>> Let me check. (uptempo orchestral music) (uptempo techno music) >> Live, from San Francisco, it's theCUBE! Covering Red Hat Summit 2018. Brought to you by Red Hat. >> Hey welcome back everyone, we are live here with theCUBE in San Francisco, Moscone West, for Red Hat Summit 2018. I'm John Furrier, co-host of theCUBE, with John Troyer co-host, analyst this week. the TechReckoning co-founder. Our next two guests are Ashesh Badani, vice president and general manager of OpenShift Platform and Alex Polvi, CEO of CoreOS, interview of the week because CoreOS now part of Red Hat. Congratulations, good to see you again. Thanks for coming on theCUBE. >> You're welcome. >> So obviously this is for us, we've been covering both of you guys pretty heavily and we've been commenting very positively around the acquisition of CoreOS. Two great companies that know open-source, pure open-source. You guys got the business model nailed down, these guys got great tech. You bring it together. So the first question is how's everyone doing? How's everyone feeling? And where's the overlap, if any and where's the fix? Explain the true fit of CoreOS. >> I'm going to start Alex, you want to jump in after. We're very excited right, so when we first had interactions with CoreOS, we knew this is going to be a great fit. The conversation we had earlier, both companies delivers in open-source, delivers in the mission center to take us forward regard to Kubernetes, as the container orchestration engine, and then being able to build out value for our customers around it. I think from our perspective, the work that both CoreOS did in advancing the community forward but also the work they've done around automation or their upgrades, management metering, charge back and so on. Being able to bring all those qualities into Red Hat is incredible. So I think the fits been good. It's been three months, I'll let Alex comment some more on that but we've been doing a lot of work from integration perspective around engineering, around product management. At Red Hat Summit this week, we reveal details around some of the converged road maps, which I can talk about some more as well. So we're feeling pretty good about it. >> Alex, your reaction. >> Yes, it's been three months. If you've studied CoreOS at all, you know everything that we do really centers around this concept of automated operations. And so by being part of Red Hat, we're starting to bring that to market in a much bigger and faster way of really accelerating it. The way the acquisition are really successful is either mutually beneficial to both companies and they accelerate the adoption of technology and that's definitely happening. We had the announcement yesterday with Red Hat CoreOS around the Linux distribution. Last week, we did the operator framework. It was very central to the work that we've been doing as part of CoreOS, and then as companies in a lot of ways is being part of Red Hat for three months now. This is what our company would have looked like if we ever just another 10 years along or whatever very similar, we're like a mini Red Hat, and now we're leaped ahead in a big way. >> And you guys done a good work. We've documented on theCUBE many times, and we were in Copenhagen last week. Now covering the operating framework but I want to get your reaction. You guys did a lot of great work on the tech side obviously, you can go into more detail but we've always been saying on theCUBE. If you try to force monetization in these emerging markets, you're optimizing behavior. And this was something that's gone on, we've seen containers. It's been well documented obviously what's happened. It's certainly a beautiful thing. Got Kubernetes now on top working together with that. If as an entrepreneur out there that are building companies. If you try to force the monetization too early, you really thinking differently. You guys stay true to it. Now we've got a good home with Red Hat. Talk about that dynamic because that was something that I know you guys faced at CoreOS and you've managed through it. Tempted probably many times to do something. Talk about the mission that you had, staying true to that and just that dynamic. It's challenging. >> Yeah, as we set out to build a company in general, there are really three operating principles. There is build a great technology to solve our mission which is to secure the internet through automated operations, build a great place to spend their days which is really about the people and the culture and so on. Why are we doing this, and the third was to make it sustainable and by that I mean to build their own money fountains, building out of the middle of our campus. And so by joining Red Hat it's we have a money fountain sitting there. (laughing) It's spewing off a ton of cash flow every single quarter that allows us to continue to do those first two things in perpetuity, and that third one is something every company needs in order to continue to execute towards the mission. And the thing that's so awesome about working with Red Hat is we're very much aligned and compatible. Red Hat's mission isn't exactly the same thing we are working but it's definitely compatible. It's like Apache and GPL are compatible. It's like that type of compatible. >> You both believe in open-source in a big way. Talk about the Red Hat perspectives. Now you got like a kid in a candy store. Openshift made a big bed with Kubernetes. You see now, you have the CoreOS, how has it changed in Red Hat internally? Things moving around actually accelerates the game a bit for you guys, and you're seeing new life being pumped into OpenStack. You're seeing clear line of sight with Kubernetes on the app side. We were just at KubeCon. A lot of people are pretty excited. There's clear