[onap-tsc] Casablanca Participation

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear TSC,

VNFSDK plans to participate in the Casablanca release.

Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-usecasesub] [**EXTERNAL**] The summary of Usecase subcommittee meeting 14/05/2017 - Casablanca use cases/functional requirements endorsement

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Agreed.  This appears to be a significant change to the existing architecture, 
and should be discussed with the wider community.  Let me know when you're 
ready, and I'll allocate a slot on the agenda.

Chris

From: mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> 
on behalf of Stephen Terrill 
mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>
Date: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 at 10:14 AM
To: "VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L" mailto:tv8...@att.com>>, Parviz 
Yegani mailto:parviz.yeg...@huawei.com>>, 
"Ranganathan, Raghu" mailto:rra...@ciena.com>>
Cc: "onap-disc...@lists.onap.org" 
mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>>, "TIMONEY, 
DAN" mailto:dt5...@att.com>>, "SMITH JR., PAUL" 
mailto:ps7...@att.com>>, 
"onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org" 
mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>>, 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-usecasesub] [**EXTERNAL**] The summary of Usecase 
subcommittee meeting 14/05/2017 - Casablanca use cases/functional requirements 
endorsement

Hi,

The current practice we have is that these are taken in the Tuesday 
Architecture meetings as is done with other use cases with architecture 
considerations.

Chris?

BR,

Steve


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On 
Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 12:15 PM
To: Parviz Yegani mailto:parviz.yeg...@huawei.com>>; 
Ranganathan, Raghu mailto:rra...@ciena.com>>
Cc: TIMONEY, DAN mailto:dt5...@att.com>>; SMITH JR., PAUL 
mailto:ps7...@att.com>>; onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-usecasesub] [**EXTERNAL**] The summary of Usecase 
subcommittee meeting 14/05/2017 - Casablanca use cases/functional requirements 
endorsement

Parviz,
Raghu,

Please join the weekly SDN-R call (see below) to discuss this topic.

We can allow 15 or 20 minutes on the agenda for the call today, May 30th, or 
for the call next week, June 6th  - just let me know your preference.

Thank you in advance,

Tracy

Tracy Van Brakle mailto:vanbra...@att.com>>
AT Labs - Wireless Network Architecture and Design
+1 732.420.3003  office
+1 732.306.2387  cell


[sdnr] team meeting (updated Apr. 3, 2018)
When

Weekly from 9am to 10am on Wednesday from Wed Apr 4 to Wed Mar 13, 2019 Pacific 
Time

Where

https://zoom.us/j/502876187
 
(map)

Calendar

tv8...@att.com






From:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org
 
mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of Parviz Yegani
Sent: Wednesday, May 30, 2018 2:03 AM
To: Ranganathan, Raghu mailto:rra...@ciena.com>>
Cc: TIMONEY, DAN mailto:dt5...@att.com>>; onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [**EXTERNAL**] [onap-tsc] The summary of Usecase 
subcommittee meeting 14/05/2017 - Casablanca use cases/functional requirements 
endorsement

Hi Raghu,

I think we need to have a call to discuss SDN-R and it’s relation to SDN-C. 
I’ll be happy to send an invite for this.

How about Thursday, 1:00PM Pacific?

Regards,
Parviz

---
PARVIZ YEGANI, PhD
Chief SDN/NFV Architect
CTO Office, Cloud Network Solutions

FutureWei Technologies, Inc.
2330 Central Express Way
Santa Clara, CA 95050, USA
Phone: +1 (408) 330-4668
Mobile : +1 (408) 759-1973
parviz.yeg...@huawei.com



From: Ranganathan, Raghu [mailto:rra...@ciena.com]
Sent: Tuesday, May 22, 2018 5:39 PM
To: Parviz Yegani mailto:parviz.yeg...@huawei.com>>
Cc: TIMONEY, DAN mailto:dt5...@att.com>>; Alla Goldner 
mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; Vladimir Yanover 
(vyanover) mailto:vyano...@cisco.com>>; Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>; 
SHANKARANARAYANAN, N K 
mailto:shan...@research.att.com>>; 
onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [**EXTERNAL**] [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-tsc] The summary of Usecase 

Re: [onap-tsc] [ARCH] Request scope change review: POMBA introduction in Logging project for Casablanca

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Michael,

Yes, we can move you to an early slot on the 29th.

Chris

From: Michael O'Brien <frank.obr...@amdocs.com<mailto:frank.obr...@amdocs.com>>
Date: Monday, May 14, 2018 at 6:55 AM
To: Chris Donley 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>, 
"onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>>, onap-tsc 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] [ARCH] Request scope change review: POMBA introduction 
in Logging project for Casablanca

Chris,
Can we delay the scope change meeting for logging until next week – the 
22nd.
I understand the Architecture team is at a conference next week – so likely 
we will do this scope change on the 29th in 2 weeks.
Can I request the first hour – as we have our logging meeting in the 2nd 
hour of the Arch meeting
Thank you
/michael

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Michael O'Brien
Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 9:41 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>; onap-tsc 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: [onap-tsc] [ARCH] Request scope change review: POMBA introduction in 
Logging project for Casablanca

Chris,
   Hi, the logging project would like to introduce a proposed scope change for 
Casablanca – we would like to pass these adjustments by the architecture 
subcommittee and the community before meeting the use case subcommittee.

https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/POMBA
The expanded clickable team member list is on the sub page
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Logging+Scope+Change+for+POMBA+seed+code#LoggingScopeChangeforPOMBAseedcode-Teammembers

  I would expect 15 min.

  1.  Jon Fannar Karlsson Taylor and Sharon Chisholm will be presenting
  2.  Heads up review of the architecture proposal, the new microservices, new 
API capabilities provided by the audit, any overlap with other projects, 
requirements on other projects and use case discussion



   This meeting is separate from the ongoing review of the Logging 
specification and implementation under the following that we discussed at last 
week’s Architecture meeting
https://jira.onap.org/browse/ONAPARC-148

   Let us know if there are any additional requirements.
   Thank you
/michael


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
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
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Members Composition Survey RFC - Respond by 18:00 Pacific time, May 7

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

If we do proceed with this motion, I think we should separate out PTLs from the 
other positions.  PTLs are responsible for managing a single project, whereas 
the other positions are responsible for cross-project leadership.  In some 
cases, it makes sense that one of the project leaders also leads the 
subcommittee (such as closed-loop subcommittee).  In others, it helps maintain 
a connection between the subcommittee work and the projects.

I have no objection to saying that a single person can only lead one 
cross-project initiative (TSC Chair, Vice Chair, subcommittee Chair), but that 
shouldn't extend to PTLs.

Thanks,
Chris

From: > 
on behalf of Alla Goldner 
>
Date: Monday, May 7, 2018 at 1:55 AM
To: "Gadiyar, Rajesh" 
>, Kenny Paul 
>
Cc: onap-tsc >
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Members Composition Survey RFC - Respond by 18:00 
Pacific time, May 7

Hi all,

Also, additional point I’ve been thinking of.
Last year we had some proposals on the table to limit number of positions (e.g. 
chairs, vice-chairs, PTLs etc.) to 1 per single person.
It never came to voting, as it was too controversial back then.
Perhaps, we have a more mature community now to move forward and see if we can 
reach consensus also on this point.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D3E5FA.3EEC3AD0]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Gadiyar, Rajesh
Sent: Sunday, May 06, 2018 5:43 PM
To: Kenny Paul >
Cc: onap-tsc >
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Members Composition Survey RFC - Respond by 18:00 
Pacific time, May 7

Hello Kenny,

Thanks! Section 2b reads:
b. TSC Voting Members
i. “Startup Period”: From date of creation of the ONAP Project a Series of
LF Projects, LLC (“Project Launch”) until June 30, 2018 (such period the
“Startup Period”), the TSC voting members will consist of one appointee
from each organization listed as having TSC appointees on ONAP.org.
All TSC voting members will be listed on ONAP.org.
ii. “Steady State”: After the Startup Period, the size, makeup and procedure
for determining voting members of the TSC will be as determined by the
TSC and documented on the ONAP web site.

I am NOT asking for a redefinition. I am proposing the following: B) 
Guaranteeing TSC seats for LFN's Platinum Member companies.

Another option that came to mind that has not been brought up before is 
guaranteeing 1 TSC seat for each of the top 15 code contributing companies 
(rewards meritocracy and actual code contributions to ONAP) and an additional 5 
seats reserved for Operators. This will bring the total TSC to 20 members which 
is reasonable.

Regards,
Rajesh


From: Kenny Paul >
Date: Friday, May 4, 2018 at 2:12 PM
To: Rajesh Gadiyar >
Cc: onap-tsc >
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Members Composition Survey RFC - Respond by 18:00 
Pacific time, May 7

Hi Rajesh,
please refer to Section 2b of the ONAP Project a Series of LF Projects, LLC 
Technical 
Charter
 below.
in the context of Question #1 unless your request is to redefine both the 
"Startup Period" and "Steady State" definitions, a specific date is required. I 
don't think that a redefinition is what you are really asking for.

My interpretation of your actual ask is that you would like to see a TSC 
Composition question added about A) guaranteeing seats for ONAP Platinum 
Members of record from 2017 or B) guaranteeing seats for any one of the LFN's 
Platinum Member companies.

An alternative interpretation may be that you would like to see qualification 
options added to Question #11 for C) only candidates from one of the ONAP 
Platinum Members of record from 2017 are qualified to hold a seat on the ONAP 
TSC, or D) only candidates from any one of the LFN's Platinum Member companies 
are qualified to hold a seat on the ONAP TSC.

Is A, B, C or D correct, or do you indeed want to redefine the state 
definitions?

b. TSC Voting Members
i. “Startup Period”: From date of creation of the ONAP Project a Series of LF 
Projects, LLC (“Project Launch”) until June 30, 2018 (such period the “Startup 
Period”), the TSC voting members will consist of one appointee from each 
organization listed as having TSC appointees on 

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Members Composition Survey RFC - Respond by 18:00 Pacific time, May 7

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Thanks Kenny.  Our suggestion could be paraphrased as "one of anything that 
shows up on Bitergia" (except email, which we thought was too low a bar). 1 
wiki page would be sufficient.

Chris

From: Kenny Paul >
Date: Friday, May 4, 2018 at 3:53 PM
To: Chris Donley 
>, onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Members Composition Survey RFC - Respond by 18:00 
Pacific time, May 7

Who should be able to vote in a TSC election?

 *   Any active community member (defined using the OPNFV model of 20 
contributions in total made over a 12-month period, inclusive of patches 
merged, reviews made, Wiki page edits, and JIRA activities)
 *   Committers, Contributors and Reviewers only
 *   Anyone on the ONAP “Discuss” and/or “TSC” email list as of the date 
nomination process starts for the election
 *   Other [Please provide recommendation]
This is missing the option from our proposal: Any active community member, 
defined as anyone who has made one or more measurable contributions during the 
previous six months, inclusive of code submissions, code reviews, wiki page 
edits/uploads, Jira activities, readthedocs, subcommittee leadership, and/or 
presentations to one of the subcommittees (Use Case, Architecture, Security, 
Modeling, Closed-Loop, etc.)
>>> Again my apologies. This is why we sent it out for comments. Nothing was 
>>> intentionally excluded, just a function of trying to reconcile a great many 
>>> things. The goal of the proposal you and Steve put together was to keep the 
>>> barrier to entry as low as it could possibly be. While discussing this 
>>> yesterday Phil and I were of the opinion that wiki page edits were the 
>>> lowest measurable common denominator and one that should effectively 
>>> capture non-developer participation.  In this case that would be 1 wiki 
>>> comment/update or page creation in 6 months.  Would you agree with our 
>>> assessment?
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Proxy for May 10 meeting

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear Team,

I will be traveling internationally next week from 5/9-13.  During my absence, 
Chaker Al Hakim will serve as my proxy on the TSC.

Thanks,
Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Kenny,

I think that's the wrong way to frame this. I don't object to any company being 
represented on the TSC, but I think we need to look at the needs of the 
community and what leadership structure would best support it.

Earlier, Mazin expressed his principles for the new TSC.  Here are mine:

  1.  Everyone on the TSC needs to have 'skin in the game'.  Everyone needs to 
be engaged and making a contribution. Further, we all need to be accountable to 
the community.  As Alex mentioned on one of our calls, ONAP is a large and 
complicated project, and we need different contributions from people with 
different skill sets.  I think that is valid and important, and and we should 
recognize myriad contributions.  Also, in your feeback slide, you wrote that 
the TSC was perceived to be:

  2.  Company Centric - Not Community Focused
  3.Only a few engage beyond their own company walls or organizational silos
  4.One-way conversations are common versus interactive dialogs with the 
Community   Decisions seem to be made in private by a small subset of people
  5.Opposing Community viewpoints or concerns are often marginalized
I think holding elections, where the TSC is accountable to the community, will 
help with this.
2. The TSC should be of reasonable size to make timely decisions.  From my past 
experience, this is somewhere between 12-15 people.  As it is now, we're having 
trouble reaching quorum with 18.  I don't want to see the size of the TSC 
expanded where it reduces effectiveness.  Also, looking at Bitergia, it appears 
that only 20 companies are contributing to ONAP.  I don't want to see the TSC 
larger than that – then we're starting to get into companies with negligible 
(or no) contributions.  I suggest we target 15 for steady-state, while allowing 
additional seats for a year for newly-joined platinum members.
3.  I have no objections to allowing platinum members who joined less than a 
year ago to maintain their seat while they formulate their strategy and begin 
to make contributions.

Chris

From: > 
on behalf of Kenny Paul 
>
Date: Thursday, April 19, 2018 at 6:37 PM
To: Phil Robb >, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Hi TSC Members,
I am attempting to get my head around a couple aspects of the discussion. I 
think that there are a few things we can knock down in advance of next week, 
which is all I am trying to accomplish here.

NOTE- THESE ARE NOT VOTES, but if there are objections or concerns, let's 
discuss them as they tie into Phil's voting proposals.

When considering each of these please DO NOT worry about any potential "order 
of operations" logic. Each question should be considered as a unique, 
independent, stand-alone question. If you have no objection to the question you 
are reading, just move along to the next one. If you have an objection simply 
state why you think it is a bad idea. :-)


  *   Are there any objections to the former ONAP Platinum Service Provider 
Members that joined the Program after the launch (specifically Turk Telekom, 
Verizon, and Vodafone), being allowed to keep an appointed representative on 
the TSC for [election date] plus 12 months?


  *   Are there any objections to any former ONAP Platinum Service Provider 
Members (specifically AT, Bell Canada, China Mobile, China Telecom, Orange, 
Reliance Jio, Turk Telekom, Vodafone & Verizon) being able to appoint a 
representative to the TSC for [election date] plus 12 months if someone from 
their company does not get elected?


  *   Are there any objections to any former ONAP Platinum Members (i.e all of 
the existing TSC Companies + Verizon) being able to appoint a representative to 
the TSC for [election date] plus 12 months if someone from their company does 
not get elected?


  *   Are there any objections to a service provider LFN Platinum Member that 
joins the ONAP Program from being able to appoint a representative to the TSC 
from the time they join ONAP until the first scheduled TSC election following 
12 months of ONAP TSC membership?



  *   Are there any objections to any LFN Platinum Member that joins the ONAP 
Program from being able to appoint a representative to the TSC from the time 
they join ONAP until the first scheduled TSC election following 12 months of 
ONAP TSC membership?



  *   Are there any objections to a service provider LFN Member at any 
membership level that joins the ONAP Program from being able to appoint a 
representative to the TSC from the time they join ONAP until the first 
scheduled TSC election following 12 months of ONAP TSC membership?


-kenny

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list

Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-lf-announce] Jenkins and Nexus downtime

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1 


From: Gildas Lanilis
To: Kenny Paul; onap-tsc;
Cc: onap-lf-annou...@lists.onap.org;
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-lf-announce] Jenkins and Nexus downtime
Time: 2018-04-17 18:29:51


Dear TSC member,

Nexus 3 is so slow that it will really help the ONAP community to have that 
work done asap.
This slowness of Nexus 3 is drastically impacting OOM and Heat deployment time. 
It will worth the 90 down time.
Not sure if Kenny is asking for a vote, but please respond asap so the work 
could be done tomorrow as planned.

Thanks,
Gildas
ONAP Release Manager
1 415 238 6287

From: onap-lf-announce-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-lf-announce-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 6:21 PM
To: onap-tsc 
Cc: onap-lf-annou...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [Onap-lf-announce] Jenkins and Nexus downtime

Given where we are in the release cycle, I've asked IT to hang off on this 
pending input form the TSC. This down time has been requested as the result of 
a call this morning discussing extremely long durations to pull docker images. 
The expectation is this will improve that issue.

Basically, I'm looking for a thumbs-up from the TSC Members before proceeding 
with scheduling down time.

Best Regards,
-kenny

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


From: 
>
 on behalf of Jeremy Phelps 
>
Date: Tuesday, April 17, 2018 at 4:15 PM
To: >
Subject: Re: [Onap-lf-announce] Jenkins and Nexus downtime

Date correction in the year:
Start Date/Time:
  - 8:30 am Pacific April 18, 2018
  - 
https://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1=8,100,4641239=8=2018-4-18=8.5-10
Systems affected:
  - jenkins.onap.org
  - nexus3.onap.org
Why:
  - LF IT is migrating the nexus3 system to a new node
Expected Downtime:
  - 1.5 hours

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 6:10 PM, Jeremy Phelps 
> wrote:
Start Date/Time:
  - 8:30 am Pacific April 18, 2019
  - 
https://www.worldtimebuddy.com/?qm=1=8,100,4641239=8=2018-4-18=8.5-10
Systems affected:
  - jenkins.onap.org
  - nexus3.onap.org
Why:
  - LF IT is migrating the nexus3 system to a new node
Expected Downtime:
  - 1.5 hours

___ Onap-lf-announce mailing list 
onap-lf-annou...@lists.onap.org 
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-lf-announce
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

 
community members from our heavily engaged end users will be elected to the TSC 
as part of the 13 count and as such, there will be no need for that company to 
appoint a representative.

Finally, I will reiterate that from my vantage point, there will be significant 
benefit from having our developers who are much closer to the code have TSC 
leadership positions.  We have a lot of room for improvement in how we work 
collectively and collaboratively to produce ONAP and empowering our leading 
developers to identify and overcome those issues will benefit the project 
substantially.

I would like to facilitate this [re]vote with potential TSC-population options 
at the TSC meeting next week (4/19)  If that sounds like a reasonable target to 
everyone, then please provide your comments and suggestions on the proposals 
I've listed above and/or propose another alternative method of populating the 
TSC.  Let's see if we can form up what will be the best options to vote on via 
email before the TSC meeting next week.

