/
2020-02-19 - [CNTT - RM Workstream Master] Agenda and Meeting Minutes

2020-02-19 - [CNTT - RM Workstream Master] Agenda and Meeting Minutes

Mar 18, 2020

Attendees:

Please add your name in here:

  1. @Kelvin Edmison (Nokia)

  2. @Mark Shostak

  3. @Tomas Fredberg (Ericsson) (Ericsson)

  4. @Pankaj.Goyal (AT&T)

  5. @shasha guo (ChinaMobile)

  6. @Gergely Csatari (Nokia)

  7. @Trevor Cooper (Intel)

  8. @Ian Gardner (Vodafone)

  9. @Karine Sevilla (Orange)

  10. @Petar Torre (Deactivated) (Intel)

  11. @Toshi Wakayama (KDDI)

Special Notes:

  • Given the limited time available, we will focus on identifying issues/actions/next steps, but not solving them right now

  • Weekly RM meetings are intended to

    • Identify owners for new Issues

    • Track open Issues

    • Address technical issues that cannot be resolved online (i.e. resolve stalls)

Agenda:

 

  • Discuss RM Specific sessions we want to have in Los Angeles - ONES LA Topics Proposals - Technical

    • Proposals/ideas due by end of week:

      • RM Deep Dive

      • RM Networking (working session, white-boarding-style)

      • consider topics that are 'below' the line' for Baldy, but need kickstarting for the next release

      • Others

 

  • Generic Fabric Model (GFM)

    • [RM] Networking Strategy (Issue #960)

    • [RM] Long Term requirements for SDN, Fabric and Networking #1037

    • The following is proposed for Baldy MVP

      • Executive Summary

        • CNTT approach to the fabric // i.e. define for flexibility in ultimate implementation

      • Initial Objectives // i.e. what we want the GFM to achieve for CNTT (and why) Ex.:

        • The implementation of Networking inside the HW Layer should not be visible to the VNF/CNF and should preferably not even be visible to the IaaS/CaaS

        • Provide L3 tenant networks, GWs, SDS, etc.

        • CLEANLY decouple interface/reference points between CNTT constituencies

        • Provide compatibility at demarcation/reference points

          • any RA couples to RM

          • appropriate RI couples to RA

          • Operator can create or procure a compatible fabric, etc.

        • Provide a catalog of APIs, and their respective domains, capabilities and intent, to facilitate ease of integration w/ a wide selection of fabric implementations

        • Provide ability for any number of Operator-specific fabrics to power an RA/RI/VI

        • Enables RC's ability to realize their deliverables

        • Clearly documents responsibilities of each CNTT constituency

        • Your ideas here!

      • Provide enough mechanics for contributors to create coherent requirements

        • What are the buckets // Tech, RM, RAx, RIx, etc.

        • Examples of what goes in each bucket // Exec Summary & approach (Tech); generic/high-level requirements (RM), detailed requirements (RA), Sample imp to support RC (RI), etc.

        • Your ideas here!

 

  • Open questions

    • None

 

  • New Business

Actions:

  • General

     Document decision (flowing from #1007) about choosing Flavours over scheduler_hints

    based on discoverability, absence of traceability from scheduler_hints option, and based on openstack recommendation link
    Note in RM that compute flavour is parked, but don't remove it from the Reference Model entirely as we are re-adding it soon.
    Move the 3 categories above (but not the details) into issue #1037, with the intent that 1037 concludes on the direction that networking is going to take post-Baldy.

Minutes: