►
From YouTube: July 2021 OpenZFS Leadership Meeting
Description
At this month's meeting we discussed: OpenZFS Conference; ASAN; changing default property values.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1w2jv2XVYFmBVvG1EGf-9A5HBVsjAYoLIFZAnWHhV-BM/edit#
A
All
right
so
first
thing
on
today's
agenda
is
the
open,
zfs,
developer
summit,
dates
and
planning
the
summit.
If
you
look
for
a
go,
look
at
the
summit
home
page
on
the
opencfs.org
website,
these
key
dates
are
up
to
date
at
the
moment.
So
registration
is
opening
the
23rd.
So
in
a
few
days
please
submit
any
abstracts
proposals
for
presentations
if
you
have
them
so
that
we
can
get
some
content
going,
they
need
that
needs
to
be
done
before
the
end
of
august
august.
A
The
speakers
will
be
selected
selected
notified
by
september
10th,
and
the
conference
is
scheduled
for
the
8th
and
9th
of
november,
so
the
conference
is
currently
scheduled
to
be
a
remote
conference
again
this
year,
but
there
is,
I
know,
some
interest
in
the
possibility
of
maybe
doing
a
hybrid
conference
this
year,
where
some
people
might
show
up
and
yeah.
I
can
see
from
some
reactions
out
there.
A
B
A
A
I
think
that
there's
there's
definitely
a
lot
of
unease
with
respect
to
that.
So
yeah,
I
don't
know,
what's
going
to
happen
exactly,
but
but
matt
wanted
to
get
a
feel
for
you
know.
If
there
was
a
lot
of
interest
in
in
some
sort
of
hybrid,
then
then
they
might
do
something
about
that,
but
obviously
there's
a
lot
of
logistics
that
occurs
in
terms
of
a
venue
and
that
kind
of
thing.
A
A
A
Right
next
item
on
the
agenda
is
a-san
running
z-test
with
the
address
sanitizer.
So
I
think
in
general
this
is
a
good
idea.
The
the
address
sanitizer
malik
debuggers
would
add
some
nice
additional
checking
for
us
during
z.
Test
runs
the
the
reason
this
hasn't
been
done
in
the
past.
I
don't
know
all
the
details.
I
know
that
matt
when
he
started
playing
with
it.
He
ran
into
some
issues
with
the
what
was
it
the
zfs
standard
memalic
some.
A
A
He
was
unable
sort
of
to
get
a
good
run
without
running
into
his
shoes
here,
so
it
would
just
creep.
Crapping
out
in
the
strategy,
ended
up
sort
of
commenting
out
the
code,
basically
and
bypassing
it
in
order
to
get
things
to
run
cleanly
for
him.
So
that's
kind
of
an
issue.
It
needs
to
be
tracked
down
and
figured
out.
It's
doesn't
seem
to
be
something
which
necessarily
reproduces
for
everyone.
So
take
a
look
at
the
issue.
There's
people
who
said
one's
fine
for
me.
A
I
think,
though,
that
we
need
to
figure
out
how
to
get
the
code
fixed
if
necessary
or
or
at
least
work
around
this
issue,
so
that
we
can
get
the
azure
sanitizer
running
regularly
to
do
regular,
builds
with
azure
sanitizer
enabled
and
get
our
z
test
runs.
So
we
can
cover
memory
issues
that
might
might
be
latent
in
the
code
or
be
introduced
by
changes
that
are
coming
in
yeah.
C
A
So
I
think
anything
like
that
is
is
a
win
for
us
yeah,
the
data,
and
it
picks
it
in
like
that.
I
ran
a
bunch
of
runs
with
the
edge
of
sanitizer
a
week
or
two
ago,
because
we
were
there.
There
was
a
few
issues
which
we
encountered
a
delphics
around
memory,
issues
that
I
couldn't
figure
out
exactly
what
was
going
on.
A
Their
sanitizer
was
able
to
to
find
one
issue
for
me,
which
was
an
issue
which
I'd
sort
of
already
partially
identified,
but
I
think
just
having
that
extra
tool
in
our
pockets
is
really
handy
for
these
kind
of
things,
because
memory,
corruption,
issues
when
you
encounter
them
are
a
to
track
down,
sometimes
like
try
to
access
freed
memories
like
how
did
that
happen.
Try
to
access.
A
You
know
whatever
it's
like
what
happened
here,
and
so
without
that
sanitizer
or
something
like
a
tool
in
there
to
track
it
down
the
point
where
it
actually
occurs.
