01-18-2022 TSC Meeting Agenda and Minutes

Owned by LJ Illuzzi
Last updated: Jan 25, 2022 by Bob Monkman (Deactivated)
2 min read

Insert Meeting Recording

Inseret Chat File



Login in with your Linux ID and add yourself to the attendance table. Tag yourslf with "@"

If you do not have an LF ID you can get one here:ย https://myprofile.lfx.linuxfoundation.org/



Attendees/Participants:

Name

Company

Name

Company

@Oleg Berzin

Equinix

@Bob Monkman (Deactivated)

Intel

@cathy zhang

Intel

@Nadathur Sundar

Intel

@Timo Perala

Nokia

@Srinivasa Addepalli

Intel

@Ritu Sood (Deactivated)

Intel

@Grzegorz Panek

Orange

@Victor Morales

Samsung

@Eric Multanen

Intel

@Igor Duarte Cardoso

Intel

@Amar Kapadia

Aarna Networks

LF Staff:ย @LJ Illuzzi



Agenda:

  • LF Antitrust Policy

  • Welcome new members

  • Opens?

  • EMCO logo vote via meeting chat

  • From 01/04 meeting ONAP TSC question on 5G SBP management of Magma - concerned about whether there is confusion about whether ONAP SO or EMCO will be integrated in 5g SBP.ย 

  • Feedback from DTF

  • Update on what transpired in an ONAP CNF WG meeting that happened in late December with regards to leveraging EMCO?



Minutes:



Logo Vote-

We discussed briefly the latest two options for logo design, pros and cons. We did not quite have a quorum and we also wanted to be sure and get a significant majority of participants weighing in and so Louis will set up an email vote that we can tally and make a final decision on.ย 

We discussed what we felt like was a very successful and well attended set of sessions last week at the LFN Dev Forum. Great exposure for EMCO and plenty of opportunities for blogs, webinars and other promotional activities we can draw content from in the coming months.ย 

We discussed the LFN 5G Super Blueprint and it was noted that the original idea of 5G SBP was to pull from existing LFN projects and ONAP was the default for VNF and CNF onboarding leveraging ONAP sub systems SO, CDS, DCAE. Amar Kapadia of Aarna networks added an EMCO option at one point. We certainly feel that we can position EMCO as one of multiple use case options for certain scenarios. The question did come up in a 5G SBP tech session in the LFN Forum last week, asking if the original intent had changed and perhaps alluding to concern that EMCO was being proposed instead of ONAP exclusively. We want to ensure that these options do not present the options as one or the other exclusively, but rather as viable alternatives depending on use case needs.ย 

So participants are asked to formally request EMCO as such an option, ensuring that it is clear that we do not intend to express this option as a replacement to ONAP equivalent capability and continue to work towards collaboration with ONAP to promote the best of both projects.ย 

Louis provided a link on this page for 5G SBP options.ย 







Future Agenda items:ย 

Let's discuss EMCO 22.03 release plan options next week.ย