►
From YouTube: Network Service Mesh Meeting - 2019-04-17
Description
Join us for Kubernetes Forums Seoul, Sydney, Bengaluru and Delhi - learn more at kubecon.io
Don't miss KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2020 events in Amsterdam March 30 - April 2, Shanghai July 28-30 and Boston November 17-20! Learn more at kubecon.io. The conference features presentations from developers and end users of Kubernetes, Prometheus, Envoy, and all of the other CNCF-hosted projects
C
C
My
toes,
but
my
idea
is
that
I
would
like
to
change
the
messaging
of
any
same
in
terms
of
I
mean
I'm,
not
saying
that
this
is
that
I
just
try
to
gather
my
thoughts,
I'm,
not
saying
that
this
is
nothing
but
I
would
like
to
start
with
the
fact
that
we're
changing
the
definition
of
a
service
I
think
that
this
is
the
core
think
about
NSM,
not
not
that
it's
a
new
way
to
implement
the
V,
etcetera,
etcetera.
This
is
kind
of
consequence,
I
think.
D
C
C
C
D
Has
applicability
in
all
kinds
of
places
and
I'd
love
to
start
with
the
the
enterprise
stuff,
mostly
because
and
I
think
I've
said
this
before.
If
you
show
an
enterprise
use
case
to
it
at
the
service
provider,
they
get
it.
If
you
show
a
service
provider
use
case
to
an
enterprise,
they
have
no
idea.
What's
going
on.
Oh
yeah,
yeah
is
that.
Does
that
sound
reasonable
to
you?
Jeffrey
is
the
the
service
provider
in
the
room.
B
Yes,
I
caught
about
80%,
so
I
was
reading
stuff
to
the
only
I
mean
yeah
I
agree.
We
don't
want
to
attack
people's
concepts
of
what
a
network
services
or
what
applications
people
think
of
as
a
kubernetes
service.
This
does
seem
very
kubernetes.
Centric,
though,
for
the
whole,
what
is
an
SM
and
now
I.
C
B
E
B
C
B
B
Vpp
is
only
one
data
plane,
but
we're
gonna
only
talk
about
VPP,
like
I,
really
feel
like
in
our
messaging
and
when
I
mean
we're
audience
to
CN
CF,
so
like
we,
we
can
take
a
little
bit
more
Liberty
like
we
really
just
need
to
start
talking
about
the
fact
that
NSM
itself
is
a
distributed
mesh
that
gives
us
network
services
and
then,
like
always
start
with
the
whole
cloud
native
networking
conversation
first
and
then
bring
in
the
Burnett
is
because
kubernetes
is
one
with
it.
You
make,
you
know
orchestration
in
a
cloud
native.
B
You
know
possible,
but,
like
I
mean
like
right
out
debate,
it's
just
in
kubernetes
boom
boom
boom,
like
we're
literally
like
right
out
the
gate,
saying
like
here's,
how
kubernetes
does
networking
here's?
How
we
do
networking
versus
here
is
a
cloud
native
approach
to
networking
and
by
the
way
we
can
do
this
in
kubernetes,
without
breaking
everything,
I
I.
B
F
B
Like
that,
that's
my
exact
that,
like
I,
think
in
what
is
in
SM,
we
should
just
say
this
is
what
in
SM
is
not
with
kubernetes
caveats
and
gotchas,
and
you
know
we're
not
going
to
like
break
things
just
here.
Is
this
really
awesome
distributed
mesh?
It
does
really
cool
things
for
you
and
in
the
different
implementation
sections
one
of
the
really
cool
things
it
does
for
you
is
it
fixes
the
plumbing
and
pod
namespaces
I.
D
D
My
input
is
primarily
just
from
not
content
at
this
point,
because
everything
you
guys
are
saying
from
a
Content
direction
is
actually
quite
good.
My
structural
input
would
be
that
we
want
to
as
we're
breaking
down
the
message
we
want
to
make
sure
we
have
a
super
simple
sort
of
elevator
pitch
of
that
that
we
can
lead
with
front
and
center
at
the
very
beginning
of
the
opening
page,
something
that
will
grab
people
and
really
draw
little
to
really
drill
the
notion
in
and
then
we
can
look
at
adding
stuff.