lines of sight on what's defacto. What people are going to build around, and also differentiate. >> Right, so I'll start off by saying I really hope our CEO, Jim Whitehurst doesn't see this interview but if it goes off in terms of money factor. I'm currently make budget request. I think I know what's going on. >> Balance sheet, cashless now. It's in the public filings. If I see a fountain of money spewing off the thing, >> The ability to reinvest. >> This is a really good fit. (laughing) The way to say this, they have a great business model. >> Yeah, yeah. >> Some of us will make money, some of us will spend the money. Some of us will spend the money, it will work out well. (laughing) >> It's a great win. It's a great win. It obviously accelerates the plans. The commercialization is already there with Red Hat. This is just a good thing for everybody but the impact of you guys accelerating, just seeing OpenShift. You can boil it down to the impact of Red Hat. What is the impact? >> So in all seriousness, I think the focus for us really has been about there is so much complimentary work that's been going on with the CoreOS team that we're bringing into OpenShift, and to Red Hat in general that accelerates everything that you're seeing. You saw some amazing announcements happen this week with regard to our partnership with Microsoft and getting OpenShift out and Azure, and joint support offering. The work we're doing with IBM to get IBM middleware as well as IBM Cloud Private support integrated with OpenShift. The work that Alex referred to around automation, being able to bring that to our customers. We see all the excitement around that front as well so we want to take all Techtonic work that has been going on at CoreOS, then move that to OpenShift. Carry forward the community that CoreOS built around Container Linux, and actually inject a lot those ideas into that Linux, our flagship technology. Bring that passion and energy to bear as well, and then carry forward a lot of the other projects that they have. For example, the Quake Container Registry, that's extremely popular. Carry that forward, support our customers to use that both stand alone integrated with the OpenShift platform. Other projects like FCB that Alex has been talking about which is the underpinnings of Kubernetes plus running worldwide. So all of those things, we can bring forward, and then all the advancements that were made in place by CoreOS as they're working towards their money fountain, just plug that right into it. >> And just as a point of reference, Brendan Burns flew in yesterday. Microsoft Build is going up so he left their own conference to come down here. >> As did Scar Guthrie, right? >> That's a great testament. This is the testament. They're coming down, really laying down support. This is a real big deal. This is not a fake deal, it's real. >> And so I want to talk a little bit about specifics of the timeline, the road maps. Sometimes with these mergers or acquisitions, it's well the technology will be incorporated at some point, and then it goes away to die and you never see it again. And then the people all leave, and then you ask what was going on. But here, you actually have, I was great. You were talking to me. You have some specific timelines and we'll start to see some of the Techtonics Stack in OpenShift fairly soon. >> Yes, absolutely so the acquisition was announced three months ago and we said at that time that by Red Hat Summit, we'll lay out for you a road map and so we're now starting to do that. We put out release of some materials around some details with regard to how that's coming out. We have detailed sessions going on at Red Hat Summit around the integration plans between Red Hat, OpenShift and CoreOS with a few specific areas with regard to OpenShift. You'll start seeing the earliest versions if you will of the work that's being done. This summer, we'll deliver the full road map to you there by the end of this calendar year. With regard to, for example pieces like the Quake Container Registry that's being made available and being sold now as we speak. Customers can go get that, and we want to make sure no customer is left behind. Right, that's a principle we put out. And with regard to supporting any existing customers on Techtonic or the Container Linux space, we're doing that as we're working to integrate them into the Red Hat portfolio. Can you talk a little bit about the decision for Red Hat's atomic coast and Container Linux? Now re-named again, CoreOS. That was one of the seminal inventions that you all made as you started the company. I think it had some brilliant ideas again about security and the operational aspects but can you talk about some of those technologies and the decisions made there? >> Yeah, like I said, the acquisition of CoreOS Red Hat was about saying look what can we take that CoreOS has been doing to accelerate both work and community but also what could be doing to deliver this technology to customers. So the goal was we'll take all the atomic and the word that's been going on there have that be superseded by the work that's coming out of CoreOS Container Linux carry the community forward. Release a version of that called Red Hat CoreOS and in its initial form make that actually an underlying environment to run OpenShift in. Okay so for customers who want the automation that Alex talked about earlier. They made that available both at the underlying platform. Make it available in OpenShift platform itself via the work that's come from Techtonic, and then ultimately, Alex will talk about this some more through operators. So trusted operations from ISP or third party software that would run on the platform. All right so now if you will, we'll have full stack automation all the