It's
it's
really
really
difficult
to
get
that
kind
of
that
stuff
tracked
down.
So
anybody
have
any
any
other
comments
around
leveraging
address
and
hazards
or
some
objections
to
it.
A
C
A
A
You
know
I
I'm
now
in
my
role
of
looking
at
a
lot
of
the
pr's
that
are
coming
in
and
looking
at
the
test
results
and
trying
to
determine
whether
or
not
there's
anything
that
you
followed
up
on
and,
and
it
can
be
quite
difficult
and
even
you
know
z-test,
because
it's
not
entirely
reproducible
you'll
get
a
z-test
failure
which
is
like
well,
that's
not
in
the
code
very
likely
to
be
in
the
code.
That's
that's
being
you
know
being
requested
to
be
merged
right
now.
A
This
is
probably
something
that
someone
else
introduced
and
and
trying
to
sort
of
trace
that
back
and
and
even
getting
that
person
who
might
have
done
that
pr
to
work
on
it
can
be
can
be
tricky.
So
it's
it's
nice
when
you
can
discover
these
things
at
the
point
of
integration,
attempt
and
say
hey,
no,
it's
not
quite
ready.
Yet
you
should.
A
C
C
A
C
The
data
set
doesn't
exist,
it's
like
it,
just
the
cache,
file's
been
updated
or
it
didn't
sync
yet
or
or
something,
but
it's
like
it
doesn't
actually
say
it.
You
know
it
gives
me
standard
error
from
the
command,
but
it
doesn't
tell
me
what
the
command
it
tried
to
run
was.
So
I
I
have
trouble
trying
to
recreate
this
exactly.
I
don't
need
enough
context,
sometimes
to
feel
what's
happened.
There.
A
A
Introducing
or
trying
to
introduce
the
outer
sanitizer
for
us
as
part
of
our
z-test.
I
know
brian
can't
be
here
today:
either
he's
he's
not
available,
and
he
was
also
you
know
in
favor
of
this.
So
so
I
think
there's
definitely
needs
to
be
a
push
here
to
see
we
can.
We
can
do
that
to
to
get
it
introduced
as
part
of
our
standard
test
runs
for
integration
prior.
A
A
C
C
A
B
D
All
right,
can
you
hear
me
so
the
problem
is
that
extended
attributes
are
named
differently
on
different
platforms,
so
loomis
doesn't
have
namespaces.
So
all
the
names
are
just
raw
freebsd
has
a
couple
different
name
spaces
and
we
prefix
the
system
name
space
with
a
freebsd
colon
system,
colon
string
and
the
username
space
names
are
just
raw
like
on
a
lumos.
B
D
And
then
you
can
turn
that
off.
If
you
know
that
you
don't
care
and
then
there's
a
x,
add
or
compat
property
that
can
be
set
to
all
to
write
the
username
space
attributes
the
same
across
all
platforms
and
so
on
linux.
It
would
write
it
without
the
prefix
and
it
also
has
a
exciter
compat
equals
linux.
If
you
want
to
set
it
back
to
be
compatible
with
what
linux
currently
does.
D
The
one
kind
of
gotcha
with
this
is
that
it's
kind
of
an
on
disk
format,
change
for
linux,
and
so
I
added
a
cool
feature
that
activates,
when
you
write
an
extended
attribute
in
the
new
format
on
linux,
and
I'm
mostly
looking
for
a
design,
review
and
code
review
on
this
at
this
point,
we're
starting
to
ship
it
for
trunas
and
so
in
beta
builds
and
so
we'd
like
to
get
it
upstream
asap
and
then
go
through
any
design
iteration.
That
needs
to
happen
before
we
get
too
far.
Along
with
that.
A
D
B
C
A
D
Just
can't
get
it
a
slew
of
attributes
and
kind
of
a
possibly
work
like
a
roundabout
security
issue.
Is
that
on
other
platforms,
if
you
can
write
in
the
username
space
with
a
name
that
looks
like
the
prefix
of
like
a
system
name
space
on
linux
and
then
import
the
pool
on
another
platform,
then
you
can
do
stuff.
You
probably
shouldn't
be
able
to
do,
and
so
I
added
checks
that
deny
using
those
prefixes.
A
D
E
A
E
A
F
C
We
had
to
revert
one
change
that
was
committed
quite
a
while
back
for
I
think
linux,
4.9
compatibility
or
something
it
changed.