B
And
I
said:
I
mean
from
the
content
perspective
I
just
either
you
know
go
one
way
or
the
other,
but
like
we
got
to
decide,
do
we
always
come
at
it
from
the
context
of
hey
we're
really
good
at
kubernetes
and
by
the
way
we
can
do
all
this
other
stuff
or
here's.
This
standalone
really
cool
cloud
native
solution
and
we
kick
ass
at
integration
with
kubernetes.
What.
G
About
we're
committed
to
the
cloud
native
language
and
we
don't
have
to
say
kubernetes
specifically,
but
the
cloud
native
side,
you're
gonna,
have
CI
CDE,
there's
gonna
be
some
possibly
some
discussion
about
containers
that
might
be
contentious,
definitely
gonna
be
an
Orchestrator
everything.
That's
in
the
cloud.
Nate
is
passports,
maturity
and
then
you
don't
have
to
say
kubernetes,
because
maybe
another
Orchestrator
will
make
its
way
in.
D
Like
this,
especially
one
of
the
things
I
often
will
beat,
the
drums
on
is
three
very
central
tenants
of
cloud
native
which
are
immutable,
infrastructure
loosely
coupled
and
minimal,
toil
and
the
I
think
sort
of
those
are
places
to
focus
because
they
can
apply
all
over
the
place.
It's
not
just
kubernetes,
but
they're,
really
the
things
that
everyone
is
looking
for.
B
D
F
G
B
D
B
B
D
B
Write
because
it
usually
is
like
one
of
the
four
of
us
writing
something
down
on
that
document
and
then
arguing
about
a
single
term
for
about
45
minutes
and
I.
Think,
like
you
were
saying,
it
will
get
a
lot
more
done
if
there's
like
20
people
writing
things
and
then
we're
just
arguing
about
lots
of
things
for
like
10
minutes
at
a
time.
B
B
B
These
may
be
next
week.
You
know
with
the
and
to
be
honest,
the
documentation
car.
Sometimes
we
get
a
groundswell
of
people
coming
in
at
thirty
after
the
hour,
just
because
of
conflicting
calls
and
stuff,
but
maybe
I'm
edit
or
Frederick
next
week
in
the
main
call
on
Tuesday.
Would
you
guys
mind
potentially
putting
out
like
a
call
for
volunteers,
because
we
have
people
who,
like
email
me
and
they're
on
like
the
boards
that
are
actually
semi
active
in
the
documentation
effort,
but
they
don't
necessarily
attend
our
call.
But.
D
B
B
Okay,
so
yeah,
we
know
that
the
site
needs
some
love,
just
holistically,
which
it
sounds
like
we
can
get
CN
CF
to
help
us
I
will
work
with
Nikolai
on
this
figuring
out
what
we
can
salvage
I'm,
like
you
said.
Everything
in
here
is
great
Nikolai
I.
Don't
want
you
to
think
like
we're
coming
after
you
on
this.
C
B
So
the
glossary
I
mean
until
people
start
making
pull
requests,
we're
in
a
pretty
good
spot
on.
Just
like
the
pure
text,
definitions
Nikolai's
got
it
merged
into
the
main,
get
in
the
readme
section
or
sorry,
the
docs
section
so
now
I'm
to
remove
as
much
ambiguity
as
possible.
I've
been
working
more
and
more
on
this
guy,
stealing
images
from
some
of
Ed's
decks.
Things
like
that
I've
actually
been
breaking
things
down
into
more
granular.
B
Slides
mechanisms
ended
up
seeming
like
they
needed
their
own
slide
verses,
trying
to
wrap
it
into
like
wires
and
connections,
so
I
kind
of
want
to
just
for
this
call.
It
is
something
I
want
to
like
discuss,
because
I
need
kind
of
help.
What
your
guys
thoughts
are
as
far
as
like
images
and
depth
grams,
because
I'm
just
kind
of
shooting
from
the
hip.
Here
it's
like
the
network
service
manager,
there's
not
a
ton
like
visually
I,
can
think
of
to
do
it.
B
Just
I
want
to
somehow
clean
this
up
so
that
it's
a
little
bit
more
transparent,
that
this
is
a
node
level
entity
or
like
a
physical
device.
So
I
might
actually
collapse.
Some
of
the
detail
in
this
and
kind
of
bring
these
individual
components
in
a
more
collapse
fashion,
just
showing
how
like
an
en
SM
fits.
