At this point, it’s about what the TSC authorizes as an official version for 
external publications, presentations, new project proposals, etc.

The ARC finalized our guidance to the projects by M1, and it hasn’t changed 
since.  We shared the draft version with the TSC at M1, but did not receive  
feedback from the TSC until after M2. The feedback related to how we documented 
each project, and the note regarding ETSI alignment referenced by Jamil.  We 
addressed it as promptly as possible; however, since some of the feedback came 
in during a major holiday affecting a significant portion of our community, it 
took time to close all of the issues.

The architecture CANNOT be approved before M1, since new project proposals are 
being accepted  until then, and some have impacts on the architecture.  We can 
present a draft by M1, though (as we did with Beijing).  If the TSC wants 
approval by M2, the ARC needs prompt feedback  from the TSC based on the M1 
draft, and not the week after M2.

Chris

From: 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
 on behalf of Alla Goldner 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Tuesday, March 20, 2018 at 11:35 PM
To: Kenny Paul <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>, 
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Cc: "[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>" 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc-vote] ONAP Beijing Architecture Approval (ends 5PM 
Pacific, March 20)

Hi,

I have to admit I have difficulty understanding meaning of vote for Beijing 
architecture at this point of time (and also understanding the meaning of 
failure of this vote).

Usually, architecture is agreed when Release starts – otherwise how different 
projects can plan their work/develop their functionalities? And what this vote 
result means? My assumption was that architecture approval AT THIS POINT of 
time is purely bureaucratic, for book keeping.

I don’t know what will be our next steps – I do believe we must establish some 
clear rules on when architecture should be approved for any Release (and what 
such an approved architecture should include in terms of contents/level of 
details for a different involved modules). I also believe such an approval MUST 
happen prior to M1 of any Release.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:[email protected]]

From: 
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
 [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 2:31 AM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc-vote] ONAP Beijing Architecture Approval (ends 5PM 
Pacific, March 20)

(Bcc’d to onap-tsc for Community visibility)

The proposed ONAP Beijing Architecture v2.0.3 was NOT approved.


Votes needed to pass: 10
Votes cast: 10
Votes in favor: 9
Votes against: 1
Abstentions: 9

Company              Member                         Vote
AMDOCS             Alla Goldner                   1
AT&T                             Mazin Gilbert                  1
Bell Canada           David Sauvageau
China Mobile                  Lingli Deng           1
China Telecom      Xiaojun Xie           1
Cisco                     Frank Brockners
Cloudify                         Amir Levy
Ericsson                          Stephen Terrill
Huawei                           Christopher Donley         1
IBM                      Jason Hunt            1
Intel                               Rajesh Gadiyar
Nokia                    Ranny Haiby
Orange                            Jamil Chawki                  -1
Reliance Jio           Aayush Bhatnagar
Tech Mahindra      Dhananjay Pavgi             1
Turk Telecom                 Cosar Baykal
VMWare                         Xinhui Li
Vodafone                        Susana Sabater      1
ZTE                                Zhaoxing Meng     1


For reference:

Section 3.c of the ONAP Technical Charter
c. Except as provided in Section 7.c. and 8.a, decisions by vote at a meeting 
require a majority vote of those in attendance, provided quorum is met. 
Decisions made by electronic vote without a meeting require a majority vote of 
all voting members of the TSC.

Vote thread archive: 
https://lists.onap.org/pipermail/onap-tsc-vote/2018-March/000441.html

Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>, 510.766.5945
San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone


On Mar 15, 2018, at 11:18 AM, Kenny Paul 
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:


The TSC approves the ONAP Beijing Architecture v2.0.3 as documented here: 
Beijing 
Architecture<https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Beijing+Architecture?src=contextnavpagetreemode>

Please respond with a +1, 0 -1



This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer
_______________________________________________
ONAP-TSC mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Reply via email to