The
way
you
looked
up
the
user
id
so
that,
if
you
were
in
a
namespace,
it
tried
to
look
up
the
id
relative
to
the
namespace,
but
from
zfs
perspective
on
disk,
we
always
want
to
store
the
user
id
relative
to
the
root
name
space.
E
C
In
if
you're,
when
you're
in
the
namespace,
you
can
only
see
the
datasets
you're
allowed
to
see,
and
it
has
all
the
right
vfs
flags
for
linux
to
be
able
to
mount
as
an
unprivileged
user
inside
that
namespace
and
so
on,
and
so
it
provides
about
the
same
feature
set
and
I
added
updated
photographs
ryan
found
a
in
the
user
space
version
of
live
spl
or
whatever
it
was
breaking
the
freebsd
tests.
So
I
added
an
iftaft
to
fix
that.
C
E
C
D
A
C
D
G
C
A
C
D
C
It
doesn't
have
enough
tests,
for
you
know,
make
sure
you
can
set
a
property,
read
it
back
and
then
unset
it
and
things
like
that
and
the
other
one
was
for
fixing
the
name
of
the
v
dev
like.
If
you
want
the
video
in
the
cache
file
to
reference
a
different
device
name
than
it
does
right
now
you
can
set
it,
but
we
want
to
probably
put
some
tests
in
there
to
make
sure
it
fails
when
it
should
and
succeeds
when
it
should.
A
A
Yeah
I'd
like
to
see:
let's
get
that
one
wrapped
up
so
yeah
does
anything
you
need
me
for
there
allen.
Let
me
know,
depending
on
that,
I
think
the
the
alec
stuff
is
solid
in
there
at
this
point,
but
you
may
I
mean
it's
sort
of
tested
by
the
device
removal
path
now,
because
that's
the
way
the
device
removal
works,
but
but
yeah
there's
other
uses
for
no
out.
A
We
should
probably
have
at
least
a
test
case
or
two
around
verifying
the
note
and
said
you
know,
alex
with
respect
to
space
usage,
etc.
One
of
the
because
I
think
we
talked
about
this
in
my
private
previous
meeting-
was
setting
no
alec
property
on
a
v.
Dev
removes
the
more
space
than
you
might
expect
from
the
available
capacity,
because
it
removes
the
storage
capacity
of
the
drive
itself
saying
all
right.
We
have.
A
The
storage
obviously
is
gone
from
your
ability
to
space,
but
also
removes
the
space
that's
using
currently
from
the
storage
capacity,
because
if
you
were
to
overwrite
that
data
you'll
end
up
being
rewritten
into
the
rest
of
the
data,
so
it
would
look
as
though,
like
you
had
not
actually
written
your
data
but
somehow
used
up
more
space
in
the
pool.
So
you
have
to
be
able
to
count
that
space
as
well.
So.
A
No,
no
so,
for
example,
if
you
were
to
say
you
had
a
pool
which
had
simplest
case
actually,
three
three
drives
of
10
terabytes
with
30
terabytes
of
space,
you
know
remove,
see.
I
want
to
remove
one
of
them.
That's
all
right
and
you
have
them
all
half
full.
You
used
up
15
terabytes
of
space
within
your
30
terabyte
space.
This
is
a
little
bit
fuzzy,
because
there's
actually
actually
considered
like
this.
A
A
So
it's
a
little
bit
fuzzy
because
like
well,
you
know,
if
you
don't
ever
rewrite
that
data.
That's
in
that
no
out
part
of
the
pool.
In
theory,
you
have
10
terabytes
of
space.
You
could
fill
up.
The
benefit
were
to
attempt
to
if
you
were
to
fill
that
up
and
then
attempt
to
rewrite
some
of
your
data,
which
was
in
the
no
alec
part
of
the
pool
which
you're
allowed
to
do.
But
no
it
doesn't
mean
you
can't.
A
A
C
A
C
And
then
the
other
thing
I
was
gonna
talk
about
was
we've
started
a
project
to
improve
the
z-vol
performance
on
linux
or
g-vol
in
general,
but
specifically
on
linux,
comparing
it
with
a
block
size
of
16k,
we're
seeing
about
a
12
slower
on
ubuntu
than
on
freebsd,
using
the
same
checkout
of
of
open
zfs
and
that's
in
gm
modem,
freebsd
after
full
mode
or
whatever.