Thanks in advance for your feedback.

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:01 AM, Christopher Donley (Chris) 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Alex,

That’s the intention (same with use case, etc.).  We want a way to measure it, 
and have it included under wiki.  People who make presentations are uploading 
their slides or adding wiki pages, which can be measured using Bitergia.

Chris

From: "Vul, Alex" <alex@intel.com<mailto:alex@intel.com>>
Date: Thursday, April 5, 2018 at 7:58 AM
To: Chris Donley 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>, "Haiby, 
Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose)" 
<ranny.ha...@nokia.com<mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com>>, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>

Subject: RE: TSC Composition Proposal

Chris,

Given that the TSC is a leadership body, I think that architectural subject 
matter expertise and industry experience should count for a lot as well…

Alex Vul
Intel Corporation

From:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Thursday, April 5, 2018 6:23 AM
To: Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose) 
<ranny.ha...@nokia.com<mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com>>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Ranny,

First, everyone currently on the TSC would be eligible to run under this 
structure.  Second, we are not just counting code contributions for determining 
voters.  We also propose counting a number of areas where operators have been 
active, such as presenting a use case to the use case or security subcommittee, 
presenting architecture proposals, or working on security in the security 
subcommittee (to name a few). These are captured in the contributions to the 
wiki bullet. The full list is:
-Code contributions/commits
-Code reviews
-Submitting Jira tickets (project management)
-Readthedocs (documentation)
-Subcommittee leadership
-Contributions to the wiki (files or wiki pages)

Also, since the window for measuring participation hasn’t closed, there is 
still time for other operators to get involved.

Chris
From: "Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose)" 
<ranny.ha...@nokia.com<mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com>>
Date: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 2:47 PM
To: Chris Donley 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: RE: TSC Composition Proposal

Chris and Steve,

Thanks for the time and effort put into this proposal.

One thing I do not see in the proposal is explanation of the “Support operators 
with high interest in ONAP (regardless of development resources involved) to be 
active in the TSC” item from the first slide. Reading the next slides it seems 
that only active contributors will be able to vote, so there is no guarantee 
operators who did not contribute yet will get a seat at the TSC. Would you care 
to elaborate on this please?

Thanks,

Ranny.


From:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On 
Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 1:58 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Dear TSC,

Steve Terrill and I have put together a proposal to transition the TSC to its 
“steady state” by June 30, as required in the ONAP Technical Charter.  We have 
tried to incorporate feedback from previous TSC discussions

[onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Feedback Session

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Pacific Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=Christopher Donley (Chris):MAILTO:christopher.don...@huawei.co
 m
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-tsc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:When: Thursday\, April 12\, 2018 8:30 AM-9:00 AM
 . (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada)\nWhere: https://zoom.us/j/7391463
 74\n\n*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*\n\n\nDear ONAP Community\,\n\nAlla\, Lingli\, an
 d I invite you to join us after tomorrow's TSC call to discuss feedback re
 ceived at ONS (and any other feedback for the TSC) in a spirit of continuo
 us improvement.\n\nChris\n\n\nHi there\,\n\nCh
 ris Donley is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.\n\nJoin from PC\, 
 Mac\, Linux\, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/739146374\n\nOr iPhone one
 -tap :\nUS: +16465588656\,\,739146374# or +16699006833\,\,739146374#\nOr T
 elephone:\nDial(for higher quality\, dial a number based on your current l
 ocation):\nUS: +1 646 558 8656 or +1 669 900 6833\nMeeting ID: 739 146 374
 \nInternational numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/di8GR0ifi\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:ONAP TSC Feedback Session
DTSTART;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20180412T083000
DTEND;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20180412T09
UID:4E318390-60EB-4508-97D4-0A0886BB086A
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20180411T205550Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://zoom.us/j/739146374
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:2116311537
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:TRUE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Jason,

Please see in-line.

Chris

From: Jason Hunt <djh...@us.ibm.com<mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>>
Date: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 3:01 PM
To: "Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose)" 
<ranny.ha...@nokia.com<mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com>>
Cc: Chris Donley 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>, 
"onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Thanks, Chris & Steve for the proposal.  A couple quick comments/clarifications:

- Should Eligible Voter Criteria also be Eligible TSC Candidate Criteria?  The 
previous slide just says candidates have to come from the ONAP Community, but 
not clear what that definition is.
We purposely separated them.  Literally anyone would be eligible to run for the 
TSC.  However, the voting criteria requires that voters were active in one or 
more of several different ways prior to the election.
- How often will TSC elections be held?  I ask because the Eligible Voter 
Criteria is limited to previous 6 months of activity.
Annually (per Charter).  We’re proposing to measure eligibility over the 
previous six months to take into account people who became inactive.
- Do you think that wiki/file contribution will capture all the active 
subcommittee members?
That’s our intention. To me, “active” means more than attending calls – someone 
should have made a presentation or provided some feedback (which would show up 
on the wiki)
- It might be good to outline how the 2 members/company will be enforced.  I 
assume it would be the top 2 Condorcet vote recipients from each company?
Once we collect self-nominations, we conduct the vote using Condorcet and get a 
ranked list of preferences.  We could do it as you suggest, or LF could 
approach the company and allow one or more of the candidates to step down 
(assuming more than two are in the top 15).


Thanks again.

Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM

Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: djh...@us.ibm.com<mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>
Twitter: @DJHunt




From:"Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose)" 
<ranny.ha...@nokia.com<mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com>>
To:"Christopher Donley (Chris)" 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Date:04/04/2018 04:47 PM
Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal
Sent by:
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>




Chris and Steve,

Thanks for the time and effort put into this proposal.

One thing I do not see in the proposal is explanation of the “Support operators 
with high interest in ONAP (regardless of development resources involved) to be 
active in the TSC” item from the first slide. Reading the next slides it seems 
that only active contributors will be able to vote, so there is no guarantee 
operators who did not contribute yet will get a seat at the TSC. Would you care 
to elaborate on this please?

Thanks,

Ranny.


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On 
Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 1:58 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Dear TSC,

Steve Terrill and I have put together a proposal to transition the TSC to its 
“steady state” by June 30, as required in the ONAP Technical Charter.  We have 
tried to incorporate feedback from previous TSC discussions on this topic, and 
are proposing a structure that encourages diversity of companies and roles, 
while recognizing contributions in the community and interested operators who 
may have joined later, but who want to take an active role in ONAP.  See 
attached.

Under our proposal, the TSC will be composed of 15 elected representatives, 
with a cap of no more than two people per company.  Anyone who is interested 
may run for a seat on the TSC.  Voters in the election will consist of people 
who have been active in the community over the previous six month period, as 
demonstrated by one or more of {code contributions, code reviews, lira ticket 
submissions, readthedocs, wiki (pages or file uploads), or subcommittee 
leadership}.

We are interested in feedback on our proposal (including community feedback), 
and would like to discuss this on tomorr

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Ranny,

First, everyone currently on the TSC would be eligible to run under this 
structure.  Second, we are not just counting code contributions for determining 
voters.  We also propose counting a number of areas where operators have been 
active, such as presenting a use case to the use case or security subcommittee, 
presenting architecture proposals, or working on security in the security 
subcommittee (to name a few). These are captured in the contributions to the 
wiki bullet. The full list is:
-Code contributions/commits
-Code reviews
-Submitting Jira tickets (project management)
-Readthedocs (documentation)
-Subcommittee leadership
-Contributions to the wiki (files or wiki pages)

Also, since the window for measuring participation hasn’t closed, there is 
still time for other operators to get involved.

Chris
From: "Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose)" 
<ranny.ha...@nokia.com<mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com>>
Date: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 at 2:47 PM
To: Chris Donley 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>" 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: RE: TSC Composition Proposal

Chris and Steve,

Thanks for the time and effort put into this proposal.

One thing I do not see in the proposal is explanation of the “Support operators 
with high interest in ONAP (regardless of development resources involved) to be 
active in the TSC” item from the first slide. Reading the next slides it seems 
that only active contributors will be able to vote, so there is no guarantee 
operators who did not contribute yet will get a seat at the TSC. Would you care 
to elaborate on this please?

Thanks,

Ranny.


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On 
Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Wednesday, April 4, 2018 1:58 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Dear TSC,

Steve Terrill and I have put together a proposal to transition the TSC to its 
“steady state” by June 30, as required in the ONAP Technical Charter.  We have 
tried to incorporate feedback from previous TSC discussions on this topic, and 
are proposing a structure that encourages diversity of companies and roles, 
while recognizing contributions in the community and interested operators who 
may have joined later, but who want to take an active role in ONAP.  See 
attached.

Under our proposal, the TSC will be composed of 15 elected representatives, 
with a cap of no more than two people per company.  Anyone who is interested 
may run for a seat on the TSC.  Voters in the election will consist of people 
who have been active in the community over the previous six month period, as 
demonstrated by one or more of {code contributions, code reviews, lira ticket 
submissions, readthedocs, wiki (pages or file uploads), or subcommittee 
leadership}.

We are interested in feedback on our proposal (including community feedback), 
and would like to discuss this on tomorrow’s TSC call.

Thanks,
Chris & Steve


___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Action Plan towards Casablanca

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Mazin,

As we discussed, please make sure that we follow the charter in proposing the 
end-user advisory committee (I.e, formal documentation of the purpose, scope, 
membership, etc) so that the TSC can review and vote on it. I think it’s a good 
idea, but I want to see the details and make sure we follow our documented 
procedure.

Thanks,
Chris


From: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
To: Alla Goldner;
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org P;
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Action Plan towards Casablanca
Time: 2018-03-30 17:57:00


Thanks Alla for the summary.

Here is what we agreed to at the TSC meeting.
There are three work plans for Casablanca. The theme is increase deployability 
of ONAP.

1. Functional requirements and use cases. We agreed to establish an end-user 
advisory committee that will be driven by the equivalent of product managers 
across operators who will help to set priorties that can accelerate 
deployability of ONAP. The work of your committee on use cases and 5G 
solutioning will help to provide options for the end-user advisory committee.

2. Platform Evolution. This includes some of your list items
a. S3P new target (including code coverage)
b. Backward compatibility
c. Improve modularity and simplicity of using ONAP.

3. Broader learning and education of ONAP.
The Education committee will develop a proposal for weekly Webinars.

I am working to assemble 1. My hope is to have 3-4 operators signed up next 
week so they can meet with your team and get the work started.
Phil will make that committee official as a subgroup under LFN end-user 
advisory committee. Until then, let’s not slow down.

We also discussed what we want to accomplish prior to the Beijing meeting in 
June. We will discuss that further at the TSC meeting this week,
and also vote on the release planning for Casablanca.

Great progress by the team on Beijing. Most projects hit M4 already. Momentum 
is amazing.

Mazin

On Mar 30, 2018, at 5:03 AM, Alla Goldner 
> wrote:

Hi all,

I re-attach the picture which describes high level priorities as discussed 
during the meeting called by me on Wednesday evening. I understand this was 
discussed in details also during the TSC meeting.

What we had on the table was:

1.   Leftovers from Beijing remained from :
a.   Functional requirements (PNF, Scaling, Change Management, HPA)
b.  Leftovers from S3P support
2.   New S3P requirements
3.   All new use cases and requirements coming to Casablanca (you could see 
the variety during our meeting on Monday)
4.   A different projects proposed extensions
5.   Possibly, new projects potentially proposed for Casablanca
6.   Architecture evolution related modifications

Clearly, this whole scope will not be accomplished in a single Release, this is 
why we needed to see what would be areas of priorities.
Clearly, we may get additional input from the Service Providers, as discussed, 
but in the mean time, in order to make progress, let’s assume these are the 
priorities.

Now, in order to do constructive work and move forward towards Casablanca 
Release, specifically for Usecase subcommittee, we need to see what ongoing 
work matches the Deployability goal as defined and, additionally, extract 
generic functional requirements from the use cases brought to the table/see if 
some requirements brought to the table can be generalized.

I identify the following areas for our activities out of proposed prioritized 
areas:

1.   Leftovers of functional requirements from Beijing – as scope is pretty 
clear, I would say that at this point the required actions are:
a.   Have a detailed list of functionality proposed to move to Casablanca
b.  Negotiate with involved projects on this functionality and resources 
assigned to these activities

2.   All 5G related requirements:
a.   A realistic plan of what can be implemented in Casablanca (a subset of 
functionality discussed so far), based on available/emulated VNFs/PNFs, 3GPP 
standards’ availability etc. with flows, needed resources, affected modules

3.   All external controllers related activities – this work should be 
generalized and common principle should be developed on what we bring to 
Casablanca in such a way that it can be utilized by several use cases. Some 
initial work on this was also done in Beijing.
a.   A concrete proposal on what we bring to Casablanca should be worked on 
and brought

I suggested end of April as a deadline for the conditional approval of the 
scope as discussed above. (Conditional is because some more detailed 
discussions with the projects after this may rule out/or add some of the 
requirements/functionalities.

For that, we need to get your revised high level proposals per (2) and (3) by 
our April 9th meeting. Please talk to me in case of any questions.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open 

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-tsc-vote] ONAP Beijing Architecture Approval (ends 5PM Pacific, March 20)

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Let’s put it on the agenda for this week’s call and hold the vote in real time. 
I don’t see any value in delaying.

The issue, as I see it, is that the TSC has a difficult time achieving quorum 
for votes.  At least since the beginning of the year, we have missed quorum a 
number of times, and have not been able to provide guidance in a timely 
fashion.  In my mind, this emphasizes the urgency of transitioning to the TSC 
“Steady State” as described in the Charter, section 2.b.ii.  We need the TSC to 
be actively engaged and addressing issues promptly.

Chris

From: > 
on behalf of Kenny Paul 
>
Date: Wednesday, March 21, 2018 at 8:06 AM
To: Mazin E Gilbert >
Cc: "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org P" 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-tsc-vote] ONAP Beijing Architecture Approval 
(ends 5PM Pacific, March 20)

Would you like this on the agenda before the M4 review or afterwards?

Best Regards,
-kenny



On Mar 21, 2018, at 6:48 AM, GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
> wrote:

Let’s have the architecture team regroup, and initiate the vote at the TSC F2F 
meeting next week.

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Creation request for coordination area: Infrastructure

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear TSC,
As I mentioned in my previous email, I would like to propose the creation of an 
Infrastructure Coordinator role to manage repository creation requests and 
other LF infrastructure issues on behalf of the TSC.  I think the current 
repository creation process is too slow, and a coordinator would help make this 
more efficient, while maintaining appropriate oversight.  I believe we should 
delegate this function to the Release Manager.
Here is the formal description per Section 5.1.4.3 of the TSC Charter:

*   Coordination Area responsibility description: The infrastructure 
coordinator, as TSC delegate, is responsible for deciding repository creation 
requests and coordinating with LF release engineering staff on other issues 
pertaining to LF infrastructure. The Infrastructure Coordinator will make 
periodic reports to the TSC, as necessary, with the status of repository 
creations and other issues that may arise.
*   Reporting Cadence: approximately monthly, or as needed, depending 
on the nature of the infrastructure issues that may arise
*   Area Coordinator: Release Manager (ex officio) - Gildas Lanilis
I would like to discuss this on tomorrow's call.

Thanks,
Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Gadiyar, Rajesh
Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 10:11 PM
To: aayush.bhatna...@ril.com; lxin...@vmware.com; rx1...@att.com; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; kp...@linuxfoundation.org
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

+1

--
Regards,
Rajesh

From: > 
on behalf of "aayush.bhatna...@ril.com" 
>
Date: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 at 10:09 PM
To: "lxin...@vmware.com" 
>, 
"rx1...@att.com" 
>, 
"onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" 
>, 
"kp...@linuxfoundation.org" 
>
Cc: "onap-disc...@lists.onap.org" 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

+1

Regards

Aayush


From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Xinhui Li
Sent: 18 January 2018 04:48
To: MAHER, RANDA; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; 
Kenny Paul
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

+ 1

Xinhui

From: > 
on behalf of "MAHER, RANDA" >
Date: Wednesday, January 17, 2018 at 11:54 AM
To: "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" 
>, Kenny Paul 
>
Cc: "onap-disc...@lists.onap.org" 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

Hello TSC, Kenny:

Any chance we can get this committer promotion approved over email?
I have put this on the agenda for this week’s TSC meeting, but with M1 review, 
not sure we will get to it.

I have recorded five +1 thus far


  1.  Dhananjay Pavgi
  2.  Mazin Gilbert
  3.  Jamil Chawki
  4.  Alla Goldner
  5.  Stephen Terrill

Thanks, Randa

From: Stephen Terrill [mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com]
Sent: Friday, January 12, 2018 4:28 AM
To: MAHER, RANDA >; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

+1

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of MAHER, RANDA
Sent: 12 January 2018 00:58
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Committer Promotion Request for [appc]

Dear TSC,

Please consider request below for Committer Promotion for APPC project.

https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=22251669

One of our existing committers has indicated that he will  step down from 
Committer to Contributor role.
Existing Committers have all voted +1 on Taka Cho promotion to Committer.

Thanks, Randa
APPC PTL

"Confidentiality Warning: This message and any attachments are intended only 
for the use of the intended recipient(s), are confidential and may be 
privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that 
any review, re-transmission, conversion to hard copy, copying, circulation or 
other use of this message and any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you 
are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender immediately by return 
email and delete this message and any attachments from your system.

Virus Warning: Although the company has taken reasonable precautions to ensure 
no viruses are present in this email. The company cannot accept responsibility 
for any loss or damage arising from the use of this email or attachment."
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative to the LFN TAC

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Thanks Phil.  I agree with your recommendation – I would prefer #2, as well.

Thanks,
Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 7:08 AM
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative 
to the LFN TAC

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

Now that ONAP is a part of the Linux Foundation Networking (LFN) Directed Fund, 
we need to decide how we are going to populate our ONAP Representative in the 
LFN Technical Advisory Council (TAC).

As a reminder, the Scope of the responsibilities of the TAC are:
=
•Scope of responsibility
•Recommend acceptance or removal of projects under the Umbrella to be approved 
by the Governing Board
•Focus on activities that drive collaboration and integration across projects 
(e.g. collaborative development, testing, etc)
•Elected TAC Chair provides guidance to Governing Board on investment needs of 
the project communities

=

Some of the options for us to populate our representative include:
1) Just have the TSC Chair represent ONAP in the TAC
2) Have the TSC vote for some TSC member to represent ONAP in the TAC
3) Have the Committers vote for some Committer-At-Large to represent ONAP in 
the TAC
... etc.

I will be setting up the first TAC meeting to occur somewhere in the last third 
of January and it would be good for the ONAP community to have representation 
from the start.

