[onap-tsc] Great News! ONAP Community Calendar Changes

[Kenny Paul]

It is with great pleasure I would like to report that Casey Cain (PM of ODL & 
Tungsten Fabric) has moved the original ONAP calendar outside the LF Google 
Suite domain. This means that it is now editable by the community!!  No more 
kenny-bot dependency. YAY! :-D

 

However, to keep the ONAP calendar from becoming anarchy and chaos, there do 
need to be some controls. Just like you don't want just anyone to be a 
Committer for a project, we don't want just anyone to make updates to the 
calendar. I am looking for 5-6 volunteers to serve as calendar admins to serve 
the community.
Calendar admins are responsible for handling creation, update and cancellation 
requests from the community.
The method by which the community will request a calendar update is to be 
determined collectively by the initial set of admins. Whatever makes the most 
sense to them; mailing list, jira, RFC-1149, whatever, the admins decide is 
what it will be.
This is only the calendar itself at this time. Figuring out how best to handle 
zoom requests will be discussed after the calendar management has been turned 
over to the community.
 

I have seen the same core set of individuals volunteering for things on a 
regular basis.  I would like to see other members of the community step forward 
here. The only requirement is that you must be able to access google calendar 
directly. Other than that, it can be anyone from anywhere.

 

Please let me know if you are interested in being a calendar admin.

 

Thanks!

 

Best Regards, 
-kenny

Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation
kp...@linuxfoundation.org, 510.766.5945
San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone

 

 


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3819): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3819
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26686899/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

[Phil Robb]

Thanks for your note Kenny.

I'm happy to present the feedback I have collected from operators thus far,
as well as go through the rationale and method for how I am collecting it.
I've asked Kenny to see if he can find a slot for me to present this at the
next, or a near-term TSC meeting.

Best,

Phil.

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 3:52 PM Kenny Paul  wrote:

> Thanks for the work on this Ranny.
>
> The concern and effort that has gone into the survey are much appreciated.
> The fundamental questions regarding timely end-user input and requirements
> and an understanding of what we need to build are critically important to
> all of us.  I'd like to try again to communicate what I had difficulty
> getting across on that TSC call a couple of weeks ago however.
>
>
>
> The key concerns being raised by the community were already being
> discussed at the LFN Board level. I brought that up repeatedly.  Phil had
> previously circulated a survey with the Operators on the Board well before
> the community decided an ONAP survey to the operators was the thing to do.
> The results of Phil's survey were reviewed with the Board last week at ONS
> and there are follow-ups in the works.  As many are aware, Phil has also
> been working diligently to address some of the gaps for input and strategy
> across all LFN Projects. This was also discussed at the Board meeting and a
> workgroup comprised of Board member operators and vendors was established
> to nail down that structure in short order. ONAP is the first target of the
> workgroup's attention.
>
>
>
> Several people on the original TSC call pointed out there has not been any
> movement with the LFN-EUAG yet, which is both true and unfortunate. I am
> the PM responsible for the LFN-EUAG. The lack of progress falls directly on
> me. The ONAP community was expected to be in a far more self-operational
> state by now and I would be focusing some attention on the LFN-EUAG.  I am
> hopeful that progress on both fronts can be made shortly.
>
>
>
> Getting back to what triggered the initial discussion was the Usecase
> subcommittee's concern that calls for operator input are going unanswered.
> From my point-of-view this is because no one is really signed up to provide
> it.  What folks are referring to as "The ONAP EUAG" were just a few folks
> hand-picked by the former Chair to provide input. This was done with the
> best of intentions, but it was completely informal. An EUAG was never
> formally established by the TSC.  There was there was no charter presented,
> there was no subcommittee proposal, there was no vote on setting up such a
> group.  From that perspective we can only be upset with ourselves if no
> formal input from "The EUAG" is coming in.
>
>
>
> We can send this survey to the LFN-EUAG, but a review of its  Charter
> 
> by the TSC is probably in order.  In addition, I'm sure you would all
> agree that the LFN-EUAG needs to be operational before we hit them up with
> a survey out of the blue.
>
>
>
> I am neither encouraging the community to, nor discouraging the community
> from setting up an ONAP specific EUAG if one is desired. If the TSC
> approves an operational charter for such a group and secures committed
> membership, any survey should probably be distributed by under the auspices
> of that structure.
>
>
>
> …and before anyone mentions it, *YES,* I am keenly aware of the timing of
> input that is necessary for us to maintain our current release cadence for
> Dublin.  There were two key themes that I kept hearing over and over at
> ONS; Stability and modularity, the latter almost always mentioned in the
> context of eliminating hard wired usecases which was a turn-off to many
> implementers.  Perhaps that should be evaluated as a potential release
> theme.
>
>
>
> All of the things above are hard decisions TSC needs to assess in the
> context of time, content and quality of the next release.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
> -kenny
>
>
>
>
>
> *From: * on behalf of ramki krishnan <
> ram...@vmware.com>
> *Reply-To: *
> *Date: *Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:01 AM
> *To: *"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" 
> *Subject: *Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey
>
>
>
> Thanks Ranny, nice survey.
>
>
>
> It may be worth adding another line as follows under  “Please choose which
> best describes your company’s strategic approach to ONAP”
>
>- We are committed to leverage some components of ONAP for our network
>service. We are currently making some progress towards this.
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Ramki
>
>
>
> *From:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  *On Behalf Of 
> *Haiby,
> Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)
> *Sent:* Tuesday, October 2, 2018 8:48 AM
> *To:* ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
> *Subject:* [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> Following a discussion on the TSC weekly call two weeks ago I started
> creating a survey that will be used to solicit EUAG input to ONAP.
>
> 

Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

[Kenny Paul]

Thanks for the work on this Ranny.  

The concern and effort that has gone into the survey are much appreciated. The 
fundamental questions regarding timely end-user input and requirements and an 
understanding of what we need to build are critically important to all of us.  
I'd like to try again to communicate what I had difficulty getting across on 
that TSC call a couple of weeks ago however.

 

The key concerns being raised by the community were already being discussed at 
the LFN Board level. I brought that up repeatedly.  Phil had previously 
circulated a survey with the Operators on the Board well before the community 
decided an ONAP survey to the operators was the thing to do.  The results of 
Phil's survey were reviewed with the Board last week at ONS and there are 
follow-ups in the works.  As many are aware, Phil has also been working 
diligently to address some of the gaps for input and strategy across all LFN 
Projects. This was also discussed at the Board meeting and a workgroup 
comprised of Board member operators and vendors was established to nail down 
that structure in short order. ONAP is the first target of the workgroup's 
attention.

 

Several people on the original TSC call pointed out there has not been any 
movement with the LFN-EUAG yet, which is both true and unfortunate. I am the PM 
responsible for the LFN-EUAG. The lack of progress falls directly on me. The 
ONAP community was expected to be in a far more self-operational state by now 
and I would be focusing some attention on the LFN-EUAG.  I am hopeful that 
progress on both fronts can be made shortly.

 

Getting back to what triggered the initial discussion was the Usecase 
subcommittee's concern that calls for operator input are going unanswered.  
From my point-of-view this is because no one is really signed up to provide it. 
 What folks are referring to as "The ONAP EUAG" were just a few folks 
hand-picked by the former Chair to provide input. This was done with the best 
of intentions, but it was completely informal. An EUAG was never formally 
established by the TSC.  There was there was no charter presented, there was no 
subcommittee proposal, there was no vote on setting up such a group.  From that 
perspective we can only be upset with ourselves if no formal input from "The 
EUAG" is coming in.

 

We can send this survey to the LFN-EUAG, but a review of its  Charter by the 
TSC is probably in order.  In addition, I'm sure you would all agree that the 
LFN-EUAG needs to be operational before we hit them up with a survey out of the 
blue. 

 

I am neither encouraging the community to, nor discouraging the community from 
setting up an ONAP specific EUAG if one is desired. If the TSC approves an 
operational charter for such a group and secures committed membership, any 
survey should probably be distributed by under the auspices of that structure.

 

…and before anyone mentions it, YES, I am keenly aware of the timing of input 
that is necessary for us to maintain our current release cadence for Dublin.  
There were two key themes that I kept hearing over and over at ONS; Stability 
and modularity, the latter almost always mentioned in the context of 
eliminating hard wired usecases which was a turn-off to many implementers.  
Perhaps that should be evaluated as a potential release theme. 

 

All of the things above are hard decisions TSC needs to assess in the context 
of time, content and quality of the next release. 

 

 

Thanks!

-kenny

 

 

From:  on behalf of ramki krishnan 
Reply-To: 
Date: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 at 9:01 AM
To: "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

 

Thanks Ranny, nice survey.

 

It may be worth adding another line as follows under  “Please choose which best 
describes your company’s strategic approach to ONAP”
We are committed to leverage some components of ONAP for our network service. 
We are currently making some progress towards this.
 