They
call
it
now,
and
I
think
in
plain
dev
mode
it
might
actually
be
even
a
bigger
difference.
C
A
A
C
D
C
Sense
to
use
a
more
native
interface
and
let
the
linux
cueing
layer
do
it
or
something
right
right,
looking
at
a
bunch
of
different
things
there,
but
if
anybody
knows
something
that
really
performs
poorly
compared
to
just
you
know,
fio
or
the
postgres
benchmark
or
something
you
know
we're
going
to
try
to
fix
it.
So
you'll
get
your
fix
for
free.
If
you,
let
me
know
what
the
problem
is.
C
And
the
last
one
is
something
that
came
up
a
long
time
ago
and
we
talked
about,
I
think,
everybody's
in
agreement,
but
I
don't
think
anybody
ever
did
it
was
we
wanted
to
change
the
default
when
you
create
a
new
pool
to
have
lz4
compression
on
by
default.
Since
there's
almost
no
reason,
you
wouldn't
want
it,
and
if
you
do,
you
would
know
that
you
don't
want
it
and
could
turn
it
off,
whereas
most
people,
I
think,
would
want
the
you
know.
C
D
It
sounds
like
a
good
idea
to
me.
It
makes
me
think
of
another
default
that
maybe
could
change
now.
Is
the
x
adder
equals
sa
before
freebsd
didn't
support
that
and
so
for
compatibility.
The
default
is
dur,
but
now
I've
implemented
it
for
freebsd.
So
we
could
change
that
if
you
wanted
to
too
that'd
be
a
little
performance
boost
too.
C
A
D
A
G
A
H
A
H
H
A
A
C
C
The
rights
together,
because
that
provides
much
better
performance
on
spinning
disks
and
we
you
can
turn
that
off
for
ssds.
But
I
wonder
if
we
actually
want
an
option
to
do
the
opposite
and
purposely
write
to
a
bunch
of
different
places
on
the
ssd
at
once,
to
activate
more
of
the
flash
cells
at
once
and
get
more
throughput.
C
Like
we've
seen
a
case
with
one
customer's
ssds,
where
you
know,
if
you're
writing
sequentially,
you
don't
get
nearly
the
same
speed
as
if
you
write
sequentially
to
these
very
different
offsets
and
if,
if
it
would
make
sense
to
purposely
grab
meta
slabs
from
very
different
parts
of
the
disk
and
write
to
them.
Concurrently,.
H
I
was
gonna
say
that
we
already
have
multiple
locators
now,
each
of
which
should
have
separate
meta
slabs
open.
So
if
you
write
several
files
same
time,
you
should
write
into
several
areas
of
ssd,
just
as
you
told,
unfortunately,
it
doesn't
work
for
several
z-volts.
At
this
point,
science,
we
see
only
one
z
wall
at
a
time,
but
that's
another
thing.
I'd
really
like
to
be
fixed.
H
H
H
Honestly,
I
don't
understand
I,
I
really
doubt
I
really
doubt
about
it:
the
slabs
already
pretty
big.
We
don't
have
so
many
of
them,
that's
from
one
side
from
another
site.
You
mentioned
lbi
bios
and
they
have
significantly
strong
feelings.
That
last
time
I
looked
there,
it
was
not
effect
effectively
used
for
present
science
science.
Some
pool
feature
I
forgot,
which
one
which
was
added
few
years
back
and
enabling
it
practically
disables
lba
bios.
We
shouldn't
have
it
this
day.
A
H
A
C
C
D
C
G
D
A
C
A
So
I
think
I
mentioned
I'm.
I
I
now
tony
and
I
and
john
kennedy
are
doing
a
lot
of
the
the
pr
management
now
in
the
in
the
gate.
So
if,
if
you
have
prs
that
are
languishing,
please
feel
free
to
ping
us
we
try
to
keep
on
top
of
things
by
the
line.
Particular
sometimes
let
things
slide
a
little
bit
until
alexander
pings
me
and
says
you
could
not
do
this
so
try
to
keep
I'll
try.
A
I
I
And
trying
to
doing
as
small
as
possible,
so
you
know,
makes
it
easier
for
everyone
to
do
code,
reviews
and
whatnot.
Most
of
them
are
real,
but
the
one
of
the
ones
we
have
at
the
moment
is
enabling
mounting
and
unmounting
of
snapshots
using
the
zfs
command
so
that
you
right
now
you
can
say
zfs
mount
and
then
data
set
so
we've
added
it.
