[onap-tsc] Srini Addepalli with be the Intel proxy for ONAP TSC tomorrow

Hi Kenny: I am on business travel tomorrow. Srini Addepalli will be my proxy for tomorrow’s (5/10) ONAP TSC. I have updated the proxy sheet on ONAP wiki. Thanks! -- Rajesh H Gadiyar | Vice President Data Center Group | CTO Network Platforms Group | Intel Corporation | +1.480.552.1068 (office)

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

e for determining voting members of the TSC will be as determined by the TSC and documented on the ONAP web site. Thanks! -kenny From: "Gadiyar, Rajesh" <rajesh.gadi...@intel.com> Date: Friday, May 4, 2018 at 11:08 AM To: Kenny Paul <kp...@linuxfoundation.org> Cc: onap

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

uot; as a write in option for Question #1 to address alternative time frames. Thanks! -kenny From: "Gadiyar, Rajesh" <rajesh.gadi...@intel.com<mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>> Date: Friday, May 4, 2018 at 9:37 AM To: Kenny Paul <kp...@linuxfoundation.org<mailto:k

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

8:00 Pacific time, May 7 Hi Rajesh, As this is a "when" question the implication of your suggested #4 is "Never". Am I understanding that correctly? Thanks! -kenny From: "Gadiyar, Rajesh" <rajesh.gadi...@intel.com> Date: Thursday, May 3, 2018 at 8:34 P

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC MEMBERS Approval/Acknowledgment Needed- Requesting Nexus3 downtime

+1 From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Yunxia Chen Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:12 AM To: Kenny Paul >; onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

+1 I agree with Frank. Would like to see an option for a larger TSC included. I like the focus on Operators but would also like to see a good mix of others in the ONAP ecosystem represented on the TSC. -- Regards, Rajesh From: on behalf of "Frank Brockners

Re: [onap-tsc] Community Announcement- PTL Self Code Merge Vote

-1 same concern as Mazin. From: on behalf of "GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)" Date: Saturday, March 17, 2018 at 4:53 AM To: Kenny Paul Cc: "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org P" Subject: Re:

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"

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

a preference for #1 unless the TSC Chair does not want to sign up for the responsibility, in which case we move to #2? Best, Phil. On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Gadiyar, Rajesh <rajesh.gadi...@intel.com<mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>> wrote: +1 From: <onap-tsc-boun...@lists

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

+1 From: on behalf of Jason Hunt Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 9:38 AM To: Dhananjay Pavgi Cc: "onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org" , onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Certificate and Secret Management Project to become subproject of AAF

+1 Good outcome. Thanks for driving the alignment with AAF team. From: on behalf of "Addepalli, Srinivasa R" Date: Wednesday, January 10, 2018 at 8:25 PM To: "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" Subject:

Re: [onap-tsc] Planning for ONAP TSC Elections

+1 I agree with the proposal as well – best to keep the current structure until Beijing Release (May-18). Also, I am happy to participate in the proposed WG to discuss/recommend the new TSC structure. Regards, Rajesh From: on behalf of Phil Robb

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] ONAP TSC measures of success

Apologies for getting on this thread a bit late. One good metric for continued tracking/grading with be the API stability over successive ONAP releases – both APIs internal to ONAP (between ONAP components) and also external APIs. Stability of APIs would be a good testament to the solidity of

Re: [onap-tsc] R2 use cases planning

Hi Alla: Thanks for sharing your views. This is a good discussion to be had – Focus on base ONAP capabilities or put some emphasis on new use cases. My opinion is the following: 1) I see these two things as somewhat linked and not disjointed from each other. As we look at missing ONAP

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

+1 On Aug 2, 2017, at 2:49 PM, Phil Robb > wrote: 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

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Draft of TSC Charter Section 5.4.1 Changes

+1 I like Steve’s suggestions below and am supportive. Kenny: We also need to bottom out on the voting clause for PTLs. We had the draft text in the summary Bob, Susanna and I discussed and sent out. From: on behalf of Stephen Terrill

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Meeting Minute Approvals

+1 From: Kenny Paul Date: Thursday, July 6, 2017 at 7:29 AM To: Alla Goldner , "mg1...@att.com" , "Sauvageau, David" , Deng , "xiexj...@chinatelecom.cn"

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Call for Self-Nominations for Modeling Project PTL

Hello Deng and Rittwik – How about the Modeling sub-committee as we had discussed at Beijing F2F? Are you inviting nominees to lead the Modeling sub-committee as well? Regards, Rajesh From: > on behalf of

Re: [onap-tsc] [ONAP TSC VOTE] vCPE Residential Broadband Use Case For Release-1

Hello ONAP TSC Members: As we left it on the ONAP TSC call this week, please review and vote on the vCPE Residential Broadband Use Case proposal for inclusion in Release-1 of the ONAP project. The wiki page for your review is here:

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers Face-to-Face Meeting

+1 Good idea ☺ From: on behalf of "GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)" Date: Monday, June 12, 2017 at 2:01 PM To: Kenny Paul Cc: "onap-disc...@lists.onap.org" , onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Members - Are you Attending the China Face To Face Next Week?

+1 Attending in person; Getting to Beijing on Wed Evening and staying through Friday. From: on behalf of Phil Robb Date: Friday, June 2, 2017 at 7:57 AM To: onap-tsc Subject: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Members -

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

+1 I was taking this as a given. We need a robust vendor/commercial ecosystem of VNFs and NFVI software, in addition to open source. I see that the vCPE and vVoLTE use case documents on the wiki already incorporate this; which I am supportive. From: on behalf

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-tsc-private] Lab and Intgeration

+1 Hello ONAP TSC: Intel is considering hosting a physical lab for ONAP as well. I have added our proposal to the document on Wiki: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Physical+Labs to co-host with the OPNFV lab that we currently host. -- Regards, Rajesh From:

Re: [onap-tsc] Thoughts on next steps.

+1. I like this approach given our focus to get a good release out in Nov. From: on behalf of "Haiby, Ranny (Nokia - US/San Jose USA)" Date: Tuesday, May 16, 2017 at 2:10 PM To: "RATH, CHRISTOPHER A (CHRISTOPHER A)"

Re: [onap-tsc] Proposal: Architecture Subcommittee

+1 for forming the Architecture Subcommittee; Also agree with Chris and Alla on the ‘advisory’ nature of the Architecture sub-committee, and the important overseeing role this committee needs to play to ensure the consistency across the ONAP modules, interfaces, contentious issues between

[onap-tsc] ONAP TSC VICE-CHAIRPERSON

owth by creating a nimble and efficient services infrastructure of tomorrow. My short bio is attached. Regards, Rajesh Gadiyar Rajesh Gadiyar, Sr. Director, Architecture & Systems Engineering, Network Platforms Group, Intel Corp. [../../../Desktop/2017MarchPassportPhoto.jpg]Rajesh Gadiyar i