Hi Xu, Thanks for the summary. With respect to naming convention poll, I would like to share of what I just posted on the wiki page.
I would like to share with the team on the result from ETSI NFV IFA WG discussion on the IE and attributes renaming. At the time the development of IFA011 and IFA014 IM models, IFA WG adopted a set of guidelines of their naming convention for the information model. Last week, ETSI NFV ISG released the IFA naming conventions and abbreviations documents. The documents are publicly available at https://docbox.etsi.org/ISG/nfv/Open/Other/NFVIFA(16)000922r6_Conventions_for_the_use_of_abbreviations.zip. My understanding is that these documents should clarify the changes request by ONAP with respect to renaming IEs or attributes. Please note that these documents are applicable to the IFA documents (Stage 2 type of specification). Regards, Thinh From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of yangxu (H) Sent: Tuesday, March 06, 2018 9:56 AM To: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org Subject: [onap-discuss] [modeling] Results of the two polls Hi All, I was about to mention the results of our two polls but got not enough time to do so. 1) Naming Convention Poll (I also count in two opinions expressed in the comments): Option 1: 16 people, 6 company Option 3: 8 people, 3 company Option 1 takes the lead, and if there’re no further objections, we’ll use the same names/naming conventions as IFA011 has. 2) Future Meeting Time Poll: The most preferred slot (6 votes): Tue 9~10 pm (Beijing) The second preferred slot (4 votes): Fri 9~10 pm (Beijing) If there’re no further comments, we will start our future meetings at Tue 9~10 pm (Beijing) and have the other slot as a substitute. Best regards, Xu
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list onap-discuss@lists.onap.org https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