You
know
in
the
whole
network
service
manager,
context,
I.
B
C
D
E
B
Okay,
and
so
we
might
even
want
to
decline
on
get
what's
either
URI
today
put
in
the
PR
and
let's
just
remove
in
a
CNN
se,
from
the
glossary
definitions
right,
because
if
it's
right
there
in
main
get
and
people
are
reading
through
the
glossary,
and
they
see
that
it's
gonna
stick
from
them
point
on
right,
like
they're,
gonna,
they're,
literally
gonna,
look
back
and
say:
well,
you
guys
literally
have
this
in
the
definition
that
this
is
the
acronym
for
it.
So
yeah,
just
let's,
let's
nuke
those
get
rid
of
the
little
follow-on
parentheses.
B
So
I
do
have
a
couple
questions
on
certain
things,
so
yeah
I
think
I'm
going
to
remove.
This
doesn't
need
to
be
quite
as
big
or
granular
and
I
want
to
show
network
service
management
different
context,
the
external
network
service
manager.
Does
this
diagram
sudo
makes
sense
to
people.
It
was
a
very
like
just
like
I
said
from
the
hip
attempt
and
I
feel
like
I.
Don't
know.
F
B
C
B
F
B
So
check
it
out,
here's
the
cns
M
is
talking
to
the
CNS
I'm
talking
to
this
in
SM,
but
this
is
and
really
all
of
these
need
to
be
this.
They
need
their
gr.
So
this
is
physical
network
right
completely
and
wholly
isolated
from
the
OpenStack
networking
with
its
own
en
SM.
It
makes
it
appear
in
the
mesh
to
these
other
ones,
but
I'm
like
you
know,
and
then
this
could
be
/d,
RV
or
vSphere.
Whatever
right
like
it
doesn't
it
doesn't
have
to
be
just
OpenStack,
I'm,
just
sort.
B
Here's
a
domain
that
OpenStack
controls
here
is
a
physical
domain.
Here
is
a
kubernetes
node
and
here
is
all
the
different
peers
in
the
mesh
and
it's
making
the
translations
in
the
ENS
M
case
talking
to
OpenStack
here,
and
that
this
is
you.
You
saying
that
like
proves
my
point,
that
this
needs
to
be
massaged
a
little
bit,
because
if
you
can't
just
look
at
it
and
know
what
I
was
trying
to
convey,
then
obviously
my
pictures
are
not
up
to
snuff
yet.
But
this
is
good
feedback
right.
B
E
Solution
to
the
Gateway
that
we
show
here,
it's
it's
role,
is
purely
data
plane
right.
If
we
can
move
that
guide
below.
Basically,
you
know
try
to
put
all
the
data
plane,
components
on,
let's
say
the
row,
one
below
role
and
then
you
put
all
the
NSM
components
on
at
the
high
level.
You
know
on
a
top
row
yeah
like
that
you
know,
then
you
know
it'll
be
clear
or
you
know
the
data
plane
could
be
across
disparate
environments.
E
B
C
B
And
we
can
massage
it
so
and
actually,
let's
just
no
and
right
now,
I
just
really
want
to
capture
your
all
thoughts.
More
than
anything.
B
D
Know
I,
don't
think
I
was
saying
earlier
about.
This
may
be
a
good
diagram
for
describing
a
particular
case
with
OpenStack,
but
it's
it's
trying
to
put
too
many
things
in
one
place
and
my
tendency.
Admittedly,
some
of
this
is
driven
by
my
own
mental
prejudices
would
be
to
start
with
a
very
abstract
sense
of
this
and
then
give
concrete
examples
that
we
start
out
with
very
specific
next
to
somebody
who
is
provided
by
a
vim.
D
B
Yeah
I,
trying
to
keep
it
succinct
I,
was
falling
into
the
trap
of
trying
to
get
like
the
big
blocks
of
text
in
these
comprehensive
diagrams
on
one.
But
really
what
probably
needs
to
happen
is
this
needs
to
be
pulled
down
so
that
there's
way
more
space
to
work
with
there
needs
to
be
the
abstract
diagram
on
this
page.
B
It
doesn't
we
like
just
like
node
them,
physical
and
nothing
else,
don't
try
to
show
any
of
the
routing
this
and
that
just
show
ENS
and
managers
just
sitting
around
and
then
the
next
one
we
can
drop
down
and
actually
get
into
some
more
the
granular
plumbing
yeah.