So
you
can
say
cfs
mount
and
then
the
snapshot
and
the
reason
for
that
is
on
the
apple
kernel.
We
cannot
trigger
mounts
from
the
kernel.
I
A
I
C
C
I
I
B
B
I
In
the
kernel
right,
you
trigger
something
that
makes
easy
land
wake
up
and
mountain
what
you
can
do
in
the
cur.
What
you
can
do
in
the
kernel
is,
you
can
make
a
device
appear
correct,
yes,
that
that
is
how
apfs
does
it.
You
know,
we've
we've
gone
down
the
road
we
also
make
suited
devices
and
so
on.
I
We
were
aware
of
all
of
that
and
in
the
end,
about
what
10
years
ago,
when
we
did
the
port,
we
felt
it
was
easiest
to
let
your
users
issue
the
mount
command
if
they
wanted
it
to
at
that
time
now
we
could
do
by
creating
pseudo-devices
and
getting
this
carb
involved,
and
so
on.
That
is
true,
but
it
doesn't
change
the
fact
that
it
has
to
come
from
user
land.
This
carb
has
to
execute
your
tool,
which
comes
from
the
file
system
thing,
so
you're
still
editing
commands.
If
you
will.
C
C
C
I
Yeah
I
mean
similar
to
that.
There's
we
add
a
bunch
of
underscore
os
functions.
A
good
example
for
that
is
with
rollback.
After
you
call
lib
zfs
to
do
rollback.
We
need
to
do
rollback
underscore
os
section
for
apple,
where
we
kick
finder
into
refreshing.
Otherwise
it
keeps
showing
the
old
information
and
that
could
all
be
in
hash
if
theft,
but
I
think
it's
nicer
to
just
have
empty
functions
on
the
platforms
that
don't
need
it,
and
we
already
do
that
for
zvo
weight.
C
F
I
did
have
a
question
or
thing
just
to
get
some
ideas
here
is
one
of
the
things
we
ran
into
on
a
lumos
here
recently,
or
we
discovered
was
because
of
the
kind
of
the
ordering
of
porting
of
stuff
the
the
encryption
features.
We
never
got
the
fix
that
included
the
project
d
node
as
part
of
the
hash
which
got
fixed
in
between
releases,
which
technically
was
a
on
format.
Disk
change
for
encrypted
data
sets,
but
because
it
was
between
releases,
it
was
kind
of
well.
F
F
It's
just
a
matter
of
doing
all
the
work,
and
so
there
are
people
that
do
like
to
be
able
to
exchange
pools
between
the
platforms,
which
right
now
is
an
issue,
and
so
you
know
the
issue
so
tr
and
thinking
in
terms
of
how
to
fix
it.
You
know
we
can.
Of
course
we
can
add
in
the
fix
that
you
know,
adds
the
project
d
node
to
the
hash
as
well
as
even
I
have,
and
I
just
I
tested
it,
the
other
night.
F
C
There
until
you
recreated
the
data
set
and
or
whatever,
and
so
like
you're,
saying
kind
of,
like
a
the
per
data
set
feature
flag
thing
like
we
have,
for
you
know,
zed
standard
and
so
on.
It's
not
actually
considered
active.
Unless
you
have
data
sets
that
are
using
it
and
then
once
you
destroy
the
last
data
set
that
was
using
it,
it
reverts
to
being
enabled
as
a
way
to
tell
whether
you
need
to
worry
about
the
backwards
shim
or
not.
C
F
Or
the
other
thing
is
what
I'm
going
back.
We
are.
The
other
thing
was
to
create
like
a
dummy
feature.
Just
automatically
like
on
open
zfs
would
just
be
enabled
basically
on
any
pool,
but
it's
like
does
nothing
versus
on
a
lumos.
Okay.
If
we
see
that
flag,
okay,
it
means,
then
we,
you
know
we
use
all
three.
Otherwise
we
use
just
the
two,
at
least
when
writing,
although
maybe
you
know,
there's
still
some
debate,
you
know,
would
we
want?
F
F
I
want
that,
although
I
also,
although
there's
a
good
chance
that
there's
probably
very
few
if
anyone
using
the
project
features
on
a
lumos
but-
and
so
I
just
you
know
in
terms
of
anyone,
had
any
suggestions,
so
we
can
do
that
because,
like
I
said
I
can
just
you
know
basically
transparently
without
you
know
the
the
operator
ever
knowing
I
can.