way through. OpenShift also support Red Hat Linux, a traditional environment for the thousands of customers that we have globally. Over a period of time, you should expect to see much of the work that's going on Red Hat CoreOS find its way into it as well. So I think this just benefits all around for us both in the near term as well as long. >> And Red Hat Container certification, where does that fit into all this? >> Yeah, a great question, so what we announced maybe was, actually was two years ago was a Container certification program. Last year, we spent some time talking about the health of those containers, and being able to provide that to customers. And this year, we're talking about trusted operations around those containers. That carries forward, we've got hundreds of ISPs that have built certified containers around it, and now with the operator framework, we've had, I think it's four ISPs demonstrating previews of their operators working with our platform as well as 60 more that are committed to building ISP operators that will be certified again. >> So people are certified in general, pretty much. I think we're very excited. The fact that we went to KubeCon last week, announced that the operating framework have been based on the ideas that the CoreOS team has been working on for at least two years. Making that available to the community and then saying for the ISPs that want a path to market. Going back to the money fountain again for the ISP that want to pass through market which is pretty much all of them. We also have the ability to do that so give them an opportunity to make sure that as wide as possible some adoption of the software at the same time help with commercialization. >> Can you guys share your definition of operator because I saw the announcement but we we're on a broader definition when we see the DevOps movement going the next level. It's all about automation and security, you mentioned that admin roles are being automated in a way to see more of an operator function within enterprise and emerging service providers. So the role operator now takes on two meanings. It's a software developer. It also is a network operator, it's also a service, so what is that, how do you guys view that role because if this continues, you're going to have automation. More administrator is going to be self healing, all this stuff is going to go on. Potentially operations is now the developers and IT all blurring together. How do you guys define the word operator in the future state? >> Well I know the scenario of great interest to you. >> So operator is the term for the piece of software that implements the automated operations. And so automated operations, what is that? Well that's what sets apart, the way I think about it is what sets apart a cloud provider verses a hosting provider. It's a set of software that really runs the thing for you and so if we're going to get into specific Kubernetes lingo, it would be an application specific controller. That's a piece of software that's implements the automated operations. And automated operation is a software that gives you that simplicity of cloud. It's at the core of a database as a service. It's both hosting but also automated operations. Those two things together make up a cloud service and that software piece is what we're decoupling from the hosting providers for the first time and allowing any open-source project or ISP brings the simplicity of cloud but in any environment. And that's what the operator is a piece of software that actually goes and implements that. >> So a microservices framework, this fits in pretty nicely. How do you see obviously? >> Microservices, there's all these terms. Microservice is more of an architecture than anything but it's saying look, there's these basic things that every operations team has to go and do. You have to go and install something, you have to upgrade it, you have to back it up, when it crashes in the middle of the night, get it going again. A lot of these things, the best practices for how you do them are all common. There's no ingenuity in it. And for those things, we can now because of Kubernetes write software that just automates it, and this was not possible five years ago. You couldn't write those software. There were things like configuration management systems and stuff like that that would allow companies to build their own custom versions of this. But to build a generic piece of software that knows how to run application like Prometheus or a database or so on. It wasn't possible to write that and that's what the first four or five years of CoreOS was is making it possible, that's why you saw all these mat and new open-source projects being built. But once it was possible it was like let's start leveraging that. You saw the first operator come out about a year ago, and I think it was our ATD operator was the first one, and we started talking about this as a concept. And now we're releasing operator framework which is from all the learnings of building the first couple. We now made a generic, so anybody can go and do it, and as part of Red Hat, we're now bringing it to the whole ISP ecosystem. So the whole plan to make automated operations ubiquitous is still well underway. >> I'd love to extend that conversation though to the operator, the person. >> Right. I think you and your team brought the perspective of the operational excellence right to the table. A lot of cloud has been driven by the role of developer and DevOps but I've always felt like well wait a minute operators the people who use to be known as IT insisted they had a lot to bring to the table too about security and about keeping things running, and about compliance and about all that good stuff. So can you talk a little bit as you