Date
Attendees
Kenny Paul Jim Baker Former user (Deleted) Trishan de Lanerolle
- Atul Purohit Marc Fiedler Ryan Hallahan Gerald Kunzmann Marc-Alexandre Choquette Herbert Damker
Minutes
Revision of EUAG Mission Statement Marc Fiedler
- comfortable with Charter
- Problem statement: Agenda driven by LFN staff - not members
- lack of continuity since launch in 2018
- recordings & minutes being public impacts discussions
- Surveys have been mix and match and the targets have been unclear/misleading
- Topics have not had an impact on features of LFN projects
- Mission Statement for EUAG 2.0 draft:
- focus on most relevant topics within the LFN
- Collecting the requirements from the SPs (Modeling, Testing , etc.)
- Share expectations and experiences of activities (POCs, MVPs, RFPs)
- Set the agenda for the industry for fully automateable capable and adaptable solutions
- Align on requirements and support to LFN subcommittees
- Time to market
- Revenue
- Performance, usability, reliability...
- Compliance, Auditing, Security...
- Way forward 2019/2020
- Kick off the EUAG 2.0 (possibly) at the DDF in Stockholm June 2019
- Establish an operating mode that can influence/support the PTLs/subcommittee
- Bi-weekly calls with rotating moderation by members
- Action item tracking
- Reviews quarterly on DDF/OSN meetings - focus points/progress
- Report to the LFN GB/TAC/TSCs
Review the homework
Atul Purohit Focus areas Vodaphone
- Carrier priorities ONAP
- Functional/nonfumctinal (liaison w/ usecase sub committee) deployment related
- State of Play
- Production examples
- PoC examples
- Cross Carrier initiatives
- Ex-BBS
- EX - CCVPN
- Use case focus? Not only use cases - feel free to use other examples
- Distribution Strategy
Ryan Hallahan Focus area AT&T
- Carrier priorities ONAP (roughly in priority order)
- ONAP
- Platform maturity
- defect backlog
- 3rd party vulnerabilities
- Faster release cadence
- improve tool-chain infrastructure
- CII silver badging
- Increase and expand unit test code coverage
- Address critical project specific tech debt
- Improve documentation (eg. all APIs fully documented)
- control loop enhancements
- operations automation
- model driven control loop design (had addition materials - not presented)
- VNF validation
- Description clarity
- create and maintain a set of VNF requirements (had addition materials - not presented)
- 5G/PNF support
- VNF/PNF Change Management
- State of Play
- Cross Carrier Initiatives
Marc-Alexandre Choquette Focus areas for Bell Canada
- Carrier priorities ONAP
- serviceability for config and control loop
- missing/limited configuration capabilities
- not model driven config
- DGs not in line w/ operational needs
- Limited/hard-coded closed loop function
- limited data collection
- DMaaP REST APIs rather than native Kafka client
- no capabilities/framework for data enrichment
- heavy/broken collector and analytics
- platform maturity
- No component level maturity assessment
- something similar to CNCF model would be good.
- should not be a required component until a certain level of maturity is in place
- Content vs. code - not model driven
- S3P tighter security
- scalability fo high volume components (DCAE, DMaaP, controllers)
- upgradability - on major ONAP releases
- platform simplification (using exiting tech vs. new build) - too complex, too convoluted
- End user documentation and overall experience
- serviceability for config and control loop
- Self-Serviceability
Suggest a 2 hour meeting next time
Action items
- Jim Baker send out a poll for a 2 hr meeting next time