It's
just
trying
to
squeeze
way
too
much
into
too
small
of
a
space
here.
You.
F
Can
also
show
very
simple
use
case,
but
this
and
break
them
apart.
So
you
know
kubernetes
manager
to
an
open
stack
base
manager,
kubernetes
to
physical,
OpenStack
and
physical
as
independent
as
independent
things,
and
then
shows
something
where
they
get
chained
together
as
well
and
then
and
then
we
can
drive
down
into
and
that
will
should
all
fit
into
one
slide
and
then
from
there
we
give
and
drive
to
here's
what
here's,
what
the
chain
would
look
like
now
that
we
give
it
some
context
and
then
we
could
probably
find
a
way
to
reuse.
D
B
B
B
Okay,
cool:
do
we
need
a
diagram
for
a
proxy
network
service
manager
and,
if
yes,
I,
don't
like
I
need
someone
to
like
give
me
some
thoughts
on
how
you
diagram
something
as
abstract.
As
saying
all
of
this
is
the
same,
but
like
there
could
be
more
steps
that
come
in
afterwards,
it's
almost
more
like
a
flow
chart
versus
a
network
diagram
or
application
diagram.
B
D
B
B
F
A
D
F
D
F
D
B
D
F
D
F
B
Okay,
this
is
pretty:
cut-and-dry
carries
packets,
so
local
and
remote
mechanisms.
I
duplicated
this
cuz.
We
have
the
concept
of
a
wire
and
a
connection,
and
obviously
the
remote
mechanism
plays
way
more
into
that
wire.
Slash
connection,
e-type
thing
that
this
makes
sense
and
I
probably
need
to
add
a
local
mechanism
also
pointing
over
here
to
be
host
user
and
mammoth.
Just
you
know
that
every
single
one
of
these
is
an
example
of
that,
but
then
we
have
the
VX.
B
D
D
F
B
Well,
this
was
actually
something
that
I
was
screwing
up
really
early
on,
because
I
was
like
assuming
way
too
much
responsibility,
unlike
the
in
points
and
network
service
mission
in
general,
it's
like
no,
no,
no
I
just
need
to
put
this.
You
know
encapsulation
on
here
and
stick
it
in
the
right,
B
and
I
write
like
there's
all
of
this
other
networking
that
already
exists,
or
even
a
better
example,
is,
like
you
know,
I'm
like
an
MPLS
or
a
segment
routing
an
example
right
is
I.
Don't
need
to
pull
every
single
like
device.
B
I
have
in
existence
into
the
one
mesh
right.
I
just
need
to
do
some
cool,
cloudy
things
in
an
isolated
environment
and
then
just
say:
okay,
once
you're
heading
out
into
the
like,
you
know
once
you
get
this
P
router
you've
already
got
your
label
like
I'm,
just
gonna,
let
BGP
do
its
thing,
or
s
are
do
its
thing
right,
and
that
was
like
a
hard
concept
for
me
to
get
eventually
or
originally
so
I've
been
trying
to
save
people
from
my
pitfalls.
In
my
flawed
logic,.
D
E
Aid,
the
uniqueness
of
the
BNI
when
you
assign
it
in
that
approach
is
good.
However,
when
different
VX
LAN
endpoints
start
talking
to
each
other
at
time,
t1,
you
might
be
good
at
time.
T
2,
as
the
we
explained
in
points,
talk
to
let's
say
more
number
of
end
points.
The
overall
we
are
nice
that
are
used
for
a
single
broadcast
domain.
We.
E
D
E
D
So
what
you're
saying
is,
if
I'm,
using
the
DNI
in
a
classic
broadcast
sense
right
on
my
network,
then
what
right?
Because
if
I've
got
a
vni
and
you
know
I'm,
you
know
I've
decided
that
I'm
gonna
use
that
BNI
to
connect
a
bunch
of
things
for
in
a
virtual
bridge
debate,
because
that's
all
you
could
do
with
a
vni
is
connect
virtual
bridge
domains,
Oh
or
even
l3
domains.
You
know,
meaning
realize
the
insulin
definitionally
carries
Ethernet
frames.
True.
D
E
D
D
Always
go
to
the
protocol.