I
can
fix
the
data
set
and
of
course,
once
you
do
that
you
can,
you
can
never
go
back
on
alumos,
which
is
you
know
the
issue.
I
I
After
that,
oh
on
linux,
it
was
done
first,
so
we
have
the
same
problem
and
we,
as
you
suggested
we
test
two
first
and
if
that
fails,
we
then
tested
the
ashes
and
then
upgrade
and
upgrade
for
the
user.
And,
yes,
they
can't
go
back,
but
we
consider
that
to
be
like
zpool
upgrade.
You
just
can't
go
back,
but
either
way
whatever
solution
you
find
we'd
like
to
be
part
of
that
conversation,
because
we
also
want
to
have
a
better
solution.
F
And
so
like
I
said
so,
the
thought
was
maybe
doing
something
with
the
feature,
but
then,
like
I
said
it
would
require.
You
know
something
on.
You
know
zfs
on
linux,
even
though
maybe
like
on
zfs
on
linux.
It
may
just
be
like
a
dummy
feature
that
does
nothing
anywhere
else,
but
you
know
kind
of
the
question
I
don't
know.
If
there
would.
You
know
people
be
okay
with
that
or
is
that
gonna
cause?
You
know.
A
Concern
the
adjacent
idea
would
be
that
on
linux
you
would
suddenly
there
would
appear
this
new
feature,
which
is
represents
the
the
three
or
hatch
base.
But
it's
always
there.
It's
like
okay,
yeah,
it's
like
we
forgot,
just,
never
saw
the
feature
as
as
being
a
bit.
You
know
visible
before,
but
now
suddenly
it
shows
up
as
being
there
on
every
linux,
because
it's
it's
drawn
everywhere.
C
Because
yeah
I
was
thinking
is
like:
would
you
want
a
feature
flag
that
is
only
active
on
the
data
sets
that
are
not
fixed
or
something
to
that
effect
so
that
it
properly
like,
if
you've
only
been
doing
it
with
the
two
hashes
and
you
import
it
on
a
version
that
does
all
three?
Does
it
cause
problems
or
is
it
just
a
problem
if
you
wrote
with
a
newer
one
and
then
try
to
read
it
with
an
older
one
or
I
guess,
if
you
have
a
data
set,
that's
that
has
this
bug.
F
C
If
you
made
it
a
feature
flag
that
only
existed
on
the
platforms
that
had
the
problem
then-
and
it
was
activated
where
the
problem
is
present-
then
it
would
block
it
importing
on
systems
that
don't
have
the
problem,
but
as
long
as
the
but
the
flag,
the
feature
flag
is
there,
but
it's
just
enabled
because
there
are
no
damage
data
sets.
Then
it's
considered
read-only
compatible
or
even
rewrite
compatible.
I
guess
like
we
don't
have
that
concept.
Do
we
so.
D
F
And
that's
what
I
thought
was
actually
kind
of
the
opposite.
We
have
like
a
feature
where,
like
I
said
on,
you
know
like
on
you
know,
on
open
zfs.
It
really
you
know
when
it's
there.
It
really
does
nothing.
You
know,
as
I
say
it's
kind
of
like
you
know
the
goggles,
if
you
or
from
the
simpsons,
but
then
on.
You
know
then
on
lumos,
so
it
actually
would
do
something
you
would
you
know,
because
everyone
else
already
does
all
three.
F
F
A
Yeah,
well,
that's
good!
It's
an
interesting
question.
I
think
it's
it's
a
little
bit.
It's
not
obvious
what
the
right
way
to
do
this
is
we've
we've
burned
up
our
usual
time.
Why
don't
we
sort
of
leave
this
as
a
item
to
to
be
thinking
about
and
and
raise
this
as
an
issue
for
the
next
meeting
that
sound
reasonable?
At
this
point,.
F
F
Yep
17,
yeah
and
yeah,
and-
and
I
am
out
then
and
I'm
going
to
be
in
the
I'll,
be
at
the
bottom
of
the
grand
canyon.
So
I'm
not
going
to
have
any
type
of
connectivity.
Oh
that's
a
problem.
Yes,
so
maybe
be
on
a
raft
down
there,
so
sweet,
but
yes,
okay,
yeah!
So
just
if
anyone
has
ideas,
you
know
feel
free
to
hit
me
up
on
there,
like,
I
said
we'll,
probably
talk
some
more
internally
like
I
said
that
was
the
one
idea
that
came
around.