Thanks

Ramki

 

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Haiby, 
Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 8:48 AM
To: ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

 

Hi,

Following a discussion on the TSC weekly call two weeks ago I started creating 
a survey that will be used to solicit EUAG input to ONAP.

With the help of several community members we now have a first draft of the 
survey available for review:

https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/EUAG+Survey

 

Please feel free to use the comments section of the wiki page for any 
suggestions for additions or modifications.

 

Ranny.

 

_.

 


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3816): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3816
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26654273/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

[Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)]

@Ramki
Thanks for your comments. I will update the survey to reflect them.

@Chaker
If the definition of modularity is up for debate, why don't we let the end 
users chime in and have them provide their definition. I can remove the 
"modularity" from the scoring matrix and instead add an open question asking 
for a definition of modularity in the eyes of the end user. Better yet, we can 
make this a multiple choice question. I will need several possible answers in 
addition to my "Ability to use only a subset of ONAP modules that are relevant 
to your company"

@Steve , @Parviz - Could you share some of the other "modularity" definitions 
you had in mind?

Thanks,

Ranny.

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Chaker Al 
Hakim
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 10:19 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

Hi Ranny,

Thanks for taking the lead on this.

My comment is regarding the definition of "Modularity" in your survey. We spent 
significant amount of time at the architecture tiger  team meeting debating the 
definition. You may want to wait for Stephen T.,  Parviz and other members to 
weigh in before you send the survey out. I will also enter my comment on the 
wiki as well.

Regards,
Chaker




From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of ramki krishnan
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 12:01 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

Thanks Ranny, nice survey.

It may be worth adding another line as follows under  "Please choose which best 
describes your company's strategic approach to ONAP"

  *   We are committed to leverage some components of ONAP for our network 
service. We are currently making some progress towards this.

Thanks
Ramki

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Haiby, 
Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 8:48 AM
To: ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

Hi,
Following a discussion on the TSC weekly call two weeks ago I started creating 
a survey that will be used to solicit EUAG input to ONAP.
With the help of several community members we now have a first draft of the 
survey available for review:
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/EUAG+Survey

Please feel free to use the comments section of the wiki page for any 
suggestions for additions or modifications.

Ranny.



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3815): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3815
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26654273/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Hi Ranny,

Thanks for taking the lead on this.

My comment is regarding the definition of "Modularity" in your survey. We spent 
significant amount of time at the architecture tiger  team meeting debating the 
definition. You may want to wait for Stephen T.,  Parviz and other members to 
weigh in before you send the survey out. I will also enter my comment on the 
wiki as well.

Regards,
Chaker




From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
ramki krishnan
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 12:01 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

Thanks Ranny, nice survey.

It may be worth adding another line as follows under  "Please choose which best 
describes your company's strategic approach to ONAP"
-  We are committed to leverage some components of ONAP for our network 
service. We are currently making some progress towards this.

Thanks
Ramki

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Haiby, 
Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 8:48 AM
To: ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

Hi,
Following a discussion on the TSC weekly call two weeks ago I started creating 
a survey that will be used to solicit EUAG input to ONAP.
With the help of several community members we now have a first draft of the 
survey available for review:
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/EUAG+Survey

Please feel free to use the comments section of the wiki page for any 
suggestions for additions or modifications.

Ranny.



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3814): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3814
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26654273/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

[ramki krishnan]

Thanks Ranny, nice survey.

It may be worth adding another line as follows under  "Please choose which best 
describes your company's strategic approach to ONAP"

  *   We are committed to leverage some components of ONAP for our network 
service. We are currently making some progress towards this.

Thanks
Ramki

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Haiby, 
Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)
Sent: Tuesday, October 2, 2018 8:48 AM
To: ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

Hi,
Following a discussion on the TSC weekly call two weeks ago I started creating 
a survey that will be used to solicit EUAG input to ONAP.
With the help of several community members we now have a first draft of the 
survey available for review:
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/EUAG+Survey

Please feel free to use the comments section of the wiki page for any 
suggestions for additions or modifications.

Ranny.



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3813): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3813
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26654273/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-tsc] EUAG Survey

[Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)]

Hi,
Following a discussion on the TSC weekly call two weeks ago I started creating 
a survey that will be used to solicit EUAG input to ONAP.
With the help of several community members we now have a first draft of the 
survey available for review:
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/EUAG+Survey

Please feel free to use the comments section of the wiki page for any 
suggestions for additions or modifications.