I personally lean toward option #2 because a) it does not by default put more 
burden on the TSC Chair unless they choose to run for the position, and b) 
having the representative come from the TSC ensures that our representative is 
up to speed on all TSC conversations that have occurred.  However, I certainly 
believe the other options are viable as well.

Given our tight schedule during TSC meetings in the coming weeks, it would be 
nice if we can come to a decision on this topic via email.  Please respond with 
your thoughts and opinions and based on the feedback received, I'll try to put 
together a vote on this topic in about a week.

Thanks,

Phil.
--
Phil Robb
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Next week f2f meeting

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

We’ll be talking about this on Monday.  Jason Hunt is conducting a survey of 
where each component is along the S3P continuum.  The goal of Beijing will be 
to improve on where we are, not necessarily to target a set level across the 
board. Aiming for a fixed target would jeopardize our six-month cadence, and a 
one-size fits all approach won’t fit all projects.  For example, VNFSDK will 
get the biggest gain focusing on security and not scalability, whereas run-time 
components might want to focus more on resiliency or scalability.

We have been discussing some top-down solutions such as HA/geo-redundancy, too. 
 We’ll see some new project proposals along those lines next week.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Yunxia Chen
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 9:16 PM
To: Alla Goldner ; kp...@linuxfoundation.org; 
wangchen...@chinamobile.com; dtimo...@att.com; Philip Robb 
; zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn; 
denglin...@chinamobile.com; pdrag...@research.att.com; denghu...@hotmail.com; 
talas...@research.att.com; rk5...@att.com; Seshu m ; 
am8...@att.com; Eman Gil ; Casey Cain 
; lxin...@vmware.com; jf2...@att.com; 
stephen.terr...@ericsson.com; ml6...@intl.att.com; Mark Pond 
; sa...@research.att.com; l...@research.att.com; 
gg2...@att.com; Kanagaraj Manickam ; 
gn4...@intl.att.com; fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; denghui 
(L) ; david.sauvag...@bell.ca; sw3...@att.com; 
rx1...@att.com; shen...@chinamobile.com; ah0...@intl.att.com; Gildas Lanilis 
; es4...@att.com
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Next week f2f meeting

Hi, Alla & Chris,
Another topic I suggest that we could discuss among Arch, Usecase and 
Integration, with the input from all other projects, is related to “carrier 
grade” requirement:

1.  What’s the priority? (I really appreciate the material Lee presented in 
Arch meeting this Tuesday regarding the requirement from AT operational point 
of view)

2.  What’s the benchmark? What’s our goal for Beijing?

3.  Top down software solution for this?

4.  Solutions in each project?

5.  Tools?

6.  Etc.

And identify the responsibilities for execution, maybe let a small group of 
people to drive it.

Regards,

Helen Chen

From: Alla Goldner >
Date: Monday, December 4, 2017 at 12:31 PM
To: Kenny Paul >, 
"wangchen...@chinamobile.com" 
>, Dan Timoney 
>, Phil Robb 
>, Helen Chen 
00725961 >, 
"zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn" 
>, 
"denglin...@chinamobile.com" 
>, 
"pdrag...@research.att.com" 
>, 
"denghu...@hotmail.com" 
>, 
"talas...@research.att.com" 
>, Ram Koya 
>, Seshu m 
>, 
"am8...@att.com" 
>, "GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)" 
>, Casey Cain 
>, 
"lxin...@vmware.com" 
>, Jimmy Forsyth 
>, 
"stephen.terr...@ericsson.com" 
>, 
"ml6...@intl.att.com" 
>, Mark Pond 
>, 
"sa...@research.att.com" 
>, LUSHENG JI 
>, 
"gg2...@att.com" 
>, Kanagaraj Manickam 
>, 
"gn4...@intl.att.com" 
>, 
"fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn" 

Re: [onap-tsc] Project part of Wiki

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

I think we should have four sections for projects:

*Draft (a sandbox for developing proposals)

*Proposed (for TSC review - once someone sends the required email to 
the TSC)

*Approved (all currently approved projects, independent of releases)

*Closed (all projects that have completed, been abandoned, etc.)
This should be independent of participation in any release, and would make it 
easy to find projects.

Perhaps we could track projects participating in the release under the Releases 
section (not project section), such as on the Release Status page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Release+Status).

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of eric.deb...@orange.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2017 8:39 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Project part of Wiki

Hello

I think the Wiki should only list the projects for Beijing Release.

The list of projects per (old) release should only be described on the 
Readthedocs.

Best Regards

Eric

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-arc] ONAP Architecture presentation

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

It's available under the Architecture Subcommittee page on the wiki (with 
recording):
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/November+21

Some of the slides have already been uploaded, but I received two last-minute 
requests for slots and I haven't seen those slides yet.  LiZi and Maopeng, 
would you please upload them to the Contributions page? 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Contributions


Chris

From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of jamil.cha...@orange.com
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:40 AM
To: Alla Goldner ; Pasi Vaananen 
; Stephen Terrill ; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [Onap-arc] ONAP Architecture presentation

+1
And also a short summary of the meeting
Best
Jamil

De : onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] De la part de Alla Goldner
Envoyé : mardi 21 novembre 2017 18:32
À : Pasi Vaananen; Stephen Terrill; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Objet : Re: [onap-tsc] [Onap-arc] ONAP Architecture presentation

+1 and including TSC list for a broader discussion of this issue.

One of the problems we face is that there are multiple locations where 
presentations are uploaded (f uploaded), e.g. under Usecase or Architecture 
subcommittee, in a dedicated project area etc.

In my view, the best way to support visibility of all submitted documents is to 
have a single placeholder as done by a different SDO e.g. 3GPP, ETSI NFV - and 
then it may be further distinguished there by subject, submitter, targeted 
subcommittee/project etc.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D362B6.8C7C90A0]

From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Pasi Vaananen
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:06 PM
To: Stephen Terrill 
>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [Onap-arc] ONAP Architecture presentation


+1

... but this should not be limited only to architecture team presentations.

Pasi

On 11/21/2017 12:00 PM, Stephen Terrill wrote:
Hi Chris,

Can I make a suggestion regarding the presentations in the ONAP Architecture 
team. Sometimes the presentation cannot be found afterwards.  I think it's a 
common practice in a few foras that the documentation has to be uploaded before 
being presented, can we assume the same practice here ?

BR,

Steve


[Ericsson]


STEPHEN TERRILL
Technology Specialist
DUIC, Systems and Technology
Development Unit IP & Cloud
Business Unit, IT & Cloud Products

Ericsson
Ericsson R Center, via de los Poblados 13
28033, Madrid, Spain
Phone +34 339 3005
Mobile +34 609 168 515
stephen.terr...@ericsson.com
www.ericsson.com


[http://www.ericsson.com/current_campaign]

Legal entity: Ericsson España S.A, compay registration number ESA288568603. 
This Communication is Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis 
of the terms set out at 
www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer





___

Onap-arc mailing list

onap-...@lists.onap.org

https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-arc

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

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] VNFSDK intention to participate in Beijing release

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear ONAP TSC,

As we have now passed the M0 milestone, the VNFSDK team would like to formally 
announce that we plan to participate in the Beijing release.

Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

The architecture subcommittee is working on the high-level architecture.  See 
http://onap.readthedocs.io/en/latest/guides/onap-developer/architecture/onap-architecture.html

Projects themselves are publishing the more detailed architecture, APIs, etc. 
on readthedocs.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Vladimir Yanover (vyanover)
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 6:32 AM
To: jamil.cha...@orange.com
Cc: onap-discuss ; Lisa Caywood 
; onap-tsc 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

And where this intention / timeline is captured?
Thanks
Vladimir

From: jamil.cha...@orange.com 
[mailto:jamil.cha...@orange.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:29 PM
To: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) >
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

It should be part of  the Release Amsterdam documentation …

De : Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) [mailto:vyano...@cisco.com]
Envoyé : mardi 14 novembre 2017 15:27
À : CHAWKI Jamil IMT/OLN
Cc : Kenny Paul; onap-discuss; onap-tsc; Lisa Caywood
Objet : RE: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

How is it related to my question on the timeline for delivery of specification 
with certain level of details?
Thanks
Vladimir

From: jamil.cha...@orange.com 
[mailto:jamil.cha...@orange.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 4:16 PM
To: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) >
Cc: Kenny Paul >; 
onap-discuss >; 
onap-tsc >; Lisa 
Caywood >
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

Yes this is in the Scope of the Architecture subcommittee
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Goals

De : Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) [mailto:vyano...@cisco.com]
Envoyé : mardi 14 novembre 2017 14:55
À : CHAWKI Jamil IMT/OLN
Cc : Kenny Paul; onap-discuss; onap-tsc; Lisa Caywood
Objet : RE: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

Thanks, Jamil. I like the diagram. My question was

Is there an intention / timeline for delivery of specifications with the level 
of details as e.g. in OpenStack (ETSI NFV, …)?

Vladimir

From: jamil.cha...@orange.com 
[mailto:jamil.cha...@orange.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 3:45 PM
To: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) >
Cc: Kenny Paul >; 
onap-discuss >; 
onap-tsc >; Lisa 
Caywood >
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

Hi Vladimir
The diagram is more a technical overview of onap components.
Regards
Jamil

Le 14 nov. 2017 à 11:25, Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) 
> a écrit :
Hello, Kenny
Thanks for sharing the Architecture diagram.
I will appreciate if you help me with a question that I have on the ONAP 
architecture documentation.
Consider potential products to be integrated into the ONAP system itself, 
interfacing to its components such as the Policy Framework and SDN-C Controller.
For such integration, the published Architecture diagram lacks many details 
that normally are provided in the architecture specifications, such as 3GPP TS 
23.501 or ETSI GS NFV 002. It’s functional description of every component, 
interfaces between the components, operations that can be executed over these 
interfaces etc. Examples from open source communities: the OpenStack’s 
Conceptual architecture 
https://docs.openstack.org/mitaka/install-guide-rdo/common/get_started_conceptual_architecture.html
 and Networking architecture at 
https://docs.openstack.org/security-guide/networking/architecture.html#.

Here is my question: is there an intention / timeline for delivery of 
specifications with this level of details?

Thanks
Vladimir Yanover (Cisco)


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2017 3:13 AM
To: onap-discuss 
>; onap-tsc 
>
Cc: Lisa Caywood 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Official ONAP Architecture Slide

Should be fixed. I’ve been using Confluence since 

[onap-tsc] Oct 6 status

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Team,

This week, the ARC team worked on the whitepaper and diagrams documenting the 
R1 architecture.  We also began the discussion of S3P and planned next steps 
for the next few weeks.
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/October+3


Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [tsc]Vote: ONAP Deployment Proposal for Amsterdam Release

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

By when do we need to make this decision?  I thought we said we'd wait until 
the code freeze next week to see how much progress we've made.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Roger Maitland
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 1:13 PM
To: eric.deb...@orange.com; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [tsc]Vote: ONAP Deployment Proposal for Amsterdam 
Release

I'll add to this conversation from the OOM team's point of view.

The OOM team is continuing with the more efficient Kubernetes deployment option 
for ONAP and at this point have on-boarded all projects except for DCAE Gen 2, 
Usecase UI (both of which are in progress) and VFC (which is under review in 
gerrit).  OOM is deployed in the Integration lab where we will continue to 
validate the firewall use case to prove equivalency with the VM deployment 
option.

OOM provides many benefits including handling interproject startup 
dependencies, floating IP addresses, coexisting instances of ONAP, all while 
using the provided hardware resources as efficiently as possible.  We believe 
the community will find OOM very useful when working with ONAP but we 
understand there is a small learning curve.

Roger Maitland
OOM Project
From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
eric.deb...@orange.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2017 3:26 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] [tsc]Vote: ONAP Deployment Proposal for Amsterdam Release

Hello

We agree that Heat template for OpenEcomp was first designed to run on 
Rackspace environment. However, the Heat template evolved to remove the 
Rackspace dependencies and I believe that the various tests we can produce on 
various OpenStack solutions in the community should eliminate the bugs as much 
as possible.


We must consolidate at least one solution working for Amsterdam Release and I 
agree with Jason that is important to make ONAP easy to deploy and we must put 
some efforts for the installer documentation and the associated test cases to 
validate that the installation is OK.

Regards

Eric

_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
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
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] R2 non-functional requirements

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Also, the recordings from the call are posted on the wiki: 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Joint+meetings.

Chris
From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Thursday, September 07, 2017 11:43 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org P ; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org
Subject: [Onap-arc] R2 non-functional requirements

Hi all,

As a result of discussions we had in Usecase subcommittee and during our joint 
meeting with Architecture subcommittee today, the following wiki page was 
created 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/R2+proposals+for+Non-functional+requirements .

This would list all non-functional requirements (i.e. not coming directly from 
a different use cases e.g. credentials usage, performance, resiliency, testing 
requirements etc.). These non-functional requirements are playing key role in 
building a stable, "Enterprise grade" ONAP platform.

Members of Architecture and Usecase subcommittees, the whole ONAP community - 
please fill in requirements' candidates for R2, we will then review and 
prioritize.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D3281F.7EDCC090]

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
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Pacific Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=Christopher Donley (Chris):MAILTO:christopher.don...@huawei.co
 m
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Alla Goldn
 er:MAILTO:alla.gold...@amdocs.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-arc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-...@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-useca
 se...@lists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-tsc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN='onap-disc
 u...@lists.onap.org':MAILTO:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:Dear Architecture and Use Case subcommittees\,\n
 \nAlla and I would like to continue our joint ARC/Use Case meetings on Sep
 tember 7 at 1300 UTC. Please see the Zoom invitation below.\n\nChris & All
 a\n\n---\n\nHi there\,\n\n
 Chris Donley & Alla Goldner are inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.\
 n\nJoin from PC\, Mac\, Linux\, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/43748053
 5\n\nOr iPhone one-tap (US Toll):  +16465588656\,\,437480535# or +16468769
 923\,\,437480535#\n\nOr Telephone:\nDial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or
  +1 646 876 9923 (US Toll)\nMeeting ID: 437 480 535\nInternational
  numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=mnKk1YCEnSSOS9SnLxFy2
 Tnd9JYqUR_a\n\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting
DTSTART;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20170907T06
DTEND;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20170907T07
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E00810F4D9887B16D301000
 010003133856474F68041B8DB4146A73975DD
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20170816T173635Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://zoom.us/j/437480535
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:1871742945
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Architecture subcommittee update

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

This week on the architecture call, we reviewed the R1 and R2 diagrams, and 
prepared for the joint Architecture/Use Case call.
Notes, material, and recording: 
https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=11929318

On the joint architecture/use case call, we discussed the VoLTE and Enterprise 
CPE use cases and identified needs for R2 and beyond.
   Material, recording: 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Joint+meetings
   We will schedule follow-up calls at least monthly

The ARC has a new JIRA site for tracking future discussion topics. If you have 
a topic for future meetings, please add it at this link:
https://jira.onap.org/projects/ONAPARC/

Next week, we'll begin reviewing project API alignment.

Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

I like the updated wording, and agree that this belongs as a policy (not in the 
charter).  One slight quibble is that you use the word “recommend” in the 
second sentence and “requirement” in the fourth.  I think we should be 
consistent. My personal preference is for recommendation.

Chris

From: Phil Robb [mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2017 2:14 PM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) <christopher.don...@huawei.com>
Cc: Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; Kenny Paul 
<kp...@linuxfoundation.org>; t...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

We should close on this topic in the near future.  To that end, please consider 
this an attempt to get an email dialog going that will hopefully lead to us 
voting on what to say and where to put it.

From discussions that we've had... and I'm sure some level of personal bias 
from me, I suggest the following as a Policy (not part of the TSC-Charter) to 
be posted on the TSC Policies and Guidelines Page:

Leadership Diversity Policy
We as a community wish to foster a breadth of knowledgeable and engaged 
leaders, as well as ensure an ongoing diverse set of viewpoints across the ONAP 
Project.  In support of this goal, we recommend that a single individual should 
not hold more than one Chair, or Vice Chair position concurrently on the TSC  
and all other TSC Subcommittees.  There may be situations warranting an 
exception to this policy.  On a case-by-case basis the TSC may determine to 
waive this requirement as appropriate.

Please let me know what you think... and/or suggest alternate wording.

Best,

Phil.

On Tue, Aug 1, 2017 at 4:33 PM, Christopher Donley (Chris) 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>> wrote:
I agree that this topic would be more appropriate as a TSC policy than as text 
in the Charter.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>]
 On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 12:22 AM
To: Kenny Paul <kp...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
t...@lists.onap.org<mailto:t...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

Hi,

Thanks Kenny for assembling this text and to the contributors for inputing.

As a general question to all, given that these appear to read as guidelines, - 
do we want to include them in a charter; or create a TSC policy document where 
we can capture such things and others (i.e. information for decision should be 
submitted x days in advance).

The advantage of including the update in the charter is that it would be more 
consistant.  The advantage with a separate TSC policy document is that we 
separate guidelines from mechanisms.

Best Regards,

Steve.

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: 01 August 2017 03:05
To: t...@lists.onap.org<mailto:t...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

TSC Members,

Please find for your discussion and review the slide contents around Leadership 
Diversity from last week’s TSC meeting. It was recommended that this may be 
better adopted as a policy, rather than as an amendment to the TSC Charter.

Leadership Diversity Intent
We as the ONAP community, should identify and train talents to help promote 
leadership diversity within projects, subcommittees, etc.
•Develop a broad base of community leaders from many backgrounds
•Instill a sense of trust and openness to multiple view points
•Ensure an adequate representation of the community
•Distribute responsibilities in a scalable fashion
•Allow exceptions where appropriate to keep both the community and project 
moving forward


Leadership Diversity Meaning
•An individual can either be in any of these leadership positions:
-the TSC Chair/Vice-Chair
-a Subcommittee Chair/Vice-Chair
-a Community Coordinator
-a PTL
•No individual should hold more than one of those roles unless the TSC deems 
there is either a high level of merit in doing so, or no reasonable alternative.
•A logical location in the TSC Charter for introducing this language would be 
in Section 1: Guiding Principles
NOTE: It was pointed out that a number of sections within the charter would 
need to be changed if Section 1 was used.

Leadership Diversity Language
1.3  Leadership Diversity
  1.3.1  Any one person should only be allowed to hold a single office at a 
time, inclusive of TSC, Subcommittee, Coordinator and PTL positions.
  1.3.2  Exceptions can be made by the TSC for someone to hold multiple 
positions if there are insufficient candidates available for a position, or in 
cases where doing so would be bring high value to the project.

