Skip to end of banner
Go to start of banner

EUAG 2019-05-07 Meeting Minutes

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Next »

Date

Attendees



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
  • Self-Serviceability 


Suggest a 2 hour meeting next time

Action items

  • Jim Baker send out a poll for a 2 hr meeting next time
  •  
  • No labels