see the community emerging, and as you see all these folks here. How do you talk to people who want to understand what their role is going to be with all this automation in keeping the clouds running? >> Computers use to be people too. (laughing) But we're not going to completely automate away everything because there's still parts of this wildly complex system that justifies whole conferences of thousands of people that require a whole lot of human ingenuity. What we're doing is saying let's not like do the part that is the fire drill in the middle of the might that keeps you from making forward progress. The typical role of an operations person today is just fighting fires of mundane things that don't actually add a lot of value to the business. In fact, this guy is difficult because you only get brought up when things are on fire. You never get an praise when things are going well. And so what we want to do is help the operations folks put out those fires like the security updates. Let's just roll those out automatically. The way you do those across all organizations does not need to be special and unique but they're really critical to do right. >> Well it's just automate that stuff away and let the operations team focus on moving the business forward. The parts that require the human spirit to actually go and do, and if we get to a point where a CEO of a company is like, wow, I can not come up with a new vision for this imitative 'cause my operations team are just so fast at influencing them. Then we have to start worrying about operations people's job but I don't see that happening for a very long time. >> And no one is going to be sitting around twiddling their thumbs either. >> Let me just extend that point a little bit. The whole point of operators is to encapsulate human knowledge that ISPs have and bring that in the platform and automate it. So the challenge that we've had is an operations person is required to know a lot about a lot. So the question then really is how can we at least take some of what's already known by people and be able to replicate that and that allows for every one to move forward. I think that's just forward-- >> Well, there's a bigger picture beyond that, so I agree but there is also scale. With cloud, you have scale issues. So with scale automation is a beautiful thing 'cause the fire has also grown exponentially too so you can't be operating like this. Scale matters, super. >> The reason that this stuff was invented at Google initially was not because of Google's high career per second. Is that they were, to build the application they're building required so many servers that you couldn't hire enough operations people without writing software to automate it. So they were forced to custom design the system because they had so many servers to run to build the software that they wanted to build. And other companies are just now getting to that point because every company is going through a digital transformation. They have to have thousands of servers just to run their applications. There's no way you're just going to hire the operations staff to go and do it all by hand. You have to write software to turn the operations people into mech warriors of running servers. You need to wrap them in automation in order to scale that. >> At KubeCon, she made a comment that all those operations folks at Google are software developers. >> Brand engineers. >> Brand engineering, so they're not Ops guys just pushing buttons and provisioning gear and what not. They're actually writing code. You bring up the Google piece, the other piece that we heard at KubeCon. We hear this consistently that this is now a new way to do software development. So when a former Googler went to work for another company, left Google. She went in and she said, "Oh my God, you guys don't do. "You don't use board?" To her, she's like how do you write software? So she was like young and went out in the real world and was like wait a minute, you don't do this? So this is a new model in software development at scale with these new capabilities. >> I think so and I think what's really important is the work we're doing with regards to an ecosystem perspective to help folks. So one of the top things I hear from customers all the time is this sounds fantastic. Everyone's talking about DevOps or microservices or wanting to run Kubernetes at scale. Do I have the skills? Can I keep up with the change that's in place and how do I continue going forward around that? So we announced at Red Hat Summit Managed offerings from let's say Atos and DXC where you've got goals to integrate us helping folks, or companies like Extension T systems. The CEO came and spoke today about the work we're doing with them to help connected cars, and those applications be rolled out quick and fast. I think it's going to take a village to get us to where we want to because the rate of change is so fast around all of these areas and it's not slowing down that we'll have to ensure there's more automation and then there's more enablement that's going on for our customers. >> So some clarity, can you guys comment on your reaction to obviously we've seen OpenStack has done over the years and now with well Containers, now Kubernetes. You seeing at least two ecosystems clearly identified. Application developers, cloud native and then I would call under the hood infrastructure, you got OpenStack. Almost it clarifies where people can actually focus on real problems that the Kubernetes needs. So how has the Container, maturation of Containers with Kubernetes clarified the role of the community? If this continues with automation, you can almost argue that the clarity happens everywhere. Can you comment on how you see that happening? Is it happening or is it just observation that's misguided? >> I think we're getting better with regard to fit for a purpose or fit for use case. All right, so if you start thinking about the earliest days of OpenStack. OpenStack is going to be AWS in a box, and then you realize well that's not a practical way of thinking about what a community can do a build at scale. And so when you start thinking about a Word appropriate use case for this. Now you start betting if you will, a set of scales, you set expectations around how to make that successful. I think we'll go through the same if we haven't already or even going through it with regard to Kubernetes. So not every company in the world can run Managed World call. DYI Kubernetes, don't many companies will start with that. And so the question is how do we get to the point where there's balance around it and then be able to take advantage of the work? For example, companies like Red Hat work for us was doing to help accelerate that path 'cause to the point Alex was trying to make is the value for them being able to keep up with the core release of Kubernetes? And every time a bug shows up to go off and be able to fix and patch it, and watch that or is the value building the next set of applications set on top of platforms. >> That's great, well congratulations guys. Thanks for coming on theCUBE. Appreciate the insight. Congratulations on the three months into Red Hat. Good fit, and enjoy the rest of the show. Thanks for coming on, I appreciate it. >> Thanks. >> Live from Red Hat Summit, it's theCUBE's coverage here of Red Hat and all the innovation going on out in the open. We're here in the middle of, we open the floor with Moscone West with live coverage. Stay with us for more after this short break. (uptempo techno music)

>> Announcer: It's The Cube covering OpenStack Summit 2017 brought to you by the OpenStack Foundation, Red Hat, an additional ecosystem of support. >> Welcome back, I'm Stu Miniman joined by my cohost John Troyer. Happy to welcome back to the program the two Keynote emcees for the first two days, Jonathan Bryce who's the executive director and Mark Collier who's the COO of OpenStack Foundation. Both of you, thanks so much for joining us. >> Jonathan: Yeah, thanks for having us back. >> It's great to be on The Cube. >> Thank you for the foundation. Without your guys' support, we couldn't do this. It's our fifth year doing the show. I remember the first year, John Furrier went. They were like, "Hey, OpenStack has arrived. "The Cube's there!" And now, it's part of our regular rotation. I know our community loves it. Community, opensource, big part of the show. I wish we had two hours to tease out all the pieces, but Mark, I got to start with you. You just did a live Q&A with Edward Snowden. Somebody joked, they said the quality and the sound was too good. He was sitting in the backroom somewhere. Can you just tell us, how did this come about and how do you make that work? >> Yeah. I mean, pinch me. Is this real life? I keep asking myself 'cause it seems kind of surreal. Just briefly, I got a lot of people that ask, "How did we get connected with him?" It's kind of a funny story, but basically, several years ago when the whole story came out about somebody from the government, from NSA had leaked these documents, but nobody knew who it was. I was on vacation, it was in the summer. I forget what year, I was on vacation with family. We were in the lobby of this hotel where we were on vacation and I've been following the story with some interest. All of a sudden, I see on the TV screen in the lobby of the hotel, "Breaking news, we're about to reveal "the name of the leaker." I look up and I'm watching it and it says, "Here it is. It's Edward Snowden." The first thing I did is I pull up my phone. I immediately look and see if edwardsnowden.com was available, so I registered it thinking, "Well, this might come in handy." Some person just became the most famous person in the world, possibly. It was available, so I'm like, I'm furiously typing on my phone trying to register the domain. I register the domain edwardsnowden.com. No idea what I would actually do with it, just thinking, "If it's there, "this name is about to become really famous," so I registered it. Didn't do much with it, I just put some Twitter feeds on there, just thought, "We'll see what comes of this." A little while later as things developed, he ended up in Russia. I was contacted by some of his team that said, "We're putting together a legal defense fund. "It'd be great if we could host it at edwardsnowden.com. "Could we buy the domain from you?" I was like, "You can have it, I'll donate it. "I just grabbed it 'cause I figured "this might come in handy someday, "just was an impulse." They said, "Great, thank you. "Edward thanks you, we're going to really use "this domain for his legal defense fund webpage," and all that stuff. Overtime, I occasionally would ping them and say, "Look, the domain's free. You've got it. "I want you to have it, it's not my name. "I don't have any need, I don't have any right to this. "You guys use it, but it would be great "if he could come on the Summit thing that we do." This was three or four years ago. They were like, "Oh yeah, he would love to do it "to thank you for donating the domain," but each time we talked, it was always like, the schedule didn't lineup. I've been literally asking him for six or seven Summits. This was the first time the schedules lined up. I didn't tell anybody 'cause I thought, this is never going to happen, this is a pipe dream. I don't want to promise anything. It was only just a few weeks ago that we found out the schedule's lined up, it's on. Got connected from there. He's obviously an opensource-person, has a lot of passion behind that. We