Best Regards,
-kenny

Ke

Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase/Arch subcommittees joint meeting on Wednesday

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Thanks to all who joined today's joint ARC/usecase meeting.  The Zoom recording 
is now available 
https://zoom.us/recording/play/EZc2tN4iOTpsqZzkywoCrsdQg9kLjKSOshwnzG9dvQAfb1CesU8N3sHqvkWyaU0a

Chris

From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Tuesday, August 08, 2017 10:25 AM
To: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org; 'onap-disc...@lists.onap.org' 
; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [Onap-arc] Usecase/Arch subcommittees joint meeting on Wednesday

Hi all,

Please find here the updated agenda with preliminary questions received from 
Architecture subcommittee (thanks, Chris!):

1.Usecase subcommittee will present R1 use cases (Yoav/Kang - vCPE, 
Chengli/Yang - vVoLTE) and provide brief overview of R2 discussions, including 
emphasizing ONAP Platform Capabilities

2.Architecture subcommittee will present and highlight differences 
between R1 and R2 foreseen architecture, so Usecase subcommittee 
representatives can ask on that and its potential impact on use cases 
implementation, and also raise relevant issues.

3.Architecture subcommittee will ask their use case related 
questions:
-  would the use case(s) require multi-site support?
-  multi-region/multi-domain/federation?
-  Multi-national?
-  Do we need to consider enhanced networking features (e.g., 
underlays)?
-  Can individual use cases be built from same components? (common 
APIs/models)
-  What are the challenges from the first set of use cases?
-  What technical debt have you identified?
-  Clarify business drivers and capabilities of the use cases
-  What are the functional commonalities between the use cases? Are 
there generic elements where we should focus?

Usecase subcommittee members, please try to come to the meeting prepared with 
responses, as our meeting time is limited; would also be good to start 
communicating some of the responses by emails sent both to Usecase and to 
Architecture subcommittee.

This is start of our dialogue which will continue towards R2, as we move on 
with use cases definition and architecture definition. We will also discuss 
format and frequency of our join meetings going forward.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D31100.6269CF10]

From: Alla Goldner
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2017 10:35 PM
To: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org; Yoav 
Kluger >; 'Kang Xi' 
>; 'Chengli Wang' 
>; 'Yang Xu 
(Yang, Fixed Network)' >; 
'Yunxia Chen' >
Cc: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
>; Phil Robb 
>; 'Kenny Paul' 
>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Usecase/Arch subcommittees joint meeting on Wednesday

Hi all,

After speaking with Chris, here is our proposal for the joint meeting on 
Wednesday:


1.  Usecase subcommittee will present R1 use cases (Yoav/Kang - vCPE, 
Chengli/Yang - vVoLTE), mostly concentrated on ONAP Platform capabilities



2.  Usecase subcommittee members are encouraged to ask questions/provide 
demands on potential functionality to be supported for the next releases


3.  Architecture subcommittee will present and highlight differences 
between R1 and R2 foreseen architecture, so Usecase subcommittee 
representatives can ask on that and its potential impact on use cases 
implementation, and also raise relevant issues.



4.  Architecture subcommittee will ask their use case related questions


5.  Both Usecase and Architecture subcommittee members are encouraged to 
send out their questions in advance, in order to make our discussions more 
effective.


This is start of our dialogue which will continue towards R2, as we move on 
with use cases definition and architecture definition. We will also discuss 
format and frequency of our join meetings going forward.


Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D31100.6269CF10]

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
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] FW: Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Pacific Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=Christopher Donley (Chris);SENT-BY="MAILTO:Alla.Goldner@amdocs.
 com":MAILTO:christopher.don...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-tsc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN='onap-disc
 u...@lists.onap.org':MAILTO:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:\n\n\n\n-Original Appointment-\nFrom: Ch
 ristopher Donley (Chris) [mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com]\nSent: Tue
 sday\, August 01\, 2017 12:59 AM\nTo: Christopher Donley (Chris)\; onap-ar
 c...@lists.onap.org\; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org\; Alla Goldner\nCc: onap
 -tsc\nSubject: Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting\nWhen: Wednesday\, Augu
 st 09\, 2017 7:00 AM-8:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & Canada).\nWher
 e: https://zoom.us/j/793175295\n\n\nDear Architecture and Use Case Subcomm
 ittees\,\n\nWe will hold a joint ARC/Use Case meeting on Wednesday\, Augus
 t 9 at 1400 UTC to synchronize on architectural impacts of proposed use ca
 se flows for R2.  We want to use this joint meeting to help refine both th
 e use cases and the architecture.\n\nWe hope you can join us.\n\nChris & A
 lla\n\n-\n\n\nHi there\,\n\nChris Donley is inviti
 ng you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.\n\nJoin from PC\, Mac\, Linux\, iOS or
  Android: https://zoom.us/j/793175295\n\nOr iPhone one-tap (US Toll):  +16
 465588656\,\,793175295# or +14086380968\,\,793175295#\n\nOr Telephone:\n  
   Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)\nMeetin
 g ID: 793 175 295\nInternational numbers available: https://zoom.us/zo
 omconference?m=sTOKi0Gvq4vo3lRdpmPlJMUYmKzDUNuq\n\n\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:FW: Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting
DTSTART;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20170809T07
DTEND;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20170809T08
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E0089065B58B0D0AD301000
 0100034A9633E578FEC40AF785F33AF47BD5C
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20170731T215901Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://zoom.us/j/793175295
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:1350531041
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Vote on Date & Location of Next ONAP Developer Face To Face

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Wednesday, August 02, 2017 2:49 PM
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] Vote on Date & Location of Next ONAP Developer Face To Face

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

As was mentioned at the last TSC meeting, Nokia and Orange have offered to host 
the next ONAP Developer Face to Face meeting the week of September 25th, 2017 
at the Nokia Paris-Saclay facility approximately 25 Kilometers south west of 
the Paris Orly airport.  We will have access to an auditorium that holds 200 
people along with several conference/break-out rooms.  We are still finalizing 
the specific days of the event, but I would like to have the TSC approve this 
time/week, and location so that attendees who need visas can begin the process 
of getting them.

Therefore, please provide your vote via email to the following resolution:

Shall the TSC approve the next ONAP Developer Face to Face meeting to be held 
the week of September 25th, at the Nokia facility located in Paris-Saclay, 
France? +1, 0, -1

TSC Members, please provide your vote at your earliest opportunity.  If we 
reach an affirmative vote on this prior to the TSC meeting tomorrow, we'll 
simply make that announcement during the meeting.  If we do not reach an 
affirmative vote, we will discuss this topic and vote on it in the meeting 
tomorrow.

Thanks in advance for your response.

Best,

Phil.
--
Phil Robb
Executive Director, OpenDaylight Project
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

I agree that this topic would be more appropriate as a TSC policy than as text 
in the Charter.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Tuesday, August 01, 2017 12:22 AM
To: Kenny Paul ; t...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

Hi,

Thanks Kenny for assembling this text and to the contributors for inputing.

As a general question to all, given that these appear to read as guidelines, - 
do we want to include them in a charter; or create a TSC policy document where 
we can capture such things and others (i.e. information for decision should be 
submitted x days in advance).

The advantage of including the update in the charter is that it would be more 
consistant.  The advantage with a separate TSC policy document is that we 
separate guidelines from mechanisms.

Best Regards,

Steve.

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: 01 August 2017 03:05
To: t...@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Leadership Diversity Language

TSC Members,

Please find for your discussion and review the slide contents around Leadership 
Diversity from last week’s TSC meeting. It was recommended that this may be 
better adopted as a policy, rather than as an amendment to the TSC Charter.

Leadership Diversity Intent
We as the ONAP community, should identify and train talents to help promote 
leadership diversity within projects, subcommittees, etc.
•Develop a broad base of community leaders from many backgrounds
•Instill a sense of trust and openness to multiple view points
•Ensure an adequate representation of the community
•Distribute responsibilities in a scalable fashion
•Allow exceptions where appropriate to keep both the community and project 
moving forward


Leadership Diversity Meaning
•An individual can either be in any of these leadership positions:
-the TSC Chair/Vice-Chair
-a Subcommittee Chair/Vice-Chair
-a Community Coordinator
-a PTL
•No individual should hold more than one of those roles unless the TSC deems 
there is either a high level of merit in doing so, or no reasonable alternative.
•A logical location in the TSC Charter for introducing this language would be 
in Section 1: Guiding Principles
NOTE: It was pointed out that a number of sections within the charter would 
need to be changed if Section 1 was used.

Leadership Diversity Language
1.3  Leadership Diversity
  1.3.1  Any one person should only be allowed to hold a single office at a 
time, inclusive of TSC, Subcommittee, Coordinator and PTL positions.
  1.3.2  Exceptions can be made by the TSC for someone to hold multiple 
positions if there are insufficient candidates available for a position, or in 
cases where doing so would be bring high value to the project.


Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Architecture meeting tomorrow

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Just to confirm, due to other overlaps, I'm afraid I can't re-arrange the 
schedule for tomorrow. We will use the original schedule as shown below.

Chris

From: Yoav Kluger [mailto:yoav.klu...@amdocs.com]
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 12:16 PM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) <christopher.don...@huawei.com>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: RE: Architecture meeting tomorrow

Chris,

The first two items on the agenda relate to the VoLTE use case, the last is a 
general architecture topic.
We have a vCPE use case coordination meeting with SDC and SO during the second 
hour. In order to allow people to  make their meetings could we start with the

*SO/APP-C/VF-C perspective from Orange (Eric - 30 min)
Item and then continue with the rest of the agenda?

Thanks much,
Yoav

From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2017 1:38 PM
To: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-tsc 
<onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: [Onap-arc] Architecture meeting tomorrow

Dear ONAP Community,

We will be holding our next ARC meeting tomorrow from 1400-1600 UTC.

The agenda is as follows:

*Update on SDC VoLTE onboarding gap analysis and open issues (Michael - 
1 hr)

*VF-C/A (Victor/Lingli - 30 min)

*SO/APP-C/VF-C perspective from Orange (Eric - 30 min)

Because the agenda may be of interest beyond the Architecture subcommittee 
membership, I am including the TSC.

Conference Bridge:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: 
https://zoom.us/j/917511391<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F917511391=D=2=AFQjCNEy9DyLYKTns2incaEZRpuGyZG-IQ>
Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +16465588656,917511391# or +14086380968,917511391#
Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 917 511 391
International numbers available: 
https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fzoomconference%3Fm%3DRldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X=D=2=AFQjCNHCqbxB-oMnhrRnt1wlJ8XfQ_0JBw>

Chris
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
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Pacific Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0700
TZOFFSETTO:-0800
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=1SU;BYMONTH=11
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:-0800
TZOFFSETTO:-0700
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=2SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=Christopher Donley (Chris):MAILTO:christopher.don...@huawei.co
 m
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-arc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-...@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-useca
 se...@lists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Alla Goldn
 er:MAILTO:alla.gold...@amdocs.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-tsc:M
 AILTO:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:Dear Architecture and Use Case Subcommittees\,\n
 \nWe will hold a joint ARC/Use Case meeting on Wednesday\, August 9 at 140
 0 UTC to synchronize on architectural impacts of proposed use case flows f
 or R2.  We want to use this joint meeting to help refine both the use case
 s and the architecture.\n\nWe hope you can join us.\n\nChris & Alla\n\n---
 --\n\n\nHi there\,\n\nChris Donley is inviting you to 
 a scheduled Zoom meeting.\n\nJoin from PC\, Mac\, Linux\, iOS or Android: 
 https://zoom.us/j/793175295\n\nOr iPhone one-tap (US Toll):  +16465588656\
 ,\,793175295# or +14086380968\,\,793175295#\n\nOr Telephone:\nDial: +1
  646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)\nMeeting ID: 793 
 175 295\nInternational numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconferen
 ce?m=sTOKi0Gvq4vo3lRdpmPlJMUYmKzDUNuq\n\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:Joint Architecture/Use Case meeting
DTSTART;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20170809T07
DTEND;TZID=Pacific Standard Time:20170809T08
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E0089065B58B0D0AD301000
 0100034A9633E578FEC40AF785F33AF47BD5C
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20170731T215901Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://zoom.us/j/793175295
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:1350531041
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Architecture meeting tomorrow

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear ONAP Community,

We will be holding our next ARC meeting tomorrow from 1400-1600 UTC.

The agenda is as follows:

*Update on SDC VoLTE onboarding gap analysis and open issues (Michael - 
1 hr)

*VF-C/A (Victor/Lingli - 30 min)

*SO/APP-C/VF-C perspective from Orange (Eric - 30 min)

Because the agenda may be of interest beyond the Architecture subcommittee 
membership, I am including the TSC.

Conference Bridge:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: 
https://zoom.us/j/917511391
Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +16465588656,917511391# or +14086380968,917511391#
Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 917 511 391
International numbers available: 
https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X

Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Architecture Progress

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear Jamil,

Thank you for sharing.  I'd like to invite you to present your concerns 
regarding the Release 2+ framework on Tuesday's ARC call so that we can 
consider them as a committee. Would 30 minutes be sufficient?

Regarding Release 1, we are a week out from the functionality freeze milestone. 
 We have heard from the projects that their R1 plans are locked in, and any 
significant changes will delay the release, which is why the committee agreed 
to proceed with the baseline.  We don't want to put undue risk on the release 
date.  However, the projects are aware of the longer-term target, and did agree 
to look at their code and try to identify any "baby steps" they could take in 
that direction for the Amsterdam release.

Chris

From: jamil.cha...@orange.com [mailto:jamil.cha...@orange.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2017 9:46 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) <christopher.don...@huawei.com>; Thomas Nadeau 
<thomas.nad...@amdocs.com>; Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com>; Pasi 
Vaananen <pvaan...@redhat.com>; onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; Phil Robb 
<pr...@linuxfoundation.org>; kp...@linuxfoundation.org; MAZIN E GILBERT 
(ma...@research.att.com) <ma...@research.att.com>; vb1...@att.com; 'BARTOLI, 
PAUL D' (pb2...@att.com) <pb2...@att.com>
Cc: onap-tsc <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: RE: [onap-discuss] Architecture Progress
Importance: High

Dear Chris and ONAP community
I understand and appreciate your leadership of this subcommittee to align 
different position and I would to clarify some points:

1- Yes the VFC is mentioned in the ONAP charter but without any explanation 
about the functionality of this component which to my knowledge it is not part 
of the Open-o and we have discovered it during the ONS 2017. Comparing to 
Ecomp, we have a clear documented white paper describing overall architecture 
and technical components.

2- Concerning the AT /China Mobile agreement, I would like to clarify 
that ONAP is a merge between the OpenEcomp project proposal supported by some 
members and the Open-O project and not an AT/China Mobile project. Phil and 
Kenny I would like you as LF to clarify this point as my understanding the ONAP 
project is governed by a clear charter  and not by some company agreement or 
discussion.

3- I would like to remember the community that the TSC decision, during the 
last F2F meeting in China, was to approve the APPC, VFC and SO provisionally 
waiting  an alignment from the architecture point of view  : the TSC approved 
the VF-C (APPC/SO) Projects as an incubation projects within ONAP provisional 
on alignment with the overall architecture if such dependencies are identified

http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/onap-meeting/2017/onap-meeting.2017-06-08-01.38.log.html

http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/onap-meeting/2017/onap-meeting.2017-06-09-01.07.html

4- My expectation was to have a feedback from the architecture subcommittee 
to the TSC on this alignment and to have a final approval of these 3 projects. 
Phil and Kenny I would like to raise this question during the next TSC meeting 
and also to indicate in the wiki that these 3 projects are provisionally 
approved.

5- We have clearly identified an overlapping problem between APP-C, VF-C 
and between VF-C and SO (as VF-C is also an NFVO) and the conclusion was to 
wait Rel-2  or Rel-3 in order to find a solution. This will mean that we have a 
high risk to not deliver a useful Rel-1 and this risk was clearly viewed during 
the virtual meeting discussion on DCAE and SDC.

6- I think we have a time to converge rapidly our view by merging  APPC and 
VFC and having one integrated orchestrator, as proposed by Vimal,  before to be 
late.
The industry is waiting our Rel-1 and unfortunately, as Justin Paul said in his 
Linkedin post, ONAP leads, but its not over 'til the fat lady sings... and we 
may not have any song ...
https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/nfv-orchestration-onap-leads-its-over-til-fat-lady-sings-paul?trk=v-feed=v-feed=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_search_srp_content%3B19yY4VKdyLkiQWwvYF88Qg%3D%3D

Regards
Jamil

De : onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] De la part de Christopher Donley 
(Chris)
Envoyé : lundi 24 juillet 2017 23:40
À : Thomas Nadeau; Alla Goldner; Pasi Vaananen; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>
Cc : onap-tsc
Objet : Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Architecture Progress

Tom,

I fully agree with your comments about top-down management. The architecture 
subcommittee is here to support and advise the projects, not command the 
projects.  I also agree with your point about this being a desired target 
state.  But I want to clarify that the projects have been involved in the 
creation of the long-term architecture.  This has not been an isolated exercise.

I'd like to 

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC VOTE on Repos for AAI, AAF, Modeling & MSB

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1 All

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Saturday, July 22, 2017 11:49 AM
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC VOTE on Repos for AAI, AAF, Modeling & MSB

As mentioned we have several repository requests queued up. Gildas has reviewed 
these and feels the requestors have done their due diligence regarding the data 
needed.

Please vote for each one individually OR respond with a (+1, 0, -1)  
“ALL” to approve or reject all requests
——

VOTE to approve the AAF Project's Requests for the creation of an incremental 
repository (+1, 0 -1)
Components Name

Components Repository name

Maven Group ID

Components Description

luaplugin

aaf/luaplugin

org.onap.aaf.luaplugin

A lua plugin to integrate AAF with MSB, which provides centralized auth 
features at the API Gateway.



VOTE to approve the MSB Project's Requests for the creation of two incremental 
repositories (+1, 0 -1)
Components Name

Components Repository name

Maven Group ID

Components Description

java-sdk

msb/java-sdk

org.onap.msb.sdk

Provides a JAVA SDK for rapid microservices development, including service 
registration, service discovery, request routing, load balancing, retry, etc.

swagger-sdk

msb/swagger-sdk

org.onap.msb.swagger-sdk

Swagger sdk helps to generate swagger.json and java client sdk during the build 
time, it also helps to provide the swagger.json at the given URI in the run 
time.