If
you
look
at
the
protocol
literally,
there
is
no
concept
of
a
BNI
in
isolation
from
its
source
than
death
psyches.
The
idea
doesn't
exist
now
you
could
decide
that
that
a
group
of
source
and
dusty
are
going
to
interpret
a
vni
commonly
as
a
domain
among
them,
but
that
is
a
decision
among
a
number
of
IPs
to
apply
an
interpretation
to
that
V
and
I
in
the
IPS
that
are
not
part
of
that
group
are
not
bound
to
provide
a
particular
interpretation
to
that
V
and
I
yeah.
D
D
E
D
But
it
should
be
understood,
centralized
IPAM
that
centralized
V
and
I
all
these
centralized
resource
mechanisms
I'm
to
be
deep,
empty
patterns.
They
don't
scale
for
hit
they're
hugely
problematic,
they're
extremely
expensive
effects
wise
to
manage,
and
so
you
can
do
native
anything
you
can
do
to
minimize
the
centralized
decision-making.
A
control
is
a
bit.
E
D
Switches,
switches
and
routers
that
are
collaborating
together
that
have
decided
that
they're
going
to
treat
at
V
and
I
as
an
l-3
or
and
l2
domain
right
as
long
as
I
am
NOT
actually
trying
to
use
any
of
those
switches
and
routers
as
source
or
just
IDs
in
a
network
service
mesh.
The
fact
that
I
happen
to
be
using
exactly
the
same
v,
a
tie
between
a
source
and
decimals
is
absolutely
harmless.
Yeah.
E
D
We
get
a
connection
coming
in
and
it's
one
of
many
many
things
that
could
be
used
as
a
local
label.
When
we
get
a
connection
coming
in,
we
could
use
at
the
excellent
via
I
to
tell
us
which
connection
it
is.
We
could
use.
You
know
srt-6
SIDS,
if
we
wanted
to
we've,
got
all
kinds
of
things
that
let
us
D
MUX,
the
stuff
that's
coming
into
the
IP,
so
it
is
just
used
as
a
local
label.
2D
MUX
things
yeah.
F
So
this
is
a
big
benefit
we
get
when
we
move
away
from
the
Neutron
style
Brigitte
domain
as
your
primitive
then
you
attach
supports
to
and
you
move
towards,
the
local
to
the
wires
and
connections
as
your
or
rather
the
wire
as
your
as
your
primitive.
So
the
local
mechanism
and
remote
mechanisms
and
you
compose
together,
it
allows
you
to
it,
allows
you
to
gain
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
in
this
specific.
In
this
specific
use
case.
B
B
Funny
is
like
the
router
knows
what
its
capabilities
are
right
and
it's
going
to
make
that
available
through
the
external
network
service
manager,
and
if
it
is
the
final
endpoint,
then
it
is
going
to
pick
you
know
it's
the
excellent
schema.
You
know
it's
it's
already
paired
with
a
route
reflector.
It
knows
in
its
tables
what
VN
eyes
aren't
are
consumed.
It
knows
how
to
get.
You
know
whether
you're
asymmetric
or
symmetric
routing.
It
knows
all
of
this
right
and
it's
just
gonna
say
I.
B
Have
this
and
then
once
it
provides
that
connection
the
point-to-point-
and
you
know
we'll
call
it
like
the
east
side
once
it
starts
heading
west,
it's
now
just
traditional
networking
right
like
it's
going
to
the
route
reflector
and
saying
you
know
how
do
I
get
to
my
next
location.
Please
put
it
in
this
via
neck
vni
and
away.
It
goes
in
like
network
service
manager.
Doesn't
care
about
any
of
that.
E
F
So
there
is
something
we
don't
have
to
be
a
bit
careful
with
that
scenario,
though,
which
is
an
appointed
point
where
what
happens
if
you
assign
the
same
DNI
on
the
from
an
en
SM,
then
and
you're
connecting
something
that's
kubernetes
related
a
pod.
Let's
say
it's
a
pod
and
we
do
have
to
be
careful
to
make
sure
that
you
know,
because
at
that
point
leave,
then
we
can
have
a
conflict.
So
so
we
do
need
to
be
careful
with
that
scenario.
B
Cool
so
going
down
one
more
we're
going
up
one
layer
up
an
abstraction,
wires
and
connections.
