No recording this week - no host privilege on Phil's bridge
Attendees:
Community: Atul Purohit Saad Ullah Sheikh David Perez CaparrosguochuyiRyan Hallahan Olivier Augizeau Vincent Colas Herbert Damker Guy Meador
Guests: cl664y@att.com
LFN: David McBride Jim Baker
EUAG Working Group proposal - Atul Purohit
Summary: Review of the current EUAG process and suggestions for a path forward to create more focus and relevance for the EUAG based on the voice of the carriers with a focus on the ONAP/OPNFV
How does the common NFVi task force interact with this? David McBride
- Larger scope - includes ONAP and OPNFV
Common NFVi task force is outside the standards bodies? Herbert Damker
- Not just AT&T - includes Verizon et.al.
- OVP focused on VNF packages
How operators will combine to define a common NFVi remains to be seen - future focus Ryan Hallahan
Vendor strategy - will there be a clear deliverable? Is this lock in to a single set of components? Saad Ullah Sheikh
What does "vendor strategy" mean? Guy Meador
- what do we want from our vendors to help with the design?
- there are vendors that do not contribute to ONAP - use carrier alignment to drive vendor engagement
- Carriers articulate their consumption model - and set that as an expectation for the vendors (set of tests? expected capabilities?)
Be cautious of the ground rules of anti-competitive behaviours Guy Meador
- bias towards technical requirements NOT vender strategy
We're a set of carriers, find areas of commonality and use that to communicate more clearly to out vendors Ryan Hallahan
A set of action items are embedded in the slides Atul Purohit
El Alto release process proposal - Catherine Lefevre
Summary: The El Alto release could be shortened and focus on internal (tech) debt and defect backlogs. A proposed release cycle is presented.
Reviewing at the ONAP TSC call 2019-04-11
Some e2e use cases are useful but too specific - would like to build own use cases - would like more ala carte use cases (modularity) - is this a possible component of El Alto? Olivier Augizeau
- Yes, this is exactly the type of info that the EUAG should be providing - please continue to provide this type of feedback.
Chat log
08:07:28 From Catherine Lefevre to Jim Baker (LFN) (Privately) : I have just joined - sorry PC issue - backup plan = iPad
08:13:43 From Catherine Lefevre : not sure if it is on my end but i only see slide 1
08:18:41 From Jim Baker (LFN) to Catherine Lefevre (Privately) : Who is dialed in on 32475773673?
08:19:16 From Jim Baker (LFN) : Who is dialed in on 32475773673?
08:32:17 From Catherine Lefevre : it is me
08:32:21 From Catherine Lefevre : Catherine
08:32:32 From Jim Baker (LFN) : Thanks
08:48:14 From Catherine Lefevre to Jim Baker (LFN) (Privately) : let's plan the ONAP Timeline evcolution for the next call so we do not need to run?
08:52:28 From Jim Baker (LFN) to Catherine Lefevre (Privately) : Please send me your slides for inclusion in the minutes
09:00:08 From Guy Meador (Cox) : Sorry that I joined late today. Here is a perspective on the EUAG “Proposed Re-Boot” topic. If we in the EUAG have members who desire to create and support the activities outlined for a sub-working group focused on “ONAP/OPNFV”, that is a good sub-team to create as a part of the LFN EUAG; doing so would not require a re-chartering of LFN EUAG; would prefer not re-chartering LFN EUAG
09:02:43 From Guy Meador (Cox) : Re: “EUAG Re-Chartering”: to be clear, and in summary, I would support the creation of a sub-team/activity of “ONAP/OPNFV EUAG Working Group” but not re-chartering of LFN EUAG. Having the sub-group would be of value to the ONAP/OPNFV community and allow the operator community to engage at a more tactical level with ONAP/OPNFV.
09:03:05 From Guy Meador (Cox) : ONAP “tic-to” releases makes sense to me
09:03:08 From Atul Purohit (Vodafone) : That is the idea, not to re-chart LFN EUAG, but within the confines of current - start a reboot to make it more meaningful. Thanks Guy
09:03:14 From Guy Meador (Cox) : “Tic-Toc”