VOTE to approve the A Project's Requests for the creation of two incremental 
repositories (+1, 0 -1)
Components Name

Components Repository Name

Maven Group ID

Components Discription

esr-server

aai/esr-server

org.onap.aai.esr-server

ESR backend, mainly include the function of external system reachable check and 
data pretreatment

esr-gui

aai/esr-gui

org.onap.aai.esr-gui

External system management ui


VOTE to approve the Modeling Subcommittee’s requests for the creation of an 
incremental repository within the Modeling Project’s structure (+1, 0 -1)
Components Name

Components Repository name

Maven Group ID

Components Description



 modelspec

 modeling/modelspec

 org.onap.modeling.modelspec

The repository for modeling specification
published by modeling subcommittee



Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Architecture Progress

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear Jamil,

I'd like to invite you to participate in our ARC calls.  We generally meet 
Tuesdays from 1400-1600 UTC (but we'll have to adjust next week due to the 
developer meeting).  We have considered multiple presentations over the last 
four weeks (including the one you referenced), and after careful discussion, we 
aligned on the release 1 and release 2 functional architecture I shared.  I 
held consensus checks on each of the last two calls and did not hear dissenting 
opinions from the high level approach. The version of the diagram that I shared 
represents the community consensus from Tuesday's call.  If you have concerns, 
please share them during the meeting. I'll be happy to reserve a slot on the 
agenda.

Chris

From: jamil.cha...@orange.com [mailto:jamil.cha...@orange.com]
Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 8:59 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) <christopher.don...@huawei.com>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: Architecture Progress

Dear Chris
Thank you for your work and the presentation, we can say that this is a first 
step but we have not agreed on the architecture mentioned in your slide as 
Vimal presented another architecture (consigned by AT, Amdocs and Orange).
Regards
Jamil


De : onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] De la part de Christopher Donley 
(Chris)
Envoyé : jeudi 20 juillet 2017 22:05
À : onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>
Cc : onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>
Objet : [onap-tsc] Architecture Progress

Dear ONAP Technical Community,

I'd like to update you on progress from the Architecture Committee.

*For Amsterdam, we agreed to use the current architecture, as discussed 
since ONS.  This is to reduce risk of late changes to the project teams, who 
have built their plans based on the current baseline.

*Longer-term, starting with Release 2, we reached consensus on an 
approach to resolve the APP-C/VF-C challenge.  We are developing a three-layer 
orchestrator/controller functional architecture, with service 
orchestration/resource orchestration/controllers.  Note that this functional 
architecture does not imply a project structure.  Between now and the beginning 
of the R2 planning cycle, the team will drill down to the next level of detail 
on interfaces and project alignment, and then the projects will map code into 
the architecture to guide R2 plans. Cross-project discussions have already 
begun, and will continue over the coming weeks.  Meeting logistics will be sent 
to the ONAP-discuss email list for those who are interested in participating.

I have attached a set of diagrams that we reviewed in the Architecture 
Committee to illustrate both the R1 and R2 architecture.  Note that in the R2 
slide, since we are focused on the functional architecture and not the 
projects, we removed some of the boxes listing projects that support ONAP, but 
don't provide interfaces or data flows through the system.

For those interested in more detail, we will discuss this during the developer 
meeting next week.

Chris


_



Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations 
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc

pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce 
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler

a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages 
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,

Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou 
falsifie. Merci.



This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged 
information that may be protected by law;

they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.

If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete 
this message and its attachments.

As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been 
modified, changed or falsified.

Thank you.
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] REMINDER - Re: Irregularities in the Use Case Subcommittee Chair Election

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

I’m happy to help, but I’ll be traveling internationally starting Wednesday, so 
my participation will be limited after tomorrow.

I would like to make sure we differentiate between eligibility for 
participation and eligibility for voting.  For participation, I agree with Bob. 
As a general rule, I think the more open we can be, the better.  There will be 
exceptions (e.g. vulnerability committee) where it makes sense to have a 
constrained and tightly defined membership, but those should be relatively rare.

For voting in elections, given the challenges we’re facing here, perhaps we can 
borrow from OPNFV:

1.  As Lingli mentioned, eligibility for voting should be determined at the 
time the election is called

2.  Perhaps we could place a limit of one vote per company (to be 
determined by the committee members from that company prior to commencement of 
the vote).
For other issues, I’d like to draw attention to Section 5.4.2:
Subcommittees are advisory in nature, and not authoritative. They provide 
advice to projects and to the
TSC.
Subcommittees operate on a rough consensus basis. If the subcommittee is unable 
to reach consensus
on what advice to offer, the subcommittee Chair shall raise the issue with the 
TSC, where a formal vote
can be taken, or advise the project that the subcommittee cannot reach 
consensus.

In other words, aside from electing the Chairperson, there shouldn’t be any 
formal voting.

I wonder if we could resolve the issue with a small change to section 5.4.1:
Each subcommittee shall determine its own membership eligibility, in 
consultation with the TSC. It is
expected that subcommittee membership shall be open to all ONAP Contributors; 
however,
subcommittees may impose restrictions such as the number of participants from a 
single company.
While the desire may be to keep its size and scope limited, each subcommittee 
shall be open to the
ONAP membership. In particular, a Platinum member has the right to appoint its 
TSC representative or
a designate to such a subcommittee. Also, all elected TSC members are eligible 
to join a subcommittee.

Each subcommittee may elect a Chair who is responsible for leading meetings and 
representing the
subcommittee to the TSC. Only people listed on the committee’s membership list 
at the time the election is called shall be eligible to vote in the election.  
No company
shall have more than one vote.  In the event that more than one committee 
member is affiliated with a single company, the committee members from that 
company shall decide amongst themselves who is eligible to vote in the 
election, and shall notify LF prior to the start of the election.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2017 2:57 PM
To: onap-tsc
Subject: [onap-tsc] REMINDER - Re: Irregularities in the Use Case Subcommittee 
Chair Election

Team
I have received only one volunteer to review and make proposed changes to the 
Charter.
If you would like to contribute or participate then let me know today.

thanks
mazin



On Jul 9, 2017, at 5:58 PM, GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
> wrote:

ONAP Community,

Thank you for the healthy dialog, and thanks to Phil for outlining the key 
issues.
I raised this issue to the Linux Foundation two weeks back as the 
irregularities that led to Phil’s email
is not healthy in growing our community. Although these irregularities are not 
intentional, they are an indication of a lack of clear policies
and guidelines. Addressing those will be the responsibility of the TSC. I will 
set up a small subcommittee that will propose modifications
to the charter.  If you were part of the charter subcommittee and would like to 
participate then LMK by Monday.

Phil, Kenny,
Please set up an hour later this week for the TSC to propose and vote on those 
changes with respect to the election
of PTLs and subcommittee chairs, as well as the number and diversity of 
committers per project.

While the TSC will provide additional more rigid language in the Charter, I 
urge everyone to work together as a team to make
our first release a big success.

Mazin


On Jul 5, 2017, at 5:44 PM, Phil Robb 
> wrote:

Hello ONAP TSC:

The Use Case Subcommittee Chairperson election has just recently completed.  
However, there have been several irregularities/inconsistencies in the 
implementation of this election that warrants your attention.  In particular:

1) Inconsistent handling of new members of the Use Case Subcommittee during the 
election time-frame.
There are no guidelines in the TSC Charter, nor in the call for 
nominations/election for this vote, indicating if individuals can add 
themselves to the Use Case Subcommittee during the Chairperson voting, and be 
allowed to vote.
a) 64 individuals were members of the Use Case 

Re: [onap-tsc] YOUR ACTION IS REQUIRED: A Project needs new repos for microservices

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Gildas Lanilis
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 3:27 PM
To: 'onap-tsc@lists.onap.org'
Subject: [onap-tsc] YOUR ACTION IS REQUIRED: A Project needs new repos for 
microservices
Importance: High

Dear TSC Voting Members,

AAI team needs the 3 following repos to be added in Gerrit. The PTL (Jimmy 
Forsyth) has provided the rational down below.
At this point the request and all associated artifacts are properly  documented 
in 
wiki
 and are summarized in the screenshot below.
[cid:image001.jpg@01D2F6A7.205728C0]

To expedite the approval, your approval by replying a +1, 0, -1 by email will 
be deemed sufficient by LF to move forward in repos creation.
The AA team thank you in advance for your prompt response.

Best Regards,
Gildas Lanilis
ONAP Release Manager
1 415 238 6287

From: FORSYTH, JAMES [mailto:jf2...@att.com]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 7:06 AM
To: Gildas Lanilis
Subject: FW: [onap-tsc] A Project needs new repos for microservices

Hi, Gildas,

I have made the update to the Resources and Repositories 
Page.

Can you help with A’s request to get new repos added?

Thank you!

-jimmy

From: Kenny Paul [mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 06, 2017 7:48 AM
To: FORSYTH, JAMES 
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; PAQUETTE, FRANCIS ; 
WEATHERLY, STEPHEN ; BYLSMA, SUSAN 
; DENING, EDWARD ; BLIMKIE, 
STEVEN ; AGGARWAL, MANISHA ; 
Gildas Lanilis 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] A Project needs new repos for microservices

Hi James,
Please ensure that all of the necessary information for these have been 
provided on the Resources and Repositories 
Page.
At first glance it appears that babel is missing.

Once that information is complete, please let Gildas know and he will help 
shepherd this request.

Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

On Jul 5, 2017, at 9:27 AM, FORSYTH, JAMES 
> wrote:

Dear ONAP TSC Members,

The A team would like to request permission to add 3 new repositories for 2 
new microservices and a new graph database abstraction library for the 
Amsterdam release.

The repos will be called:

aai/champ
aai/gizmo
aai/babel

A’s rationale for creating these separate repos as opposed to using a 
subdirectory under an existing repo is as follows: it is the convention to 
create a separate git repository for each microservice and library as is 
demonstrated by the microservices currently part of the AAI project. The 
advantages of separate repos (as opposed a single repo containing multiple 
microservices) is the ability to manage access rights for each microservice. 
Otherwise a user with write permissions to the “common” microservice repo could 
accidentally (or intentionally) make change to another microservice.

Please let me know if further clarification is needed.

Thank you for your attention,
Jimmy Forsyth
A PTL


___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Corrective Action on Approved Project Proposals

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Thursday, June 29, 2017 12:13 PM
To: onap-tsc
Subject: [onap-tsc] Corrective Action on Approved Project Proposals

TSC Members:

The following are discrepancies and/or change requests in the approved versions 
of the Project Proposals have been identified during project infrastructure set 
up, which warrants your attention. To minimize email traffic I have 
consolidated these into a single message for your review. It is my 
recommendation that we pursue the necessary corrective action to maintain 
forward momentum.  In the event that any TSC member feels that any one of these 
items warrants further consideration/discussion please let me know and I will 
see that we address it a more formal fashion.

ACTION REQUIRED:  A +1, 0, -1 vote in response to this email will be deemed 
sufficient to cover all of these cases.

Please let me know if you have any questions.

Project

Descrepancy / Requested change

Corrective Action

Command Line Interface

Jira naming conflict with the Portal project

changing Jira Project name from PORTAL to CLI and Jira Prefix and Mailing list 
to CLI


University

conflicting repo naming within the different sections of the Proposal

setting repo name to onapuniversity


Software Defined Network Controller

- list of commiter names changed
- addition of 2 repositories
org.onap.sdnc/architecture
org.onap.sdnc/features

Accept requested changes


 Modeling

repository name change request- remove  “modeling” and replace with repos named 
“toscaparsers” and “yangvalidators”

Accept requested changes


MultiVIM/cloud:

Addition of 1 repository - windriver

Accept requested change





Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Optimization framework

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Thanks Oliver.  That works for me.

Chris

-Original Message-
From: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) [mailto:spat...@research.att.com] 
Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 12:50 PM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris)
Cc: Stephen Terrill; PUTHENPURA, SARAT (SARAT); onap-tsc
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Optimization framework


I would say something like:

“ It offers a set of MS which provide reusable optimization functionality which 
can optionally be used by other ECOMP components if required by a use case.” 

I like MS better then SDK but I think we agree.

Can certainly change to may.

Thx

Oliver

> On Jun 22, 2017, at 3:35 PM  EDT, Christopher Donley (Chris) 
> <christopher.don...@huawei.com> wrote:
> 
> Oliver,
>  
> Just to clarify the governance question: is this project producing a set of 
> services or an SDK that other projects can choose to implement or is it 
> producing artifacts that they must implement?  
>  
> From your example, I read it as the former (that projects can choose whether 
> or not to utilize oof), rather than a mandate.  If so, I’d recommend updating 
> the proposal (particularly the architecture alignment section) to change 
> “[may|will] need to….” language to “may ….” to clarify that point.
>  
> Also (since it will come up tomorrow), please adjust the committer list. 
> Everyone on the project is currently listed as a committer.
>  
> Chris
>  
> From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
> [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of SPATSCHECK, OLIVER 
> (OLIVER)
> Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2017 10:31 AM
> To: Stephen Terrill
> Cc: PUTHENPURA, SARAT (SARAT); onap-tsc
> Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Optimization framework
>  
>  
> I think there are a couple of misconceptions here. 
>  
> This is not the change management project. The change management project was 
> about the end to end use case flow needed to perform change management.  This 
> project ONLY provides the schedule optimization part of that flow. The flow 
> itself touches many projects and as discussed I agree is best handled as a 
> use case. The actual flows would be implemented using all the regular 
> components which at one point in the flow call out to this project for an 
> optimization decision. 
>  
> The same is true for homing. 
>  
> So let me try to illustrate the flow of this a bit better. The scope of the 
> project is algorithms and a run time framework to :
>  
> 1. gather and normalize data to perform an optimization decision based on a 
> request
> 2. gather the polices from the policy engine provided by the policy project 
> using standard APIs exported by that project
> 3. formulate the optimization problem
> 4. run the optimization algorithm (this might be iterative with the prior 
> steps)
> 5. return an optimization result to the requestor
>  
> So let me give a homing related example.
>  
> Let’s assume a workflow in the SO is triggered to instantiate a VNF. As part 
> of the workflow there might be a call into HAS to derive the optimal 
> location. The constrains for the placement are associated with the policy 
> (handled in the policy project) for that VNF. HAS will now go to A and 
> DCAE (using the regular A and DCAE APIs) to gather enough data to make a 
> placement decision at which point HAS would return the result back to the SO 
> so the SO can proceed instantiating the VNF following the rules in it’s 
> workflow.
>  
> Please note that the call out to HAS was part of the SO workflow for that 
> particular VNF.  It’s under the control of whoever designs the SO workflow 
> (likely the specific use case) if HAS gets called or not and what constraints 
> are communicated.
>  
> In terms of execution of all of this. Parts currently run as independent MS 
> other parts run as MS managed on DCAE. Again this project just uses 
> infrastructure that already exists.
>  
> You also mentioned CLAMP. CLAMP flows as any other flow in ONAP could call 
> out to the optimization framework if it helps. If it doesn’t the flows don’t.
>  
> So this should explain how this project does not “hurt” any other project and 
>  is aligned with the architecture.
>  
> Now if I interpret your second question correctly you are also asking “How 
> does it help?” .
>  
> The reason we want to combine all of this in one project is that there is 
> reusability in the code required in steps 1.-5.
>  
> For example:
>  
> 1. + 2. requires code to gather information from many existing ONAP 
> components and present them in a common format so they can be used to derive 
> the optimization formulation.
>  
> 3. + 4. as we do not believe that there is one formulation/optimizer which 
> solvers every problem we do believe that the same

Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee WeeklyMeeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT)(christopher.don...@huawei.com)

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Correct.  The ARC meeting will start at 8 am PDT, right after the TSC meeting.

As a reminder, we will be discussing VF-C/APP-C on tomorrow’s call.

Chris

From: yuan@zte.com.cn [mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn]
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 1:50 AM
To: vyano...@cisco.com
Cc: Christopher Donley (Chris); alex@intel.com; yoav.klu...@amdocs.com; 
cc...@linuxfoundation.org; onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee 
WeeklyMeeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday 
(PDT)(christopher.don...@huawei.com)


I checked meeting calenda, seems TSC meeting will begin one hour early to 6 PDT 
and will not overlap with Architecture meeting. You would be painful if you 
based in California.

 https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/TSC+Meeting+Resources





Yuan Yue







袁越 yuanyue

资深战略规划师   Senior Strategy Planner

技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System 
Product


[cid:image002.gif@01D2EAA7.F4AC0D40]

[cid:image003.gif@01D2EAA7.F4AC0D40]
南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼
1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua 
District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012

T: +025 88013478
M: +86 13851446442
E: yuan@zte.com.cn
www.zte.com.cn<http://www.zte.com.cn/>

原始邮件
发件人： <vyano...@cisco.com>;
收件人： <christopher.don...@huawei.com>; <alex@intel.com>; 
<yoav.klu...@amdocs.com>; <cc...@linuxfoundation.org>; 
<onap-...@lists.onap.org>; <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>;
日 期 ：2017年06月21日 16:18
主 题 ：Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee WeeklyMeeting @ 
Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT)(christopher.don...@huawei.com)


Chris,
The TSC call this Thu was extended to 2 hours thus creating conflict with the 
Architecture Subcommittee call. Please advise.
Thanks
Vladimir

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 6:52 PM
To: Vul, Alex <alex@intel.com>; Yoav Kluger <yoav.klu...@amdocs.com>; 
cc...@linuxfoundation.org; onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com)

I apologize.  I sent out two notifications of the move, and Casey sent an 
update to the calendar invitation.  In the future, I will work with Casey to 
streamline  the process of making adjustments when necessary.

Chris

From: Vul, Alex [mailto:alex@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:25 AM
To: Yoav Kluger; Christopher Donley (Chris); 
cc...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>)

+1


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Yoav Kluger
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:07 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>>; 
cc...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>)

Hi Chris,

A bunch of never got this move, and do not have the Thursday meeting.

Thanks,
Yoav Kluger
Amdocs Technology
+1(201)912-7294
+972-54-4850278
[amdocs-a]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 9:27 AM
To: cc...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>)

As a reminder, the ARC meeting this week has been moved to Thursday during this 
timeslot.

Chris

-Original Appointment-
From: ONAP Meetings and Events
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 7:44 PM
To: ONAP Meetings and Events; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Christopher Donley 
(Chris)
Subject: Invitation: ONAP Arch

Re: [onap-tsc] Special (and longer) TSC meeting this Thursday 6/22/17

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1, since we scheduled this week’s Architecture meeting to start at 8.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Ed Warnicke
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 6:35 AM
To: Phil Robb
Cc: onap-tsc
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Special (and longer) TSC meeting this Thursday 6/22/17

I would request that we please respect the fd.io TSC meeting, 
which I chair, which is held at 8am PST, by extending the ONAP TSC meeting to 
two hours by starting it at 6am PST, rather than extending its ending to 9am 
PST.

Ed

On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 12:16 AM, Phil Robb 
> wrote:
Hello ONAP TSC Members:

We've been unable to get adequate response from TSC members in the Doodle poll 
to determine when we could hold extra TSC meetings to close on the remaining 
project proposals that would like to participate in Release-1.

Given the urgency of holding these reviews so that development teams can 
actually get to work coding, we are going to hold a special TSC meeting on 
Thursday morning during our regular TSC meeting slot, and we are extending the 
meeting to two hours this week so that we can get through all of the proposals.

Please look for an updated calendar event to this affect.

The agenda, including the order for each Project Creation Review is on the TSC 
Meeting Wiki here: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/TSC+Meeting+Resources

As we did before, one TSC member is responsible to "sheperd" the project 
proposals that fall in their domain.  Please review the list on the agenda, 
identify the projects that you are to be shepherding, and reach out to the 
project contact to ensure they are available to present, *and* ensure that 
there are no outstanding questions/issues from the rest of the TSC that have 
not been addressed in the project proposals.

Let's try very hard to get through all of the remaining proposals on Thursday.  
If that doesn't work, then we will need to call another special meeting 
(probably on Friday) to close on all of them.

Thanks in advance for your help with this. We have project teams *unable* to 
work until the TSC completes these reviews.

Best,

Phil.


--
Phil Robb
Executive Director, OpenDaylight Project
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) (christopher.don...@huawei.com)

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

I apologize.  I sent out two notifications of the move, and Casey sent an 
update to the calendar invitation.  In the future, I will work with Casey to 
streamline the process of making adjustments when necessary.

Chris

From: Vul, Alex [mailto:alex@intel.com]
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:25 AM
To: Yoav Kluger; Christopher Donley (Chris); cc...@linuxfoundation.org; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com)

+1


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Yoav Kluger
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:07 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) <christopher.don...@huawei.com>; 
cc...@linuxfoundation.org; onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com)

Hi Chris,

A bunch of never got this move, and do not have the Thursday meeting.

Thanks,
Yoav Kluger
Amdocs Technology
+1(201)912-7294
+972-54-4850278
[amdocs-a]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 9:27 AM
To: cc...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly 
Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>)

As a reminder, the ARC meeting this week has been moved to Thursday during this 
timeslot.

Chris

-Original Appointment-
From: ONAP Meetings and Events
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 7:44 PM
To: ONAP Meetings and Events; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Christopher Donley 
(Chris)
Subject: Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting @ Weekly 
from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) 
(christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>)
When: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & 
Canada).
Where: https://zoom.us/j/917511391


more details 
»<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting
Hi there,
ONAP Meeting 4 is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: 
https://zoom.us/j/917511391<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F917511391=D=2=AFQjCNEy9DyLYKTns2incaEZRpuGyZG-IQ>
Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +16465588656,917511391# or +14086380968,917511391#
Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 917 511 391
International numbers available: 
https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fzoomconference%3Fm%3DRldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X=D=2=AFQjCNHCqbxB-oMnhrRnt1wlJ8XfQ_0JBw>





When

Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday Pacific Time



Where

https://zoom.us/j/917511391 
(map<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F917511391=D=2=AFQjCNEy9DyLYKTns2incaEZRpuGyZG-IQ>)



Calendar

christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>



Who

•

Casey Cain - creator



•

onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>



•

onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>



•

christopher.don...@huawei.com<mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com>







Going?   All events in this series:   
Yes<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=1=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
 - 
Maybe<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=3=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
 - 
No<https://w

Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) (christopher.don...@huawei.com)

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

As a reminder, the ARC meeting this week has been moved to Thursday during this 
timeslot.

Chris

-Original Appointment-
From: ONAP Meetings and Events
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 7:44 PM
To: ONAP Meetings and Events; onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; 
Christopher Donley (Chris)
Subject: Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting @ Weekly 
from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) (christopher.don...@huawei.com)
When: Tuesday, June 20, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & 
Canada).
Where: https://zoom.us/j/917511391


more details 
»<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>

ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting
Hi there,

ONAP Meeting 4 is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: 
https://zoom.us/j/917511391<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F917511391=D=2=AFQjCNEy9DyLYKTns2incaEZRpuGyZG-IQ>
Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +16465588656,917511391# or +14086380968,917511391#
Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 917 511 391
International numbers available: 
https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fzoomconference%3Fm%3DRldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X=D=2=AFQjCNHCqbxB-oMnhrRnt1wlJ8XfQ_0JBw>






When
Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday Pacific Time

Where
https://zoom.us/j/917511391 
(map<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fzoom.us%2Fj%2F917511391=D=2=AFQjCNEy9DyLYKTns2incaEZRpuGyZG-IQ>)

Calendar
christopher.don...@huawei.com

Who
•
Casey Cain - creator

•
onap-...@lists.onap.org

•
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org

•
christopher.don...@huawei.com



Going?   All events in this series:   
Yes<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=1=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
 - 
Maybe<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=3=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
 - 
No<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=RESPOND=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=2=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
more options 
»<https://www.google.com/calendar/event?action=VIEW=dG04MjR1Y3RranMxcDQ0aHFtazRzMmt0cWMgY2hyaXN0b3BoZXIuZG9ubGV5QGh1YXdlaS5jb20=NzIjbGludXhmb3VuZGF0aW9uLm9yZ18xcm10YjV0cHIzdWM4Zjc2Zm1mbHBsb2k4OEBncm91cC5jYWxlbmRhci5nb29nbGUuY29tN2NhMGFlOGIyY2IyZDVkN2VkZGYzNjhmYTQ4Y2FhYWQ1YTZhZDMzYg=America/Los_Angeles=en>
Invitation from Google Calendar<https://www.google.com/calendar/>

You are receiving this courtesy email at the account 
christopher.don...@huawei.com because you are an attendee of this event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event. 
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at 
https://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for 
your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP 
response. Learn 
More<https://support.google.com/calendar/answer/37135#forwarding>.


___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting @ Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) (christopher.don...@huawei.com)

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear Team,

Due to the OPNFV Summit, I need to cancel this week’s Architecture meeting.  
Our next call will focus on VF-C/APP-C, and several people critical to this 
discussion are unavailable this week.

We will resume our calls next week.

Chris

-Original Appointment-
From: ONAP Meetings and Events
Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2017 7:44 PM
Subject: Invitation: ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting @ Weekly 
from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday (PDT) (christopher.don...@huawei.com)
When: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 8:00 AM-9:00 AM (UTC-08:00) Pacific Time (US & 
Canada).
Where: https://zoom.us/j/917511391


more details 
»

ONAP Architecture Subcommittee Weekly Meeting
Hi there,

ONAP Meeting 4 is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: 
https://zoom.us/j/917511391
Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll): +16465588656,917511391# or +14086380968,917511391#
Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 917 511 391
International numbers available: 
https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=RldTp0lAcFewk1ZIKtbiUPlr_puNua4X






When
Weekly from 08:00 to 09:00 on Tuesday Pacific Time

Where
https://zoom.us/j/917511391 
(map)

Calendar
christopher.don...@huawei.com

Who
•
Casey Cain - creator

•
onap-...@lists.onap.org

•
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org

•
christopher.don...@huawei.com



Going?   All events in this series:   
Yes
 - 
Maybe
 - 
No
more options 
»
Invitation from Google Calendar

You are receiving this courtesy email at the account 
christopher.don...@huawei.com because you are an attendee of this event.
To stop receiving future updates for this event, decline this event. 
Alternatively you can sign up for a Google account at 
https://www.google.com/calendar/ and control your notification settings for 
your entire calendar.
Forwarding this invitation could allow any recipient to modify your RSVP 
response. Learn 
More.
 << File: invite.ics >>

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Usage of commercial VNF and NFVI+VIM solutions for ONAP R1 use cases, and open lab

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

I think there’s a difference between using proprietary software in the 
production of the platform (e.g., incorporating proprietary code into ONAP) and 
testing to make sure that ONAP will work in an ecosystem including commercial 
products (e.g., bringing commercial VNFs, VIMs, etc. into the lab). I see the 
latter as the point of the open lab project – testing integration with 
third-party components (including commercial) to prove out our use cases.  I 
expect that we will have separate labs (e.g. hosted by LF) for software 
development and unit test purposes. This was generally the approach we used in 
OPEN-O, where we had labs in China Mobile and China Telecom integrating 
commercial VNFs and PNFs with OPEN-O to prove out our vCPE and VoLTE use cases, 
and I think it’s effective.

Chris



From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of SULLIVAN, BRYAN L
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 5:06 PM
To: Hellmann, Gil; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Usage of commercial VNF and NFVI+VIM solutions for ONAP 
R1 use cases, and open lab

For an open source community, the use of proprietary software in the production 
of the platform (including tools, NFVI platforms, or VNFs used as use cases for 
developing the platform in open labs), or as part of the released platform, 
takes the project into a tricky space. It will complicate how “open” the labs 
actually are, e.g. who has the ability to use what where, and the transparency 
of test results with/against specific proprietary components.

Certainly it would be useful to provide some environment in which commercial 
NFVI platforms or VNFs are tested against the ONAP platform, and takeaways from 
that used to help improve the project. But that environment would probably need 
to be separate from the main “open” labs or more tightly controlled, as access 
to the proprietary components/VNFs would be problematic.

An alternative to using proprietary NFVI platforms is to focus the integration 
testing in the OPNFV, where open source versions of NFVI platforms are freely 
available for testing with. Integrating/testing with these (currently 
RedHat/RDO, Ubuntu, Mirantis, and Huawei) can address probably the vast 
majority of issues in ONAP-NFVI interop, and a side benefit is that any gaps 
would be addressed in an open source space (avoiding the temptation to address 
gaps by adding proprietary feature compatibility into ONAP). We are planning to 
drive ONAP-NFVI integration in OPNFV for that purpose over the current and next 
release. I will be giving a talk on this at the OPNFV Summit the week after 
next, so invite any more detailed discussion on what’s planned.

Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Hellmann, Gil
Sent: Thursday, June 01, 2017 2:09 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Usage of commercial VNF and NFVI+VIM solutions for ONAP R1 
use cases, and open lab

Dear TSC members,

It is very exciting to see the great momentum and grow in the ONAP community, I 
hear that there is different opinion / debate with regard to whether release 1 
of ONAP should be using commercial VNFs & NFVI+VIM’s solutions for the 
implementation of the proposed use cases and open lab / integration in release 
1 or should it be strictly limited to use only open source. I would suggest 
that the TSC will consider the following before making a decision:

As it was agreed by both the TSC and the wider ONAP community, using real life 
use case like the proposed VoLTE and vCPE use cases for release 1 is very 
important to ensure that ONAP is built from day 1 in a way that will provide 
close implementation to a real-life use case which can provide proper 
foundation to use ONAP in commercial deployment, and implementation of real 
life use case can have a great contribution to the success of this project.

ONAP as orchestration / MANO project require NFVI+VIMs (clouds) to run on, and 
VNFs to run to create the services. The use of commercial NFVI+VIMs and VNFs 
for the use case implementation and open lab / integration can have a big 
positive impact on our ability to be as close as possible to a real-life usage 
scenario. Limiting the usage *to only open source* solutions will limit 
dramatically the ability to get there. Not saying we should not use open source 
VNFs and NFVI+VIMs, but I hope we wouldn’t limit ourselves to only open source 
VNFs & NFVI+VIM in the open lab / integration lab and for the release 1 use 
cases, same like we would not limit yourself to only use open source hardware.

I hope this can be considered, and thanks for your consideration.

Regards,
Gil Hellmann, VP - Solutions Readiness
direct 289.553.5815  mobile 905.409.6878 
 skype ID gil.hellmann

Re: [onap-tsc] project proposal: VNF SDK

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Erik Sundelof from AT is putting that proposal together.

Chris

From: Andrei Kojukhov [mailto:andrei.kojuk...@amdocs.com]
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 4:07 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris)
Cc: Alla Goldner; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: FW: project proposal: VNF SDK

Hi Chris,

Where and when the discussion about the content and the leadership of VNF 
Validation Program (TBD) projects, which will handle vnf guidelines and 
compliance/validation, respectively will be held?

BR

Andrei

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 3:27 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] project proposal: VNF SDK

Dear ONAP TSC,

The VNF SDK team would like to formally propose the VNF SDK project: 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/VNF+SDK.

Note that we have adjusted the scope of this project and split the original 
proposal into three parts.  VNF SDK (this project) is focused on developing 
tools for VNF packaging and validation.  It will work closely with two 
independent projects: VNF Requirements project 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/VNF+Requirements) and VNF Validation Program 
(TBD) projects, which will handle vnf guidelines and compliance/validation, 
respectively.

Thanks,
Chris
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
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] project proposal: VNF SDK

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear ONAP TSC,

The VNF SDK team would like to formally propose the VNF SDK project: 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/VNF+SDK.

Note that we have adjusted the scope of this project and split the original 
proposal into three parts.  VNF SDK (this project) is focused on developing 
tools for VNF packaging and validation.  It will work closely with two 
independent projects: VNF Requirements project 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/VNF+Requirements) and VNF Validation Program 
(TBD) projects, which will handle vnf guidelines and compliance/validation, 
respectively.

Thanks,
Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] ONAP Architecture subcommittee kickoff

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Team,

Just to clarify, this is a one-time meeting proposal.  There were limited slots 
next week, and this is the best I could find.  Next week, we will discuss 
recurring meeting times for future meetings.

Chris
From: Lingli Deng [mailto:denglin...@chinamobile.com]
Sent: Friday, May 26, 2017 5:17 PM
To: denghui (L); Christopher Donley (Chris); onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] ONAP Architecture subcommittee kickoff

Hui,

Thanks for the clarification.
Sorry for the confusion.

Lingli

From: denghui (L) [mailto:denghu...@huawei.com]
Sent: 2017年5月27日 8:12
To: Lingli Deng <denglin...@chinamobile.com>; Christopher Donley (Chris) 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com>; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] ONAP Architecture subcommittee kickoff

Lingli,

It doesn’t conflict with modeling (PDT 6-7AM), architecture will be PDT 8-9AM

Best regards,

DENG Hui

From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Lingli Deng
Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2017 7:55 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris); 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] ONAP Architecture subcommittee kickoff

Hi Chris,

Thanks for the arrangements.

I am interested to join but found a conflict with modeling weekly calls.
Will the suggested time slot be used for subsequent routine calls or is it only 
a one-time suggestion?
Since I expect several people including myself to be regularly attending both 
meeting series, would you consider the possibility that we might reschedule it 
to another slot?

Thanks again,
Lingli

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: 2017年5月27日 7:44
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] ONAP Architecture subcommittee kickoff

Dear ONAP community,

This is a call-for-participation message for our newly created architecture 
subcommittee.

We will have a kickoff meeting next Tuesday, May 30 at 1500 UTC.  Preliminary 
agenda includes:

  *   Introductions
  *   Discuss subcommittee goals, roles, purpose, processes/tools/communication 
mechanisms, and formation next steps
  *   Recurring meeting dates/times
  *   Discuss the starting point and open issues 
(https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/3245203/ONAP%20Architecture%20Evolution%2005022017_v7.pptx?version=1=1493761356000=v2)
  *   As time permits, continue the SO-APP-C-VF-C discussion


For those interested in joining, here are the logistics:
Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/525972941

Or iPhone one-tap (US Toll):  +16465588656,525972941# or +14086380968,525972941#

Or Telephone:
Dial: +1 646 558 8656 (US Toll) or +1 408 638 0968 (US Toll)
Meeting ID: 525 972 941
International numbers available: 
https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=TTavi4JgYzPQg9seHf6L8GWCn-g6ehUy

Chris
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Ranny,

What’s the saying?  If you want to go fast, go alone; if you want to go far, go 
together

You’re right that there are risks to having an open membership. The alternative 
is to impose restrictions such as the number of participants per company.  
However, that could leave some ideas out of the conversation, and foster 
mistrust in people who are not invited to participate.  My preference is to err 
on the side of openness, and impose limitations down the road if the committee 
becomes unwieldy. I want to set the right note at the beginning that we value 
community input and transparency, and are not making decisions in the 
proverbial smoke-filled room. (Also why I’m proposing this as an advisory body 
and not a decision making body).

My experience is that some people will be more interested in architecture than 
others, and people will self-select.  I expect that we would see a fairly 
stable core group, and others who come and go based on the topic. Yes, in 
OPEN-O, some people opted out.  We regularly had about 30 people attending 
(+/-), compared to 45 or so who showed up on TSC calls and 100+ contributing to 
the codebase.   Generally, about 10 people were active participants.  I don’t 
know how many people from ONAP will want to join - so far, about 10 have 
reached out to me.  I expect we’ll have more step forward if this proposal is 
approved and we have an open call for participation.

You could  have architecture discussions outside of the subcommittee, but it 
becomes difficult for people to know when or where conversations are taking 
place, and many such conversations de facto become private.  I think having a 
defined forum helps build trust in the community.

As with other aspects of open source communities, the architecture subcommittee 
would be contribution-driven.  I expect that the chair would schedule regular 
meetings, solicit contributions for particular topics, and publish an agenda in 
advance.  People who have a contribution or question could schedule a slot on 
the agenda.

Chris

From: Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA) [mailto:ranny.ha...@nokia.com]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 11:33 AM
To: Alla Goldner; Christopher Donley (Chris); SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER); 
aayush.bhatna...@ril.com
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

Chris,

I am having a hard time figuring out the difference between an architecture 
subcommittee member and a “plain” member of the community. Architectural 
discussions take place in the community on a regular basis and they are open to 
all. With the current definition of the subcommittee I don’t think any member 
of the community will opt-out for participation. I am missing some kind of 
required commitment from subcommittee members. Unless some commitment is 
involved (meeting participations, contributions to documentations, etc.) I 
hardly see how we can have an efficient subcommittee in a community as large as 
ours.

What was your experience in Open-O? What was the size of the subcommittee? Did 
any community member opt-out?

Would love to hear your thought on that matter.

Ranny.


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 10:47 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) <christopher.don...@huawei.com>; SPATSCHECK, 
OLIVER (OLIVER) <spat...@research.att.com>; aayush.bhatna...@ril.com
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

+1, as also provided by my previous response to Aayush.

Architecture subcommittee, if created, should not deal with any specific 
architecture requirements, which are up to release/project to define.
Architecture subcommittee should review interactions between a different 
components/modules per defined Release goals, i.e. be responsible to validate 
whether e2e architecture across all modules is correct, whether all necessary 
interactions are covered etc.. It may also propose a new project, if gaps are 
identified, but it will be up to community to create such a project and up to 
TSC to approve/reject it.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D2CB12.A5B18490]

From: Christopher Donley (Chris) [mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com]
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 8:38 PM
To: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) 
<spat...@research.att.com<mailto:spat...@research.att.com>>; 
aayush.bhatna...@ril.com<mailto:aayush.bhatna...@ril.com>
Cc: Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
Kanagaraj Manickam 
<kanagaraj.manic...@huawei.com<mailto:kanagaraj.manic...@huawei.com>>; 
bob.monk...@arm.com<mailto:bob.monk...@arm.com>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

+1.  The architecture subcommittee should NOT put gating requirements on a

Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

That’s the intention, and one of the reasons I’m proposing a subcommittee, 
rather than a project. If we form this as a project, then decisions would be 
made by the ptl and committers. It also clouds the relationship with other 
projects.

As proposed, the architecture subcommittee would be an advisory body open to 
the community. There are not restrictions on who can participate:
The architecture subcommittee is open to all interested participants, and 
meetings are open.

I believe the subcommittee should be open to the community, whether or not you 
are a member of the TSC or an employee of a member company.

I specifically do NOT believe that this subcommittee should have approval 
power. That should rest with the projects. This group would advise the projects 
and ask questions about how does project A interact with project B, but should 
NOT dictate the answer.

Chris

From: Alla Goldner [mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 9:59 PM
To: Kanagaraj Manickam; Bob Monkman; Christopher Donley (Chris); onap-tsc
Subject: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

Hi,

According to the Charter,

It is expected that subcommittee membership shall be open to all ONAP 
Contributors; however,
subcommittees may impose restrictions such as the number of participants from a 
single company.
While the desire may be to keep its size and scope limited, each subcommittee 
shall be open to the
ONAP membership. In particular, a Platinum member has the right to appoint its 
TSC representative or
a designate to such a subcommittee. Also, all elected TSC members are eligible 
to join a subcommittee

Thus, I guess, this one will follow the same rules.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D2CB08.6E07D670]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Kanagaraj Manickam
Sent: Friday, May 12, 2017 2:55 AM
To: Bob Monkman <bob.monk...@arm.com>; Christopher Donley (Chris) 
<christopher.don...@huawei.com>; onap-tsc <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

IMHO, its really an important and critical team for onap community to ride in 
right path and to maintain the integrity of onap projects as a whole. so would 
like to suggest an idea to systematically handle it as below

- should we consider architecture as a project, which will have ptl, committers 
and any contributors and importantly git repository. so that we formalize the 
approval process of the given change in onap architecture.
-  instead of ppt format, should we  use uml and store it in XML in git 
repository for architecture diagram and use some tool automate the creation of 
architecture diagram from XML
- as part of it, could we bring approval process for nbi and sbi of each 
component of architecture as well.
- in addition, should integration project  automate the validation of nbi and 
sbi of  the project deliverable whether it meets the approved ones by 
architecture committee, who already had committed the nbi and sbi in 
architecture git repository in the appropriate form like one of   yang, 
swagger, etc. interoperability will be taken care by this way.

this end2end process will govern the integrity of onap architecture as a whole.

and i am not sure, but it could bring opportunities to non tsc member as a 
committer in architecture project☺ for bringing his(er) expertise to onap.

your thoughts.
---
Kanagaraj M
From:Bob Monkman
To:Christopher Donley (Chris),onap-tsc,
Date:2017-05-12 00:44:28
Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

+1  

Robert (Bob) Monkman
Networking Software Strategy & Ecosystem Programs
ARM
150 Rose Orchard Way
San Jose, Ca 95134
M: +1.510.676.5490
Skype: robert.monkman

From: Christopher Donley (Chris) [mailto:christopher.don...@huawei.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 12:03 PM
To: Bob Monkman <bob.monk...@arm.com<mailto:bob.monk...@arm.com>>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: RE: Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

Bob,

I propose that it’s open to anyone, regardless of membership level (if any).

Thanks,
Chris

From: Bob Monkman [mailto:bob.monk...@arm.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 11:32 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris); 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: RE: Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

Chris, TSC,
  Can Silver members put forth a representative to contribute to 
the architecture subcommittee, or will this be only available to TSC members or 
representatives from member companies of a certain level?

  This would seem to be to be a very important step for ONAP, btw. 
Very helpful to the success of this project.
Regards,
Bob

Robert (Bob) Monkman
Networking Software Strategy & Ecosystem Programs
ARM
150 Rose Orchard Way
San Jose, Ca 95134
M: +1.510.676.5490
Skype: robert.monkman

Fro

Re: [onap-tsc] CI/CD

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Gildas and I have been participating in the group, representing OPEN-O, and 
Phil has been active, as well.  This group is working more along the lines of 
harmonizing tools, labs, and processes, rather than Integration.

I would recommend whomever is maintaining the CI/CD tooling and infrastructure 
requirements participate in the activity.

Chris

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of ROSE, DANIEL V
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 1:54 PM
To: Stephen Terrill; onap-tsc
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] CI/CD

I think we can just drop in ONAP to that list were Open-O is.
There is an integration project here in ONAP being proposed so that would apply 
still unless the TSC wants a separate coordinator here instead.


Thanks,
Daniel Rose
ECOMP / ONAP
com.att.ecomp
732-420-7308

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 4:47 PM
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] CI/CD

Hi All,

I've become aware of colloborative work between a number of communities 
regarding CI/CD, where there is information here: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Infra+Collaboration

I assume it would be good to consider this as well from an ONAP perspective.  
Any ideas on how we should?  Under the integration project? Or opensource 
coordinator?

Best regards,

Steve.


[Ericsson]
STEPHEN TERRILL
Technology Specialist
DUIC, Systems and Technology
Development Unit IP & Cloud
Business Unit, IT & Cloud Products

Ericsson
Ericsson R Center, via de los Poblados 13
28033, Madrid, Spain
Phone +34 339 3005
Mobile +34 609 168 515
stephen.terr...@ericsson.com
www.ericsson.com


[http://www.ericsson.com/current_campaign]

Legal entity: Ericsson España S.A, compay registration number ESA288568603. 
This Communication is Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis 
of the terms set out at 
www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Bob,

I propose that it's open to anyone, regardless of membership level (if any).

Thanks,
Chris

From: Bob Monkman [mailto:bob.monk...@arm.com]
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 11:32 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris); onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: RE: Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

Chris, TSC,
  Can Silver members put forth a representative to contribute to 
the architecture subcommittee, or will this be only available to TSC members or 
representatives from member companies of a certain level?

  This would seem to be to be a very important step for ONAP, btw. 
Very helpful to the success of this project.
Regards,
Bob

Robert (Bob) Monkman
Networking Software Strategy & Ecosystem Programs
ARM
150 Rose Orchard Way
San Jose, Ca 95134
M: +1.510.676.5490
Skype: robert.monkman

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2017 10:53 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

Dear TSC,
I'd like to propose the formation of an architecture subcommittee to develop 
and maintain a functional architecture for ONAP.

Please see the details below.

Chris

* TSC subcommittee name:
Architecture Subcommittee (ARC)

* TSC subcommittee purpose:
The architecture subcommittee is responsible for developing and maintaining a 
functional ONAP architecture. This functional architecture helps inform 
relationships and interaction between functional modules, which may include 
high level information flows between the modules supporting the use case(s) 
driving each release. It also helps the community with project proposals by 
clarifying the new project relationship with existing components.
The architecture subcommittee will not make decisions regarding internal 
functioning of projects.

The architecture subcommittee is advisory by nature, and not authoritative. It 
may provide advice to projects and to the TSC, such as by providing a forum to 
help resolve architectural questions that may arise.

The architecture subcommittee operates on a rough consensus basis.  If the 
subcommittee is unable to reach consensus on what advice to offer, the 
subcommittee will refer the matter to the TSC or inform the project that advice 
cannot be rendered.

The architecture subcommittee will consult with Projects to help drive 
alignment between components and with the functional architecture.

* TSC subcommittee expected deliverables:
The architecture subcommittee will develop and maintain a functional 
architecture diagram and any explanatory material.

Periodically, or midway through a release, the architecture subcommittee will 
schedule a walk-through with each project to understand API interactions 
between components.

* TSC subcommittee starting participants:
The architecture subcommittee is open to all interested participants, and 
meetings are open.
IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are 
confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, 
please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose the contents to any 
other person, use it for any purpose, or store or copy the information in any 
medium. Thank you.
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] TSC Charter

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear TSC,

For your reference, here is the TSC Charter we approved yesterday.  The team 
and I made the updates we discussed in the meeting and cleaned up the 
formatting.  We have asked LF to post a copy of this to the website.

Chris
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ONAP TSC Charter APPROVED 7 1 CLEAN.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 672442 bytes
Desc: ONAP TSC Charter APPROVED 7 1 CLEAN.pdf
URL: 

Re: [onap-tsc] [ONAP TSC VICE-CHAIRPERSON ELECTION] Kickoff of the ONAP TSC Vice-Chairperson Election

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Dear ONAP TSC,

I am interested in serving as ONAP’s TSC Vice-Chairperson.  In this role, I 
will focus on two priorities: community and cadence.  I am committed to 
openness and transparency, making room for other people’s contributions, and 
recruiting new developers and new companies.  Also, I believe that it is 
essential that we demonstrate the ability to release on time, before the end of 
the year.

Over the past year, I have served as OPEN-O’s TSC Chair.  I know what it takes 
to build and lead an open source community and to release on time, having 
delivered two on-time releases in 11 months. Also, I can devote about 90% of my 
time to ONAP, and I am committed to its success.

I have over 20 years’ networking experience, including 6+ years’ experience 
leading open source SDN/NFV development teams using Agile and Lean 
methodologies.   I have also been active in open source leadership for several 
years:

·OPEN-O TSC Chair and Member of the Governing Board

·OPNFV Certification & Compliance Chair; former Member of the Board of 
Directors and Strategic Planning Committee Chair

·Open Daylight Advisory Committee

·MEF Certification Committee Co-Chair

·CableLabs Virtualization and Network Evolution head, developing 
residential and business Virtual CPEs, including the first open source version 
of MEF LSO.

Thank you. I appreciate your support.

Chris

Chris Donley serves as Senior Director, Open Source Ecosystems at Huawei.  He 
is providing open source leadership in several Software Defined Networking 
(SDN) and Network function Virtualization (NfV) initiatives, including Open-O, 
ONAP, and OPNFV.  He previously served as Director, Virtualization and Network 
Evolution at CableLabs.

Chris has been involved in many standards and open source organizations. He 
currently serves as TSC Chair for Open-O, Certification and Compliance Chair 
for OPNFV, and Huawei’s TSC member for ONAP. He previously served on the OPNFV 
Board of Directors and Open Daylight Advisory Council.  He also chaired the 
OPNFV Strategic Planning Committee and served as MEF Certification Committee 
Co-Chair.

Chris received a Bachelor's degree in Engineering from Dartmouth College and a 
Master's degree in Business Administration from the University of Colorado. He 
holds Cisco CCIE and (ISC)2 CISSP certifications, and has been granted 15 US 
patents.


[Chris Donley]


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Friday, April 28, 2017 3:49 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] [ONAP TSC VICE-CHAIRPERSON ELECTION] Kickoff of the ONAP 
TSC Vice-Chairperson Election

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

Please consider this email as the kickoff of the ONAP TSC Vice-Chair Election 
process.

There are two phases to the election process.  The first is the Nomination 
Phase where TSC Members may nominate themselves for the position of TSC 
Vice-Chairperson.  Once the Nomination Phase has concluded, we will enter the 
Election Phase, where all ONAP TSC Members are invited and encouraged to vote 
on the candidates whom have been nominated.

Timing:
§  Nominations open April 28th, 2017.
§  Nominations close May 2nd at 9:00pm Pacific Time
§  Voting begins May 3rd, 2017
§  Voting Ends May 5th, 2017 at 9:00pm Pacific Time

If you are an ONAP TSC member and wish to nominate yourself for the position of 
TSC Vice-Chairperson, please respond-all to this email with your picture 
(headshot), biography, and statement of interest on why you would wish to be 
the TSC Vice-Chairperson.  I wlll post this information to the wiki prior to 
the start of the election so that everyone in the technical community is able 
to become familiar with the candidates.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Best,

Phil.
--
Phil Robb
Executive Director, OpenDaylight Project
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Repo Question

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

+1

Chris

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Wednesday, April 26, 2017 10:06 AM
To: Ed Warnicke; SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)
Cc: Phil Robb via onap-tsc
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Repo Question

+1

Alla Goldner

 Original Message 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Repo Question
From: Ed Warnicke 
Date: Apr 26, 2017, 7:34 PM
To: "SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)" 
+1

Ed

On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 8:14 AM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) mailto:spatsch at research.att.com>> wrote:

Dear TSC,

I think we have a little conundrum with the current code base repos. As you are 
likely aware the original code base we had released was matching our 1610 
internal release. We have been busy the last few weeks uploading the delta to 
bring the public code base up to the current internal version to give the 
community the same view/code we use today. Now it turns out that our current 
internal code base requires some additional "sub-repos" 3 under A and one 
under SDC. Without those repos we can not complete the public code update by 
5/5 as originally promised.

The conundrum now is that we still don't have a charter and no projects have 
been created yet. So there is no process for us to create those additional 
repos on LF servers.

Therefore, I am requesting a one time waiver from the TSC allowing the LF to 
create those repos so we can complete the code base update in a timely manor.

I don't really think there is any substantial risk as the TSC can always decide 
to delete the repos again later if the TSC doesn't like them. On the positive 
side it allows the community to see all the code in a timely manor.

To be clear those are nor new functional components. Those repos only include 
improvements to the existing functional components in particular A and SDC.

Thx

Oliver
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

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
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

[onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

We had a smaller community, and didn?t have ?coordinators??

My point is to leave the flexibility to the TSC, and not to specify the 
mechanism in the Charter (no comment on who specifically would 
coordinate/manage the repos).

Chris

From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 12:56 PM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris)
Cc: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER); Ed Warnicke; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; onap-tsc at 
lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

I'd suggest distributing responsibilities at bit more (rather than centralizing 
in a Release Manager... that job is hard enough ;) ).

Ed

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 12:50 PM, Christopher Donley (Chris) 
mailto:Christopher.Donley at huawei.com>> 
wrote:
That?s essentially the approach we used in OPEN-O, with the Release Manager 
handling the coordination ? if a project needed a new repo for a sub-project, 
etc., the team reached out to Gildas.  It worked fairly well. We could update 
the language in section 1 to allow plural repositories.  Beyond that, I suggest 
not over specifying the mechanism in the charter, and instead provide 
flexibility to the TSC to deal with issues as they arise.

Chris

From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagbard at gmail.com<mailto:hagb...@gmail.com>]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 12:34 PM
To: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)
Cc: Christopher Donley (Chris); Ed Warnicke; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; onap-tsc at 
lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc at lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

Inline...

On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:01 AM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) mailto:spatsch at research.att.com>> wrote:

I think one option would be to stick with the project approval as outline but 
allow multiple repos in one project as decided by the project team.

Then we could have a repo coordinator who provides advice to the projects on 
repos and races issues (like this should really be two projects) to the TSC as 
they occur which allows the TSC to intervene (e.g. splitting the project).

This sounds like a good start :)  Though I would prefer the TSC ask hard 
questions as to whether a project has grown beyond its scope rather than 
'intervening' ;)

Ed


Similarly to your philosophy I believe into trusting the people which do the 
work and dealing with problems IF they happen rather then trying to design a 
process which is heavy handed trying to address anticipated issues which might 
rarely/never occur.

Oliver

> On Apr 21, 2017, at 1:47 PM  EDT, Ed Warnicke  gmail.com<mailto:hagbard at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Inline...
>
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 9:22 AM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)  research.att.com<mailto:spatsch at research.att.com>> wrote:
>
> I guess you could argue that our current code base is not well formed but if 
> you look at Gerrit right now you see about 60+ repos for the couple of 
> components we have.
>
> LOL... I try not to argue that somebody elses work is not well formed till I 
> can understand a bit better both their constraints and reasoning ;)
> But when they do things that don't make immediate sense to me... I *do* get 
> curious and want to understand :)
> So about the worst you are going to get from me is that seeking to understand 
> and perhaps some "Have you thought of this" questions :)
>
>
> Let?s just start with A. A in my mind is one project. The scope of the 
> project is to provide a current inventory for ONAP.
>
> It consist of 5 repos.
>
> - AAI Chef cookbooks
> - AAI Chef environment files
> - AAI REST based services
> - AAI common logging library
> - Loads SDC Models into A
>
> now could we have thrown all of this into one repo? Sure we could have but I 
> think they are functionally separate enough that they shouldn?t be in the 
> same repo so they can be managed separately (e.g. versioning, patches, 
> releases etc?). Also not every ONAP user might use all of them (e.g. somebody 
> might not want to use chef and add an ansible repo)
>
> This is true pretty much for every component we have right now as you can see 
> in gerrit.
>
> Now I guess you could argue that we should file a sub project proposal for 
> each of those repos but I am not sure if e.g. creating two repos for  Check 
> cookbooks and Check environment files is really a decision which needs TSC 
> input. That could perfectly be handled by the project team. After all we are 
> trusting the project team to write the code so why not trust them with this?
>
> Honestly, my preferred mode of oversite in general is to provide information 
> that may be relavent and then defer to the guys doing the work.
> So please take my comments in that spirit ;)
>
> When I see repo proliferation a couple of things come to mind for me:
> 1)  Is that really part of one project with one set of committers?  Or is 
> that a new s

[onap-tsc] Project proposal training material

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Brian,

Yes, the OPEN-O wiki template is available here: 
https://wiki.open-o.org/display/REL/Wiki+Proposal+Template if you want to adapt 
it for ONAP.

FYI, the project lifecycle document is contained inside the TSC Charter.

Chris

From: Brian Hedstrom [mailto:brian.hedst...@oamtechnologies.com]
Sent: Friday, April 21, 2017 8:28 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris)
Cc: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Project proposal training material

Chris,
Was there a Project proposal Wiki template page in 
https://confluence.open-o.org/?
If so, I could easily duplicate this page into https://wiki.onap.org/

It would be good to create a new templates Wiki section for the various 
artifacts for a project lifecycle, as well as a lifecycle info or tutorial page.

Brian

On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 9:26 AM, Christopher Donley (Chris) mailto:Christopher.Donley at huawei.com>> wrote:
Team,

As we discussed on today?s TSC call, here is a presentation from OPEN-O on how 
to put together a project proposal.  While we haven?t specifically discussed 
the format for ONAP proposals, I expect it will be similar (ODL, OPNFV, OPEN-O, 
and FD.IO<http://FD.IO> all share a common format with minor variations).

Hope this helps,
Chris

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org<mailto:ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org>
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc



--
Brian Hedstrom
Founder/CEO
OAM Technology Consulting LLC
oamtechnologyconsulting.com<http://oamtechnologyconsulting.com>
brian.hedstrom at oamtechnologies.com<mailto:brian.hedstrom at 
oamtechnologies.com>
720-470-7091
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.onap.org/pipermail/onap-tsc/attachments/20170421/745d9747/attachment.html>

[onap-tsc] Project proposal training material

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Team,

As we discussed on today's TSC call, here is a presentation from OPEN-O on how 
to put together a project proposal.  While we haven't specifically discussed 
the format for ONAP proposals, I expect it will be similar (ODL, OPNFV, OPEN-O, 
and FD.IO all share a common format with minor variations).

Hope this helps,
Chris
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

-- next part --
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Open-O_Project_Proposal_Training-v5.pptx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.presentationml.presentation
Size: 860224 bytes
Desc: Open-O_Project_Proposal_Training-v5.pptx
URL: 

[onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

It's important to separate the project lifecycle from the release lifecycle.  
It usually takes 2+ releases for a project to move from 'incubation' to 
'mature'.  However, you probably want to have an MVP for each release defined 
during the planning phase (before the M1 milestone).  What is the minimum 
functionality this project can deliver and still be part of the release? You 
can add stretch goals in case the team has extra time. In a date-driven 
release, though, the two levers a project team has are scope and quality, so it 
helps to understand up front what features/functions can be jettisoned if the 
team starts to fall behind.

Chris

From: Dhananjay Pavgi [mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 5:12 AM
To: Stephen Terrill; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; Christopher Donley (Chris); onap-tsc at 
lists.onap.org
Cc: Ed Warnicke
Subject: RE: Updated TSC Charter

On MVP and text in below email from Bryan,  Clarification as to what an MVP is 
as the target for the end of the incubation phase. Believe, that's where we 
need to some element of Product Management.

thanks & regards,
Dhananjay Pavgi
Mobile : +91 98220 22264
[cid:image002.png at 01CE7323.F2727500]   [ONAP_logo_Sig]
www.techmahindra.com<http://www.techmahindra.com/> Platinum 
Member. Visit : http://www.onap.org<http://www.onap.org/>

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 12:32 AM
To: SULLIVAN, BRYAN L ; Christopher Donley (Chris) 
; onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Cc: Ed Warnicke 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

Hi,

Thanks for the comments Bryan.  On responding comment in the "incubation" and 
MVP definition and that is on the proposed addition of "That is (or can be) 
used in a production environment".  The use in a "production environment" is 
also subject to whatever additions and support is required.   I can agree that 
MVP is subject to the same question in that its very subjective.  Its not 
obvious to phrase in a non-subjective way, but we could remove MVP and  go with 
"Project has resources, but is recognized to be in an early stage of 
development and not generally considered suitable to a production environment."

I'm ok with the contributor clarification.

Best Regards,

Steve.

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-bounces at 
lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of SULLIVAN, 
BRYAN L
Sent: 19 April 2017 19:12
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) mailto:Christopher.Donley at huawei.com>>; onap-tsc at 
lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc at lists.onap.org>
Cc: Ed Warnicke mailto:eaw at cisco.com>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

Chris,

Not sure I can post to the TSC list, but here are some comments in the draft:

* Each project will have its own code repositories (one or multiple),...

o   The concept of an umbrella project may address this, but that's an overhead 
that should be optional. It may be more effective in some cases for projects 
just to have multiple repos.

* A Contributor is someone who contributes code or other artifacts to a 
project, and reviews the contributions of others. Contributors are not 
necessarily from Member companies.

o   We should encourage and recognize all forms of contribution, especially 
reviews. IMO contributors may provide *no* code but still contribute valuable 
advice on architecture, quality, testability, or other contributions of a 
non-code/artifact nature.

* Committer rights for a project are earned via code contribution ...

o   The potential pool of committers should go beyond just code contribution, 
given the merit of their other types of contributions

* (description of Incubation phase) Project has resources, but is 
recognized to be in early stages of development, having yet to achieve a MVP 
(Minimum Viable Product) that is (or can be) used in production environments.

o   Clarification as to what an MVP is as the target for the end of the 
incubation phase.

* Other editorial items


Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan | AT

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-bounces at 
lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 8:45 AM
To: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc at lists.onap.org>
Cc: Ed Warnicke mailto:eaw at cisco.com>>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

Dear TSC,

On behalf of the Charter drafting team, please find attached an updated version 
of the TSC Charter incorporating your suggestions and feedback from the last 
review.  We have attempted to highlight the open issues that need a decision 
from the TSC.  We are sending this draft with the intention that you review it 
in preparatio

[onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

We talked about this at the face-to-face in Santa Clara.  We agreed not to 
over-specify coordinators or subcommittees in the Charter, but instead set up a 
framework so that the TSC can add them once the Charter is in place.  We 
specifically talked about security ? while we?re bootstrapping, security 
questions go to Phil Robb, but once the Charter is in place, we expect to have 
a security team to handle vulnerability reports. Of course, each individual 
project is responsible for the security of its component.

Chris



From: SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) [mailto:spat...@research.att.com]
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 4:55 AM
To: GOLDNER, ALLA
Cc: Don Clarke; Christopher Donley (Chris); onap-tsc at lists.onap.org; Ed 
Warnicke
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter


I would have expected to have at least a coordinator focused on this or even 
better a project which builds risk analysis tools and guidelines for ONAP. You 
can define them under the release requirements but unless you have a group of 
people working out the tools and details they really don?t mean much and I 
don?t think you want to distribute this to all the individual component 
projects.

Oliver


On Apr 20, 2017, at 1:51 AM, GOLDNER, ALLA mailto:alla.goldner at amdocs.com>> wrote:

Hi Don, all,

I believe this would be covered under Release requirements, once we define 
those.

Best regards, Alla

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-bounces at 
lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Don Clarke
Sent: Thursday, April 20, 2017 8:48 AM
To: Christopher Donley (Chris) mailto:Christopher.Donley at huawei.com>>; onap-tsc at 
lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc at lists.onap.org>
Cc: Ed Warnicke mailto:eaw at cisco.com>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

Chris,

Regulators are concerned about the impact of virtualization on the resilience 
of critical national infrastructures (they have turned-up at ETSI NFV meetings).

Will there be a formalized ONAP process to minimize security vulnerabilities 
and/or undertake risk analysis in relation to critical components of the 
platform?

I don?t see anything in the charter, would these aspects fall under (e.g.) the 
TSC Responsibility for ?defining release quality standards??

I don?t think this should be left to individual project teams to figure out.

Thanks,
Don.


From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-bounces at 
lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Christopher Donley (Chris)
Sent: Wednesday, April 19, 2017 9:45 AM
To: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc at lists.onap.org>
Cc: Ed Warnicke
Subject: [onap-tsc] Updated TSC Charter

Dear TSC,

On behalf of the Charter drafting team, please find attached an updated version 
of the TSC Charter incorporating your suggestions and feedback from the last 
review.  We have attempted to highlight the open issues that need a decision 
from the TSC.  We are sending this draft with the intention that you review it 
in preparation for discussion and voting during our next TSC meeting.

Chris, Steve, Ed, Lingli, Alla, and Phil
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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amdocs.com_about_email-2Ddisclaimer=DwMFAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=3WBYkehchaQg0p_gO26aU_ahomnFHCk_-us7kcQebm4=qanJmrKS-8k07dPd2m4vkZO_i076Fj4PF-Z_thIkNw0=ZQWOusx5K1pirGXMQqTdJ2gLSS1c8QUaIsa1vwqQrWI=>
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org<mailto:ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Dtsc=DwICAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=3WBYkehchaQg0p_gO26aU_ahomnFHCk_-us7kcQebm4=qanJmrKS-8k07dPd2m4vkZO_i076Fj4PF-Z_thIkNw0=pJET50QlbJFhc7UGw25LtzuYI1yz0pcrvdaq_1clvDw=

-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 
<http://lists.onap.org/pipermail/onap-tsc/attachments/20170420/1deb9b9f/attachment-0001.html>

[onap-tsc] May face-to-face: NA location?

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Many of our Chinese colleagues already have multi-entry visas into the US, but 
not necessarily into Canada.  While the Canadian visa process may be faster, 
there isn?t time to go through the application process due to upcoming travel 
for ONS. My Huawei colleagues from China would prefer New Jersey in either case.

Chris



From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 9:43 AM
To: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
Cc: tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] May face-to-face: NA location?

We had members from China indicate that getting visa's to the U.S./ were very 
slow, and/or being flat out rejected.  So for the first week of May selection, 
I think we need to do Vancouver as the ability to get a Canadian Visa is much 
better/faster than the U.S.

If we do the meeting in late May, then New Jersey could be a viable option, but 
as mentioned earlier if we pick late May, then we delay our jump-start of the 
community as well as position the first face to face too close to the second 
face to face which is tentatively planned for June in China.

Best,

Phil.

On Fri, Mar 31, 2017 at 8:52 AM, GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) mailto:mazin at research.att.com>> wrote:
I believe we agreed that if North America is selected then it would be NJ.
We will find out later today.

Mazin


On Mar 31, 2017, at 10:46 AM, GOLDNER, ALLA mailto:alla.goldner at amdocs.com>> wrote:

Hi,

Amdocs would also prefer New Jersey in the US/Toronto in Canada as a location, 
if possible ? as we have National Holidays ending the day before the meeting, 
travel time is critical, and getting to Vancouver takes many hours more?

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology




From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Jason Hunt
Sent: Friday, March 31, 2017 5:20 PM
To: tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] May face-to-face: NA location?



Perhaps I'm the only one that is confused on the May face-to-face meeting.  I 
thought based on yesterday's TSC meeting that we were looking to have the North 
American location be in New Jersey, with Mazin's offer to host.  But Annie 
posted on the Doodle poll that the North American location is Vancouver?


Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM

Phone: +1-314-749-7422
Email: djhunt at us.ibm.com
Twitter: @DJHunt

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at http://www.amdocs.com/email_disclaimer.asp 
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Dtsc=DwICAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=2dwD7a5k4V9cZl09O7uTpejnZMF8aa01W3yMqrrZC5Y=2qDBFz2Nv5zgbgGhmfgoTxcCj1Ntr9uHlZiAwO8crRY=8uqc15bz1wtUR93A0ju8YOS31o3_Y4FlodYtyVG3NyE=


___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC at lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc



--
Phil Robb
Executive Director, OpenDaylight Project
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb
-- next part --
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: 

[onap-tsc] ONAP Project: TSC Meeting Minutes 3 //Canada Visa request 4 weeks, we can not attend the F2F meeting in Canada.

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

The first week in May is problematic for me, particularly if we hold it on the 
East Coast.  We have an OPEN-O minisummit at the Layer123 conference (SJC) on 
Wednesday, May 3 from 4-6 pm, and I have another speaking slot Thursday from 
12:30-1:30.  We are planning to announce our second release and use the 
minisummit to promote ONAP.  I wouldn?t be able to make it to New Jersey until 
that Friday.

If we are going to hold the event during the first week of May, would it be 
possible to do it on the West Coast? Particularly in the Bay Area?

Chris

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Lingli Deng
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 10:57 AM
To: 'GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)'
Cc: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP Project: TSC Meeting Minutes 3 //Canada Visa 
request 4 weeks, we can not attend the F2F meeting in Canada.

Hi Mazin,

Thanks for the invitation.
For the date I prefer the first week in May, which sits right in the best 
timing and suggest that we leverage the meetup as much as possible, planning 
for 3-4 days for deep dive discussion on seed code merging and extra 1-2 days 
for drafting session on release plan and related documentation (whitepaper, VNF 
guidelines, etc.).

Lingli

From: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) [mailto:ma...@research.att.com]
Sent: 2017?3?28? 1:30
To: Lingli Deng 
Cc: Hui Deng ; Zengjianguo (OSS Design) ; onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP Project: TSC Meeting Minutes 3 //Canada Visa 
request 4 weeks, we can not attend the F2F meeting in Canada.

TSC Members,

I am happy to renew the invitation to host the meeting in NJ, USA
I realize there were many conflicts regarding dates. We can discuss other dates 
if that help.
Let?s try to finalize date and location in our TSC call this Thursday so we can 
discuss agenda at ONS.

Thanks
mazin


On Mar 27, 2017, at 11:25 AM, Lingli Deng mailto:denglingli at chinamobile.com>> wrote:

In this case, I would suggest that in NJ at AT labs if possible.
We could wish that our colleagues from China who does not yet get a U.S. Visa 
can pass this time and request for the host to kindly provide remote access if 
otherwise.

Lingli

From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Hui Deng
Sent: 2017?3?27? 22:08
To: Zengjianguo (OSS Design) mailto:zengjianguo at 
huawei.com>>; onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP Project: TSC Meeting Minutes 3 //Canada Visa 
request 4 weeks, we can not attend the F2F meeting in Canada.

If Canada becomes impossible, then we have to return back to US for the meeting 
location

DENG Hui


From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org mailto:onap-tsc-bounces at 
lists.onap.org>> on behalf of Zengjianguo (OSS Design) mailto:zengjian...@huawei.com>>
Sent: Monday, March 27, 2017 9:24 PM
To: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP Project: TSC Meeting Minutes 3 //Canada Visa 
request 4 weeks, we can not attend the F2F meeting in Canada.

Hi all
  Huawei Dev team encounter the same risk to apply Canada visa in short time. 
Is it possible to host the meeting in US to aviod any visa issue?

best regards



Sent from HUAWEI AnyOffice
From: onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-bounces at lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
yuan.yue at zte.com.cn
Sent: 2017?3?25? 14:48
To: afisher at linuxfoundation.org
Cc: tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP Project: TSC Meeting Minutes 3 //Canada Visa 
request 4 weeks, we can not attend the F2F meeting in Canada.

Hi Phil, Annie and all,

I double checked Canada visa timeline this morning and found the duration of 
traveler visa application processing was extended to 4 weeks due to rapid 
increasing mumber of visa applications this days. 2 to 3 weeks has some risks 
but we can prepare early and submit passport and application on April 10, the 
first working day when we back from ONS.  4 weeks totally does not work for us. 
Personally my Canada visa just expired and other persons in zte team do not 
have Canada visa. Persons from other Chinese companies may meet same problem.
I am sorry to request TSC to re-consider the date or location of this important 
technical F2F meeting. I'd like to propose if we can move to some place like 
Hong Kong or Bangkok where has no visa problem for everybody or we postpone to 
the 4th week of May.

Best Regards,
Yuan Yue


?? yuanyue
???   Senior Strategy Planner
?/?/ Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System 
Product



??50?3??
1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua 

[onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Policies & Processes

[Christopher Donley (Chris)]

Ed, Phil, and ONAP TSC,

Thanks for starting the discussion.  I?d also like to point to OPEN-O?s TSC 
Charter: https://wiki.open-o.org/display/TSC/TSC+Charter.  It?s similar to the 
ODL and FD.IO charters (and OPNFV), but has a few differences that may be 
relevant here:

?Terminology and role definitions are more aligned with the ONAP 
Charter (given the relationship between the OPEN-O Charter and ONAP Charter) 
(Section 8)

?We define an Architecture Committee, with responsibilities for 
maintaining the long-term architecture and representing the organization with 
external standards bodies (Section 9).  Given the need to merge two existing 
projects and to develop a common long-term vision, I strongly recommend we 
consider a similar Architecture Committee in ONAP.

?We have a TSC Vice-Chair to help lead the project, run meetings when 
the Chair is away, and represent the organization at some speaking engagements 
(Section 4).  Given the size of this project, I recommend creating this role, 
as well.

?In OPEN-O, we combined the Vice Chair and the Architecture Chair.  
Since ONAP has a larger TSC, I recommend separating the roles, so the 
leadership team would be the TSC Chair, Vice Chair, and Architecture Chair 
(with the option for future subcommittees as needed).

Our policy document is here: https://wiki.open-o.org/display/TSC/TSC+Policies.  
Again, very similar to ODL/OPNFV.

Ed, you raised the question of Committer promotion.  Our policy is here: 
https://wiki.open-o.org/display/TSC/Committer+Promotion+Process.  It?s aligned 
with the one in the FD.IO charter, but goes into a bit more detail to provide 
transparency, checks-and-balances, and a paper trail to help build trust in the 
community.

Chris

From: Ed Warnicke [mailto:hagb...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 19, 2017 3:31 PM
To: Phil Robb
Cc: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Policies & Processes

Phil,

Thank you for raising this and for being clear about distinguishing the charter 
for the technical community from the 'ONAP Charter'.

I would recommend we look at the fd.io 'Technical Community 
Charter':
https://fd.io/governance/technical-community-charter

as a guide *structurally*.  It is structured into very short sections that can 
be linked directly that answer
common governance questions asked by members of the technical community.  This 
turns out to be massively
useful because there are questions that consistently arise like

"How do we add a committer to a 
project?"

"How do we remove a committer from a 
project?"

"How does as project make 
decisions?"

We may decide on different answers as a community than fd.io 
has... but I would maintain that the fd.io charter
effectively provides many of the *questions* we need to answer in a very very 
clear (and linkable) way.

Finally... I'd suggest we think of it as a 'Technical Community Charter' rather 
than a 'TSC Charter'... the TSC plays
an important role in the Technical Community, but there is more to the 
Technical Community than the TSC :)

Ed


On Sun, Mar 19, 2017 at 2:06 PM, Phil Robb via onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc at lists.onap.org>> wrote:
___
onap-tsc mailing list
onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc


-- Forwarded message --
From: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>
To: onap-tsc at lists.onap.org
Cc:
Bcc:
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2017 15:06:03 -0600
Subject: ONAP TSC Policies & Processes
Hello ONAP TSC Members:

We need to discuss, decide, and document the policies and processes we will use 
for oversight and governance of the technical community.  This will span such 
mundane topics as ?indentation style in the code? and ?use of license/copyright 
headers per file? (one of my personal favorites ?), to what constitutes an ONAP 
[sub]project, and what, if any, lifecycle should govern it.

Some of these policies & processes are needed more urgently than others as we 
begin.  We need to identify what things we need to document and prioritize our 
efforts on them.  This email is intended to kick off such a discussion.

First off, let?s clear up some terminology.  In several other Linux Foundation 
projects the TSC has a ?Charter?.  This is not to be confused with the ?ONAP 
Project Charter?.  The ONAP Project Charter deals with membership classes, 
Mission & Overall ONAP Project scope, the Governing Board Makeup, etc.  It 
touches upon the existence of the TSC, along with the Marketing Committee, but 
by-and-large it does not talk about how the TSC or the technical community are 
to operate.  That is left to the TSC, and the