So
does
this
make
sense
from
a
diagram
perspective,
got
a
wire
between
here
and
here
got
a
wire
between
here
and
here.
The
end-to-end
data
flow
is
here
because
if
what
I
want
is
a
connection,
these
are
all
the
components
in
the
middle.
C
D
Only
has
one
thing
going
into
it:
mm-hm
and
there's
actually
two
things
going
into
it.
There's
something
coming
in
from
the
incoming
wire
and
there's
something
going
out
for
the
direct
mem
I
have
does
that
make
sense
and
the
back
the
fact
that
I'm
only
showing
the
one
might
confuse
people
about
there
being
some
kind
of
a
multi
point
thing
going
on
along
that
Purple
Line
I.
B
Think
I
get
what
you're
saying
them:
I'm,
not
visualizing
in
my
head.
So
if
you
just
want
to
pack
the
image
I
mean
I,
conceptually
I
understand
what
you're
saying
I
just
don't
know
how
to
visualize
it
and.
D
F
D
B
B
C
B
The
other
thing
nicolai
with
the
ordering
and
I
just
I,
need
all
of
you
to
weigh
in
and
kind
of
help
me
pick.
The
lesser
of
you
know
all
evils,
not
just
two,
because
the
biggest
problem
with
a
lot
of
this
is
you
would
know,
I
mean
Google
Docs.
Is
we
constantly
use
terms
to
build
definitions
that
have
to
have
their
own
definition?
And
so
it's
I've
been
trying
to
figure
out
like
ordering.
B
Circular
to
be
exactly
right,
like
we're
we're
using
the
definitions
of
things
in
the
definition
of
things
and
so
like
then,
when
I
order
them
like
I,
can't
put
the
control
plane
before
network
service
managers
or
I
could
and
I
say
you
know
reference
this
slide,
like
maybe
I,
do
a
little
asterisk
says
and
do
a
little
footnotes,
but
that
circular
dependency
keeps
biting
me
every
time.
I
try
to
like
order
this.
It's
it's
been
an
interesting
challenge.
C
C
B
D
F
D
D
It's
sort
of
like
if
I
were
if
all
I
knew
in
life
was
rip
but
I
had
a
notion
of
a
control
plane
for
rip
right.
But
you
know-
and
you
said,
okay
well,
we
know
what
control
planes
are
and
I'm
gonna
go.
Introduce
you
to
is,
is
and
I
could
teach
you.
What
is
is
and
then
I
point
out
that
is
is
is
actually
a
control
plane
in
this.
B
No
I
agree
I
guess
because
we're
scoping
it
there,
like
a
lot
of
like
these,
the
lens
of
what
we're
saying
the
control
plane
is
in
this
implementation.
Really
cuz
I
mean
that's
what
we're
doing
right,
we're
giving
a
definition
for
this
implementation
of
a
control
plane.
Your
analogy,
is
it
just
gets
a
little
bit
hairy,
sometimes
so,
like
I
put
domains
at
the
end
just
because-
and
it
feels
super
awkward
like
it's
just
like
tagged
on
there
at
the
end-
and
it
definitely
doesn't
it.
B
So
I'm
like,
let's
just
noodle
on
that
for
a
bit
I,
am
open
to
suggestions
like
maybe
we
you
know
use
like
we
just
point
to
things.
Maybe
we
make
maybe
what
I
do
is
I
do
every
single
one
of
these
is
a
hyperlink
right,
and
so,
if
I
have
to
do
something
that
hasn't
been
described
yet
I
give
it
the
hyperlink
that
way.
You
can
just
click,
and
it
goes
to
that
right.
But
yeah,
like
you,
said,
I,
it's
weird
and
so
I
put
control
plans
up
here
but,
like
I
said
like
that.
D
B
Definite
you
know.
Example,
you
gave
yep
no
worries
all
right.
Everyone
I
will
catch
you
guys
all
later,
thanks
for
help.
This
please
go
in
and
make
changes
to
this
document
unilaterally,
and
then
we
can
just
discuss
them
or
do
it
through
comments
if
you're
scared
to
write
things,
but
you
know
we'd
like
to
get
to
where
we're
doing
like
review
as
much
as
possible
on
Tuesday
as
days
as
opposed
to
I'm.
Always
you
know
just
putting
all
of
our
focus
into
one
document.