thought this is pretty interesting for our audience, so it worked out. >> All right, so Jonathan. Let's reset for a second here (Jonathan laughs) and step back. One of the things we'd love to see is the foundation is self-aware. There's always that balance when you get into, you don't want to read the press or things like that because they don't understand what we're doing or where we're going or things like that. In your opening Keynote and throughout the show, we called it, it's a little bit of a reset. If you think about where people thought OpenStack was and where it was going three years ago, it was like, the Amazon this or the cheaper VMware or how that is, where it is, where it's going, who's leading, who's involved, winning-and-losing type stuff, you guys did a good job of laying that out, so congrats on that. Take us in a little bit, and what message did you guys want to get out this week? >> Yeah, I think that you're right, we are very self-aware. I think that some of that comes from our role. At the foundation, we are not selling a product. We don't have anything to sell off the back of a truck, so to speak. What we actually really care about is moving the state of the community and the technology we produce forward. The thing that's great about that is we can look at the portfolio of technologies that we have. We can look at the things that are in the market and if we see a shift there, it's not like we have a $500 million dollar line of business that, "Uh-oh, we need to keep milking this cash cow "and turn a blind eye to these changes over here." I think over the last couple of years, I talked about a shift in what private clouds can do now and how they're built and operated. We seen that and we've sort of been teasing that out a little bit at previous Summits whether it's demos with Kubernetes or different integrations with Cloud Foundry and other things like that. What we decided this time is coming out of last year, there was a lot of news. What we saw really picking up is there would be these rumors or misperceptions that somebody would put out there, you know? Not based on fact, not based on reality. We were like, "You know what? "We can't just try to subtly hint at what's going on. "Let's just go out there and actually address "the state of things," and I think what you mentioned is actually what's at the root of a lot of these misconceptions as people look at opensource now. Because so much technology gets developed that way, they look at it and they expect it to be like the old world of IT where you need to have Microsoft versus Linux, and you need to have Oracle versus MySQL. Actually, what we see is just the cloud overall is growing so quickly. Public cloud, everybody believes that's growing. What we see is, private clouds are growing. We see that servers, there are more servers this year than there were last year. There are more virtual machines this year than there were last year. Far more containers this year than last year. All of these technologies are growing, so it's not a zero-sum game where in order for OpenStack to succeed, AWS has to lose. I think that we feel that way and we see that, but we realize that this is... We need to just go at it directly. >> Mark, I've heard good feedback from people when, you know, core, where it is, how it's matured. People like the component piece. They'd be able to take some digital pieces which, my understanding, they could do that before, it's becoming highlighted a bit. We talked about some of the opensource days and Cloud Foundry, Kubernetes. The piece where we've heard some people poking holes in is what big tent we discussed last year. Big tent, we poked a hole, is it dead? How do we reposition that? >> Yeah, that's a great question. I think first of all, one of the things that this just this strange stroke of luck that maybe turned out to be bad luck was, one of the few times when a handful of developers went off and organized something, gave it a random name and the name really stuck. It actually was almost too good of a name. You heard Big Tent and everyone's just rolling off the tongue all the time, "Big Tent, Big Tent, Big Tent," so everyone had to have an opinion about it and was like, "This is a huge change." It really wasn't meant to be a huge change. It wasn't even meant to be broadcast that widely to everyone who's just observing OpenStack. That's just kind of what happens, people talk about it. I do think that we are entering a point now when we're thinking about composable, open infrastructure, yes, you need to have different components. You need to be able to pick them, but we're also getting more serious about what things need to exist in OpenStack. I talked about that a little bit this morning. Not every single thing that we've launched needs to continue to be an OpenStack project. Whether you call it the Big Tent or not, or if you give it different names, the reality is we need to adopt and integrate technologies from other communities. Any opensource community out there is potentially developing something really powerful. >> Jonathan: Did you mention the FCB thing this morning in your, I can't remember if-- >> Yeah I mentioned it briefly. A perfect example of this is a lot of OpenStack services have said, "You know, we need to distributed lock management function "in order to evolve as a service. "Where should we go build it? "How're we going to write it?" Then, this culture of, "Well, hold on. "There are a lot of them out there, they're proven. "What about Etcd?" So the forum, which is the first time we've really had a dedicated space at the Summit for both developers and operators to be in the same room, not just next door to each other. They had a discussion yesterday on this and they said, "Yes, we're going to