Ranny.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3812): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3812
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26654273/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] Agenda Preparation for the next TSC Call (Oct 4th, 2018)

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

Good morning Chaker and TSC Team Members,

We have now a "ONAP TSC" project under JIRA.
It will help us to track our TSC activities, to build our TSC roadmap etc.
https://jira.onap.org/projects/TSC/issues/TSC-7?filter=allopenissues

I have started to create some TSC tasks based on feedback received from the ONS 
event (still in progress)
I am also working on the TSC Dashboard and we will review the first TSC Tasks 
Allocation on Thursday, Oct 4th.

The ONAP TSC session will be recorded but we can definitively review any topic 
on Oct 11th after the RC0 milestone review or earlier,
in case of our Chinese colleagues have any question/feedback.

I also would like to invite any TSC member to request their JIRA account (if 
not yet done).

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 7:20 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Agenda Preparation for the next TSC Call (Oct 4th, 2018)

Hi Catherine and Community colleagues,

I have a list of items that  I'd like to propose not only for this upcoming 
meeting but perhaps for future meetings. Do we have a place on the wiki where 
we can "park" these items or should I just add them to the next agenda and 
collectively decide if we should defer to future meetings.

In addition,  our Chinese colleagues are off this week so we may have to 
revisit some of this weeks' topics  on next week's call when everyone is back.

Regards,
Chaker



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 10:50 AM
To: ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Agenda Preparation for the next TSC Call (Oct 4th, 2018)
Importance: High

Dear ONAP Community,

We would like to invite you to share any agenda item, that you would like to 
discuss this week with the ONAP TSC, no later than Tuesday (Oct. 2nd) 11.59pm 
PST.
The TSC agenda items will therefore be reviewed and confirmed on Wednesday (Oct 
3rd).

Here is the wiki link where you can post your agenda item(s):
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/TSC+2018-10-04+Meeting+Agenda

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 475 77 36 73
catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com

TEXTING and DRIVING... It Can Wait

AT
BUROGEST OFFICE PARK SA
Avenue des Dessus-de-Lives, 2
5101 Loyers (Namur)
Belgium



NOTE: This email (or its attachments) contains information belonging to the 
sender, which may be confidential. proprietary and/or legally privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
content of this is strictly forbidden. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please immediately notify the sender identified above



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3811): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3811
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26442215/21656
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-arc] Dublin Architecture Planning Meeting

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

+1

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
ramki krishnan
Sent: Tuesday, October 02, 2018 2:06 AM
To: Chaker Al Hakim ; Alla Goldner 
; Kenny Paul ; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Cc: Phil Robb 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-arc] Dublin Architecture Planning Meeting

+1

From: onap-...@lists.onap.org 
mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Monday, October 1, 2018 2:13 PM
To: Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
Kenny Paul mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; 
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Cc: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [Onap-arc] Dublin Architecture Planning Meeting

+1

From: onap-...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 1:12 PM
To: Kenny Paul mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; 
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
Cc: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [Onap-arc] Dublin Architecture Planning Meeting

Adding discuss and tsc lists.

Kenny, Phill,

As it looks right now, we will not have Dublin Developer Forum before Dublin 
release.
Thus, it is extremely important to have at least VF2F, preferably in November, 
where we can discuss Dublin scope and contents per each one of the projects.
We, probably, need 3 or 4 days (Mon to Thu), 3 hours each day for the meetings.
Is it possible to set up such a meeting?

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image002.png@01D45A40.4EC495A0]

From: onap-...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Monday, October 01, 2018 9:30 AM
To: onap-...@lists.onap.org
Cc: Bartosz Balazinski 
mailto:bartosz.balazin...@ibm.com>>; Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; Lara Taback 
mailto:ltab...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: [Onap-arc] Dublin Architecture Planning Meeting

First and foremost, I want to apologize for the delay in assisting here. I know 
that is has been frustrating for many community members given upcoming holidays 
and such.  I greatly appreciate the community's understanding and patience 
regarding all of the activities we are juggling in parallel. Secondly, I wish 
to thank IBM, and Bartosz Balazinski in particular, for their outstanding help 
and support!!!  Bartosz started a wiki page for this meeting that I've just 
finished fleshing out a bit further with all of the information you should 
need. Dublin Architecture Planning 
Meeting

A couple of important items of note about this meeting:

-  This is NOT a Dublin Release Developer event – unfortunately we still do 
not have a final date for that, however there was a great deal of progress made 
working with potential hosts at ONS. Please stay tuned.


-  The F2F meeting is an Architecture Subcommittee meeting, specifically 
for Dublin Architecture Planning.  This is similar to the meeting that occurred 
at the Openstack Summit back in May  
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Casablanca+Architecture+Planning+Meeting

Formal registration: