Attendees & Representation (default sort: member first name)
TAC Members and Project representatives should mark their attendance below
Non-TAC project reps do not count towards meeting quorum
X = Present | P = Proxy (Indicate in the table with @name for @name
| Member | Representing | Member | Representing | Member | Representing | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ODL | X | FD.io | X | TF (incubation) | ||||
| OPNFV | X | @Eyal Felstaine | Amdocs | Samsung | X | |||
@Anil Guntupalli | Verizon | Cisco | Intel | X | ||||
| AT&T | X | IBM | P | Red Hat | ||||
| ONAP | X | China Mobile | TBD | Juniper | ||||
| ZTE | X | Deutsche Telekom | X | Huawei | ||||
| Ericsson | X | OPX (sandbox) | China Telecom | |||||
| Vodafone | Orange | |||||||
@David Sauvageau | Bell Canada | Türk Telekom | ||||||
| Tech Mahindra | Nokia | X | TBD | VMware |
LF Staff: Casey Cain Kenny Paul Jim Baker Brandon Wick LJ Illuzzi
Others: Qihui Zhao Zhiqiang Yu Scot Steele Qiao Fu @Xuxia Zhong @Amit Tiwari Kalyankumar Asangi Gergely Csatari
Agenda
- Start the Recording
- Show the Antitrust Policy
- Roll Call
- Action Items Review
- Agenda Bashing
- General Topics
- Encourage platform maturity, stability, modularity, and robustness - Discussion
- Introduction to XGVela - Qihui Zhao
- CNTT future mode of operations - Options discussion Scot Steele
- Any Other Topics
Minutes
Discussion - Enabling platform maturity, stability, modularity, and robustness
- A SPC KPI exists that asked that we measure the maturity of all the LFN projects
- cl664y@att.com Jason/Chaker has shared the project lifecycle with the TAC that includes maturity assessments - perhaps a year ago - review and revitalize
- Looking to build common criteria cross-projects and have the LFN TAC make the assessment during project reviews
- FREEMAN, BRIAN D Should have non-ONAP folks review the SP3 approach from ONAP
- Ed Warnicke Security surface areas are totally different between ONAP and FD.io by virtue of where they reside in the stack - so we need project specific objectives for these factors
- Ed Warnicke Believes that the Board should not be implementing KPIs for Projects, just the LFN because KPIs do no provide value to shipping a product.
- FREEMAN, BRIAN D KPIs cannot be shared across projects, categories might be the same, but metrics may be different
- Ask the projects what their metrics are for those categories AND determine which ones make sense for the project
- Next steps: Launch email discussion LFN PMs
Introduction to XGVela
- Qihui Zhao presented an overview of xGVela - see also https://xgvela.org/ and https://github.com/XGVela
- Please join their mailing lists and participate in their meetings.
Discussion - CNTT future mode of operations
- Scot Steele Reviewed the status of CNTT and the shift away from a task-force to some more sustainable structure and decision making process
- Option 1: CNTT become a LFN project
- Option 2: CNTT as a committee of the LFN GB
- Option 3: Merge CNTT into OPNFV
- Ed Warnicke Needs of an SDO are different than an open source project - eg. IP handling, ratification of standard
Action items
- Casey Cain Launch email to discuss the assessment of project maturity.