go forward with Etcd." That's an opensource project, very proven, it solves this particular function, it's not developed inside of OpenStack, but who cares? It's opensource. We can work, we can be friends with anybody who builds great opensource software. Let's not reinvent the wheels. I think that does represent a bit of a shift in the philosophy and culture at OpenStack of not trying to just build every single thing from scratch 'cause that's not the best thing for our users or the market. >> I think the ecosystem message and the landscape message came through really clearly. This is my first OpenStack Summit. I was very curious about what is the shape of OpenStack? Where does it fit in? Talking about the upper layers and Kubernetes and the app layers, and now talking about the overall landscape, right. Why rewrite that something like Etcd write. The whole ecosystem has grown up around OpenStack. During the 70's, the whole foundation has been working on it, all the members. One thing that impressed me, we are post-hype cycle. There are real customers here. There are people building their first clouds right now on OpenStack. Could you talk a little bit about just the community in general, the composition of it and the actual real use cases that we're seeing that happen. >> We had some new companies that spoke here for the first time, GE was one. The U.S. Army Cyber School is another one. We had some companies that came back as well. I think that you hit on a key point which is the maturity of the software. A company like GE, especially in their healthcare division, this is a highly regulated company. It's probably the most regulated company out there when you consider the things they do with aviation, nuclear power, healthcare, finance and all these things. They don't take those decisions lightly at all. I think that is an indicator of that maturity. What we see in the makeup of the community is a broader set of industries than ever before. We had strong representation among IT companies early on and continued with that, but now we have industrial companies. We have manufacturing companies like Volkswagen, BMW, you know, a number of car manufacturers, and defense companies. I think that kind of plays into that. I think the other thing that we've seen... When we talk about the OpenStack community and the platform overall, we think of it as an ecosystem that has three main parts. There's the users, which, that's why we exist. We create software for it to be used. There are the developers who are doing that, and then there's the ecosystem of companies who create commercial products and services. I think that's actually just as important. Right now, at the phase that we're at is how that is also reaching maturity. In the earlier days of OpenStack, I think that we had a lot of startups and we had a lot of activity, but the market didn't know how to consume it. It didn't understand what it was. I think that actually scared off some companies and it made a little bit of it more confusing, but as you get a few years into that, some of those companies succeed. Some of them don't succeed, but what you arrive at is a clear understanding of what the market wants, how the products should shape up. You get companies that stop trying to build it all themselves, kind of along with the not-invented-here, and they partner with people who know how to do opensource or they come up with new delivery models. I think that, actually, just as important is the maturing that we've seen in the commercial ecosystem because that leads to sustainable business models for these companies like Red Hat and Rackspace and others that then drive the development, but it also leads to clear adoption choices for users. >> One of the things that I think came out of last year at the Austin Summit was just where OpenStack fits in in this hybrid world. I think about GE, Rackspace, Red Hat, all of those companies clearly span both sides of it. Back to that winning-and-losing discussion we had at the beginning, it was always public cloud versus the private and the infrastructure piece. We know it's a multi-cloud, hybrid cloud world. How do you see that fitting in the conversations? The other piece on that, I see a large number, it was a 74% of deployment according to your latest survey, are not U.S. which is the inverse of we see such. North America's where we have a lot of public cloud adoption so does that fit in? What dynamics may be mixed up with you, Mark? >> A couple things, I would say that what we're finding is a few years ago, it was like, are we going to do cloud? Okay, now it's yes. Then it was, which app it's going to be? It's going to be as many as we can get. Then it was, are we going to do public or private? Well, we picked one. Now it's, okay, yes to everything. It's going to be cloud, we're going to put as many apps as we can. We're going to do public and private, so what happens next? Now, it's a question of where. Where do you place each workload? Some of them belong in the public cloud, some of them don't. Economics plays a big factor, performance, compliance, all the things that he said. The three C's, capabilities. I think that's the next discussion point that's happening inside of these boardrooms with CTOs and IT leaders at the major companies. How do we get a sophisticated strategy for where to place the workload? In terms of the geographic dynamic, I think one of the things Jonathan hit on yesterday is that it's just the nature of opensource that you never know where it's going to go. You just have no clue. Really, any new technology development, the market's going to go somewhere you could've never predicted like, the crystal ball is dead. It's really roadmaps or almost obsolete. It's like, you need to create a structure for how you respond and adopt to change 'cause you know it's coming. What's happened with OpenStack 'cause it's been used in all these new and different ways, and part of that's geographic. It's used to power cell phone networks in all these different countries. It's being used to fit within regulatory requirements in certain countries in data locality, both for performance and other reasons. I think that's why you see it, it's a big world out there. More than 74% of the world doesn't live in the United States, so I think we're closer to the real percentage out there. >> I want to jump in with one thing that you said that I might disagree with slightly. >> Mark: Okay, let's have a debate. On the right... >> Well, you said that these are the conversations that CTOs and CIOs are having is the strategy about how to do it. I think it's a conversation they should be having... >> Mark: Okay, fair point. >> But I think that what we see is, we see a lot of companies-- >> After they hear this, maybe they'll start talking about the right thing. >> I think that we see that, but we're kind of on the front edge of cloud adoption >> That's a good point. >> in the OpenStack community. >> Mark: I concede your point, sir. >> And I think that one of the issues that we see still is that people are thinking about it too simplistically, almost. As Larry Ellison famously said, "The IT industry is the most "fashion-driven industry out there." I think that right now, there are a lot of companies that they still think that there's some shiny object that's going to fix it all for them. Right now, it might be public cloud or containers. They've heard this word and they think that's... Never happened. Never happened in the history of IT ever before. There has never been at technology that came along and fixed the stuff before it. They all get edited. So, yes. We were talking with a CEO just this week, and it was real interesting to hear his perspective because he said that he actually thinks that the pendulum is going to shift back towards private cloud for people who run any significant amount of software. He goes, "I know that is not a popular viewpoint right now, "and if I said that to most other "technology C-level execs, "they would probably disagree with me and go, "No, cloud first, containers," but I think that just the fundamentals behind it, over the next few years, I don't know if it will shift all the way back. It may, who knows? But that's definitely something that I think is going to change from where the current fab might be. >> We'll have to have you back later to talk about how public is now moving to edge. Edge, of course, lives. >> Yeah. Oh, yes. >> Edge is the new data center, is what they have. I do have one final question before we let you go. That whole new shiny stuff? The last couple years, I'd been hearing, everybody's like, "Containers are going to subsume and take over. "DockerCon will be the new thing. "Oh wait, Kubernetes is just "going to dominate and take it over," and we have CubeCon and the CNCF. There's lots of Linux Foundation shows that do partnerships with what you do in Cloud Foundry Summit and on all these other pieces. What do you see as the future for the OpenStack Summit? Does it get pulled? This is being pulled into pieces, but for the show itself, for the foundation, and how it fits with that whole broad ecosystem of opensource. >> Well, the OpenStack Summit has always had some specific purposes. Again, this gets back to the fact that we are an opensource community and a foundation built to support that opensource community. The primary purposes of the OpenStack Summit are basically to strengthen those three pillars that I talked about earlier, especially on the software angle. Mark mentioned that this time around, we are doing what we call the forum. We used to have the Design Summit here, and we actually split that into two parts: one that's very technical and it's really gets down into implementation details. That's split out into a separate event. It happened in February, it's going to happen in September. What we did here is we set up time where developers and operators can get together and talk about strategic issues. Instead of talking about, "How do we fix this issue on line X of file Y?" they're talking about, "What should we use for distributed storage "and lock management? "Should we do Etcd? Should we do Zoo?" They're having more strategic conversation. That is a very critical piece for our community and for the people who run on it. We do a lot of education here. I think that what we've seen is that the OpenStack Summit is becoming more focused around users and the strategic needs of them as we build out the technology versus what it used to be. It originally started as a hacking event for 75 software developers. That's where I think it's going. Just to address the other point, all of the other opensource projects, a lot of them are here and we go to their events because, again, like we've been saying, it's not a zero-sum game. What we care about is that there are open alternatives and that they work well together. One of the things that I think we've seen and we've seen it proven over and over again with OpenStack is that getting communities together in person, those high-bandwidth interactions are actually really critical to getting work done and making things happen. I think they're all valuable and we're going to continue to participate in all of them. >> Yeah, well, Jonathan Bryce, Mark Collier. Really appreciate you joining us. I'm sure we'll see you at many of those other shows that The Cube will be covering throughout the years. Stay tuned with us, we've got lots more covered here at OpenStack Summit 2017 in Boston. Thanks for watching The Cube. (minimal electronic music)