Re: [onap-tsc] Kenny, please move Usecase subcommittee meeting from MOnday to Tuesday next week, the same timeslot

Kenny, I sent 5 requests since last Tuesday to reschedule this meeting next week. As you've mentioned there are no guaranteed slots on Wednesday, I suggested to reschedule for Tuesday next week 4 pm CET, as Architecture subcommittee meeting is cancelled, and use their bridge. Please

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

Hi, Thanks Alla - I would like to elaborate on this. At the end of the release we have to be able to articulate what we are doing and why, otherwise we reduce ONAPs credibility. Part of this is ensuring architectural coherence and the appropriate project structure as part of our governance.

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

Agree with Alla. The name doesn’t matter. You can call it “Pineapple”. What we need to do is to review the ONF architecture and other relevant specs to see if this module, indeed, implements only a subset of the SDN-C functions. I glanced through some of these documents. The good news is like

Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Survey Results

Hi Kenny, Thanks for your response. @your first point: I have difficulty accepting this as is. The reason is that similar suggestions of granting a seat were also brought for another positions (not only for Release Manager) in the past, but somehow this whole topic was not included into the

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

Thanks Dan! I fully agree to your view! The SDN-R project just adds some wireless/ran related applications/functions according to ONAP procedures and process to SDNC. That was the reason, why SDN-R is a subproject of SDNC – also visible as subfolder of in the ONAP wiki and in ONAP

Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Survey Results

Hi Alla, The topic of having the Release Manage as part of the TSC has been brought up previously although it was not included in the survey. I added it as a recommendation because it is the appropriate given both the importance of a Release Manager to the health of the Community and the

Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Survey Results

Thanks Kenny. Who did the poll go to? It seems that it was just the current TSC. While the current TSC will be the one deciding (read: voting), it would have been nice to get the temperature and opinion of the overall community (“all active members”), because ultimately the TSC should represent

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

All, I think perhaps when thinking about the relationship between SDN-R and SDN-C, it might be helpful to draw a parallel to OpenDaylight. OpenDaylight consists of many projects (the project list on their Gerrit is 4 pages long, with about 25 per page – so close to a hundred), but a given

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

Very useful clarification. BR, Steve. From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of TIMONEY, DAN Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2018 2:50 PM To: Parviz Yegani ; Alla Goldner ; Vladimir Yanover (vyanover)

Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Survey Results

Hi Frank, Yes, the poll only went to the current TSC members. I'll incorporate this into today's discussion. Thanks! -kenny From: "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" Date: Thursday, May 17, 2018 at 6:45 AM To: Kenny Paul , onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] TSC Decision to postpone Beijing Release Sign-Off by 2 weeks

Hi All, This email is to communicate the decision the TSC has taken to postpone the Sign-Off of Beijing Release by 2 weeks. The new dates becomes: 1. RC2: Thursday, May 31, 2018 2. Sign-Off: Thursday, June 7, 2018 This decision will allow the community to complete the tasks related to

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

Vladimir, if I understood Steve's comment correctly, it is not about any particular name, but more about recognition of yet additional standalone controller, while we don't have it as a part of our architecture. This is why the proposal is to contain it under SDN-C (as, also according to our