybersecurity, you mentioned in the CIO event that you were just at the threat of cyber, I feel like in our industry it's trivial compared to some of the cyber threats that you've had to deal with. But nonetheless, there seems to be the recognition within the executive community that it's not about just keeping people out anymore, it's about recognizing that you have been hacked, you will continue to be hacked, it's about the response. What should be on board of directors' check list, if you will, with regard to cybersecurity? >> Well I think cyber and the risks associated with cyber and IT need to be a regular part of every board's agenda. I think that there is value in having it an integral part of risk management. And so whether you focus specific attention, in the audit committee for example, and then have briefings for the broader board. Probably is up to each company but, there's no question in my mind that when it comes to risk, for most companies today, cyber is right up there with natural disasters and business continuity and so on and needs to be a responsibility in terms of oversight for a board. >> With regard to the board's use it on, do you feel like there's an honest and frank conversation about cyber and has that changed? >> Well I do, I do, I think it's very different, I mean I think people really take it seriously. >> Yeah sometimes I get concerned that this fail equals fire mentality has led a lot of organizations to sandbag the risks, is that a fair criticism? >> Oh, what do you mean by that? >> By essentially say, I've got it covered. The risk of us getting hacked is low, we have it under control. Verus an open and frank conversation of no, we're getting infiltrated, we have to think about the response versus we can't keep the bad guys out, we can try, but... >> Anytime anybody in an organization tells me he's got everything under control, I am automatically skeptical. >> Okay fair enough. I got to ask you, I know we're tight on time, you've been gracious with your time, but I have to ask you about the current tone of the campaigns. Your reaction to that. It's kind of comedic. There's not a lot of comedy. Comedy in the narrative. What's your take as now an independent observer? >> Well I don't think it's funny at all, I think it's very serious, I worry about the fact that there's no real discussion of specific, of the many challenges that we face expect in the broadest possible terms. Foreign policies being discussed in almost primitive terms. And not very intelligently in my view. So in terms of the challenges that the country faces, which are quite extraordinary, it seems to me, the campaigns at this point, across the board politically, seem to me to be pretty superficial. >> So I want to end with coming back to the Passion for Leadership. You know I have to say the brilliant part of this book, don't hate me for this, but you basically laid out a lot of common sense ideas but the brilliance of the book was the way in which you weaved it together and gave examples. If I may, it was listen, respect, reward people, delegate, empower, have fun. Care from your heart. Check your ego at the door. Hire smart people, honesty, integrity. These are very common sense things, but you brought them all together in a way that had meaning, I felt like some of the classics, Dale Carnegie's How to Win Friends and Influence People, I feel like there's a lot of timeless things in here. Was that your objective or did you just write from your heart? >> Well both. It seems to me that as I looked back and realized that I had let these three very large institutions, the American intelligence community, the fifth largest university in the country, and the Department of Defense, that I actually had been able to change a lot. And in environments where people said that was impossible. And so it seemed to me worth sharing here's how I got it done. It can be done, I guess one of the most important messages I wanted to convey was that institutions can be reformed. They can be transformed. And made more efficient and more cost-effective and more user-friendly. And better serve both customers and citizens. At a time when most people just throw up their hands and say this is all impossible. The theme of the book is it's not impossible, it can be done, it has been done, it can be done in the future. >> Dr. Gates, thanks so much for coming on the Cube, taking your time and really appreciate you at this event and really welcome the feedback. >> Thank you very much. Really appreciate it. >> Alright, keep it right there everybody, we'll be back with our wrap right after this. Thanks for watching. >> Service management is helping GE connect...