...
- What happens when CNTT develop a requirement in, say, RI-1?
- do CNTT goes directly to prospective OPNFV project and get it implemented (via that project PTL).
- how are those implementation will link back to CNTT releases?
- Will each project has their own release cycle (with appropriate baggings) or will OPNFV has an overall release cadence ? how does the model work?
- or will CNTT has to follow some kind of process to get their requirements implemented?
- or will OPNFV itself regularly get CNTT releases and find the right OPNFV projects to implement any new requirements.
- via CIRV?
- what is the role of OPNFV TSC on all this? who is accountable for what?
- we need to talk about accountability and make it clear who is accountable for what!
- do CNTT goes directly to prospective OPNFV project and get it implemented (via that project PTL).
- How does OVP fit into this matrix?
- Given the GSMA process is it mostly a consumer and ratifier of the output from CNTT, or does it have a role in providing feedback? I.e. how can this be set up to be a two way street?
Scott Steinbrueck proposal 6/9/2020
The challenge is how to organize the content in an efficient way that reduces complexity for the authors/implementors to create, while also producing a quality product that is simple for the end user base to navigate, read and comprehend.
Seeking agreement to the following premises:
- RA-1 is the requirements and specs
- RI-1 is an example implementation (“example” word is used because no company is required to follow this exact lab setup / installer approach – it’s an example)
- RC-1 is a test conformance suite