Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

Attendees & Representation (default sort: member first name)

TAC Members and Project representatives should mark their attendance below 
Non-TAC project reps do not count towards meeting quorum

X = Present | P = Proxy  (Indicate in the table with @name for @name

MemberRepresenting
MemberRepresenting
MemberRepresenting
ODL (TAC)XFD.io (TAC)xOrangeX
OPNFV (TAC)X

@Eyal Felstaine

Amdocs
NokiaX

@Anil Guntupalli

Verizon
Cisco
TF (incubation)

@Anil Kapur

Juniper

IBM

XGoogle
AT&TXHuawei
SamsungX
ONAP (TAC)XChina Mobile
IntelX
ZTE
Deutsche TelekomXRed Hat
EricssonXWalmart
China Telecom
Tech Mahindra
OPX (sandbox)
TBDXGVela (sandbox)






Alexander VulODIM (sandbox)

LF Staff: Kenny PaulCasey CainJim BakerLouis IlluzziHeather KirkseyTrishan de Lanerolle

Others: Amar KapadiaTimo Perala

Agenda

  • Start the Recording
  • We will start by mentioning the project's Antitrust Policy, which you can find linked from the LF and project websites. The policy is important where multiple companies, including potential industry competitors, are participating in meetings. Please review and if you have any questions, please contact your company legal counsel. Members of the LF may contact Andrew Updegrove at the firm Gesmer Updegrove LLP, which provides legal counsel to the LF.
  • Roll Call
  • Action Items Review
  • Agenda Bashing
  • General Topics
    • LGBMCR Election Status
    • 5G Super blueprint  - Topic presentation and discussion with Amar Kapadia
    • Governing Board Update Jason Hunt
    • Committer Rep Eligibility
    • OPX Archive Review
    • TAC Office Hours
    • June Developer & Testing Forum 
  • Any Other Topics

Minutes

LGBMCR election status:

  • ~84 out of 527 potential votes have been cast
  • Election closes EOD today 

5G Super Blueprint

  • Amar Kapadia 
  • Integration effort - all contributions will be up stream
  • Will mix open source and proprietary components (ORAN) initially with the long-term goal of full open source
  • Catherine Lefevre Magma orchestrator does not have the network slicing that is implemented in ONAP, is there an opportunity to use ONAP SO in the Magma space?
    • Magma orchestrator is NOT the full featured orchestrator that ONAP is, they are independent/complementary functions 
    • Perhaps rename "Magma Orchestrator" to HSS emulator
  • Phase 2 - network slicing is aggressive
  • Phase 3 - Use open source O-RAN 
  • Plan on asking Anuket and other LFN projects to consolidate offerings and suggest a platform
  • Tactically target for the July time frame (aggressive)
    • Install kuberef 1&2
    • install onap and emco
    • register kuberef2 with onap+emco
    • onboard cnfs 1&2 & vnf 1
    • create network services with xNFs
    • deploy network service
    • register awg with magma
    • manually config awg and run the tests
  • Acceleration needed in Magma - ONAP integration (LCM, closed loop automation, etc.) + O-RAN integration (OSC) + lab resources (using LaaS now) + XCI-style CI pipeline (build from master)
  • Catherine Lefevre ONAP enterprise taskforce will focus on the integration here
  • Governance - Brandon Wick leads meetings in LFN, Louis Illuzzi PM support
    • Spanning multiple projects - need to cover the IP with clear licensing (needs LF legal input)
    • Scripts/recipes & glue code will be authored for the implementation of the blueprint - to be stored in public repo
    • Wiki page - https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/x/DAADAw
  • Catherine Lefevre Prefer to centralize the Jira for the project. ONLY pull content from upstream, no forks for existing projects.
  • Jason Hunt How can we generalize the 5G blueprint to include enterprise networking?
    • Perhaps the use cases can include non-telco verticals 

Governing Board update

  • Jason Hunt Mentioned that the board discussed Anuket Assured, 5G Blueprint, the EUAG proposal to appeal to enterprise and operator groups.
  • ODIM has been officially inducted into the LFN!  Congrats!

Committer Rep Eligibility

  • Community members have raised concerns about the language in the Committer representative eligibility.
    •  Currently, the role is outlined in the LFN Charter in section 7(a)(iv).
      • iv) setting processes and procedures for the election annually by vote, by and from
        among the committers and maintainers to any Technical Project, an individual to
        serve as a representative of the development community on the Governing Board (the
        “Committer Representative”). Nominations to the position of Committer
        Representative are subject to Governing Board approval; and
      • v) such other matters related to the technical role of the TAC as may be communicated
        to the TAC by the Governing Board.
    • Criteria defined by the TAC LFN Governing Board Member Committers Representative (LGBMCR) 
      • Eligible voters:

        • Any person who is an “active contributor” to any LFN project (i.e. LFN TAC-projects as well as any other LFN projects) is eligible to vote for the election. 
          • An "Active Contributor" is defined as anyone that has made a code contribution to any LFN project in the past 12 months.
  • Al Morton OPNFV has always defined active community members broadly. Concerned that Anuket is a composite Project that includes folks that do not commit
  • Ed Warnicke notes that communities that define voters differently creates issues - concerns raised of gaming system 
  • Jason Hunt stated that the original rules for eligible voters were chosen to ensure a consistent definition across projects. 
  • Discussion to be moved to the TAC list 

OPX Archive Review

Misc

  • TAC Office Hours
    • Casey Cain mentioned that there are members who would like to pursue having regular TAC office hours.  The topic will be continued on the mailing list in the interest of time.
  • June Developer & Testing Form
    • Event takes place 7 - 11 June, 2021
    • Currently we have 2 reps from ONAP, one from ODL and one from TF for the Program Committee
    • Any other volunteers to represent the other communities?

Action items

  • Amar Kapadia upload a PDF of the slides presented today to these minutes  

1 Comment

  1. The comment on the HSS emulator was just a statement that for the 5G UE emulator to work their needs to be an HSS and PCRF etc functions. Int he Magma environment there is apparently an embedded HSS/PCRF function (emulator ?) that can be used for testing and small scale deployments . The comment was to add that text to the Magma box so that it was clearer how the 5GUE would be able to work without a carriers HSS/PCRF in the architecture.