User Tools

Site Tools


Minutes of Technical Community Discussion on April 16, 2015

  • Date and Time: UTC 13:00, Thursday April 16, 2015
  • Convenor: Bin Hu (AT&T)
  • Participants:
    • Adrian Hoban (Intel)
    • Al Morton (AT&T)
    • Ana Cunha (Ericsson)
    • Ari Pietikainen
    • Artur Tyloch (Canonical)
    • Brady Johnson (Ericsson)
    • Brian Smith (Bell Canada)
    • Carlos Goncalves (NEC)
    • Christopher Price (Ericsson)
    • Dave Neary (Red Hat)
    • Eric Multanen (Intel)
    • Heather Kirksey (OPNFV)
    • Howard Huang (Huawei)
    • Jie Hu (ZTE)
    • Joe Huang (Huawei)
    • Jonas Bjurel (Ericsson)
    • Juan Antonio Osorio (Ericsson)
    • Juha Oravainen (Nokia)
    • Julien Zhang (ZTE)
    • Larry Lamers (VMWare)
    • Manuel Rebellon (Sandvine)
    • Maria Toeroe (Ericsson)
    • Mark D Gray (Intel)
    • Mike Young (Huawei)
    • Narinder Gupta (Canonical)
    • Pat Vaughan (Intel)
    • Prakash Ramchandran (Huawei)
    • Qiao Fu (China Mobile)
    • Rajeev Seth (Sonus Networks)
    • Ruan He (Orange)
    • Ryota Mibu (NEC)
    • Ulrich Kleber (Huawei)
    • Wei Su (Huawei)
    • Yuri Yuan (ZTE)
    • Zhongwen Peng (Huawei)
  • Draft Blueprints Discussion
    • None

Brady from Ericsson introduced this proposal.

Mark from Intel asked if the deliverables include modifying OVS. Brady and Chris clarified that there is no plan to modify OVS code. Instead, the OVSDB code may be modified in ODL. They also expect that ODL SFC project will drive changes to OVS for NSH encapsulation. Brady agreed to clarify it in wiki.

Carlos from NEC asked what is the relationship with VNFFG project, because Cisco has submitted BP in OpenStack and got approval. Huawei is also working on a BP in OpenStack. Brady clarified that there is no plan to work in OpenStack. So that is a typo and will be fixed in wiki.

Uli from Huawei suggested to add VNFFG project as dependency.

Howard from Huawei indicated that the "Key Project Facts" should only be applied to approved projects. Chris clarified that it is from the template. Perhaps the template should be changed to remove the "Key Project Facts" section. Brady will also remove this section from the wiki of proposal.

Dave N from RedHat suggested to put it in Gerrit for review with version control. Chris clarified that the complication includes creating repo etc. which will only happen after project is approved.

Uli asked since OpenStack has BP process, what is the process in ODL? Dave N indicated that there is no formal process in ODL, while OpenStack has mature BP process.

Mark asked what is Release 2 schedule. Uli and Chris clarified that it is in November.

Uli further asked because it is a collaborative development project, where the requirement is from? Perhaps it should be from VNFFG.

The consensus is that:
- Brady will update the wiki by removing OpenStack contribution from the deliverables, clarifying OVS and removing "Key Project Fact" section
- Brady will initiate a discussion in mailing list so as to address any other comments if any.

Ana from Ericsson presented this proposal.

Uli from Huawei asked how to resolve and align the environment and content which refers to ETSI document, especially ETSI TST001. ETSI has its own IPR policy, and only ETSI member can view those unpublished draft of document.

Ana proposed that one possible solution is to align the date of project deliverables with the anticipated date of document publication in ETSI. Under this circumstance, ETSI TST001 GS document should be available in the ETSI open area after WG approval which is scheduled for May 30. This was possible in the past. TB approval of ETSI TST001 GS is scheduled for June 30. Of course, those dates may slip.

The consensus of the group is to continue the discussion in the mailing list in order to find the most practical way in order for the proposal to move forward.

Bin will initiated this discussion in the mailing list.

This proposal was discussed in the past, and on the mailing list too. We decided at last meeting to have a polling for consensus. The polling was sent on last Thursday and finished at 8am PDT, Saturday April 11. There was one question and answered by the author. Other feedback of the polling indicated that the concerns were addressed.

Because there was no outstanding concerns, the consensus is to request Project Creation Review in TSC.

This proposal was discussed in the past. Author revised the proposal based on prior comments and actions. Author has been polling the community for further comments and feedback since last Thursday April 9. There was no comments on the mailing list.

Bin will request TSC's Creation Review for both Multisite and Escalator.

Because there was no outstanding concerns, the consensus is to request Project Creation Review in TSC.

The meeting gets to the hour, and all other items below are postponed to next week.

Meeting adjourned

wiki/tc_minutes_20150416.txt · Last modified: 2015/05/06 20:08 by Daniel Farrell