...
Table of Contents | ||
---|---|---|
|
Monday, January 13
Expand | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Tuesday, January 14
Expand | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Wednesday, January 15
Expand | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
...
- Technical Tracks:
- RA-1
- RA-2
- RC
- RI
...
- Governance:
- (On-boarding, Adoption, Release cadence, trials, OPNFV Alignment).
...
...
...
RA 2 Deep Dive
- Mostly review of Ch3 issues, followed by text review in first AM slot.
...
- Forward-looking discussion of Programmable Network Fabric (P4). Has certain advantages unproven - Performance and scalability, but seen as challenging the usual NF vendor model by requiring application code in Smart NICs and the Controller Point (split from User Plane).
...
CNTT | OPNFV Release & Lifecycle Planning
- Ecosystem has shifted, OPNFV is refreshing and redefining what release artifacts will be
- Straw model mode of operation presented
- Chicken and Egg Problem →
...
- RI1 is a good place to start as the processes are more mature and the upstream release cycles are better understood
- RI2 is going to be much more of a learning process as CNF is still a very volatile environment wrt changes
- So, which comes first? The RC or the RI? Can we release an RI without it having been certified?
...
- Need to define release cadences, per stream (RI1, RI2)
CNTT RC Cookbook
Description:
- Leverages existing OPNFV CI/CD toolchain (jenkins) and test results DB
- Cookbook starts with Airship deployment, otherwise it is the same as RI
- Test tools conform to RA Ch5, when RI available, can add any form of additional benchmarking
- X-testing CI first creates a copy of the OPNFV CI in the local system
- RC specifies what tests MUST be run, Functest Implements the tests
...
- There must be an exact record "Source of Truth" of what tests have been executed and the results.
- Also, how do we patch in a reasonable way: Controls on the file that determines the tests run are needed. Processes needed. Essential to build the BADGING process up (from where we are.
- Choices between Tools must be set by Policy == DETERMINISTIC
...
- Trouble shooting needs to include Best Practices and General Guidelines, but also let the Community know (Open JIRA in Functest, or other tools) that something failed (more than log files from the failing test are needed). Need to open an issue for RC Appendix on Troubleshooting
- TSC must help find the PTLs of the necessary projects, but they haven't replied. Also need to discuss the related "level-up" to CNTT question at TSC and Weekly Tech Discuss (with PTLs).
- Need a real distinction between projects which are currently inactive but have responsible people available and projects that have working repos, but no support, (and should be closed). See https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/PROJ/Project+Directory
- CNTT RC has a list of projects they are looking at to fulfill their needs
...
...
...
Collaboration between 3GPP (and other SDOs) and ONAP -
- 3 GPP/SA5 Liaisons to
- TMF: many collaborations on API. TMF also launched various catalyst projects based on ONAP
...
3GPP/SA5 collaboration to
Establish more communication wit TMF to get more feedback on ONAP (via catalyst experience)
Catalyst projects can be seen as use-case incubation
O-RAN / OSC rel A / ONAP joint PoC/PlugFest results and next steps
ONAP Integration
Gating retrospective
~2h to deploy ONAP
|
|
...
|
Thursday, January 16
Track | Key Points | Challenges | Next Steps / AIs |
---|---|---|---|
Testing |
|
|
|
CNTT | |||
OPNFV | OVP Automation Augment with ONAP
|
| need to work with OVP and ONAP to identify the real telecom testing requirements and push the related work in ovp and ONAP to make up the gaps |
ONAP | Cross-project AI Cooperation and Innovation | Network intelligence is ALL about DCAE or Close Loop in ONAP? No | Need a focal point for both internal and external information exchange and efforts collaboration
-Identify people, specify scope, establish process, and planning for Guilin -Participate time poll by Friday at https://www.doodle.com/poll/q46kat8dx8xyd9dv |
ONAP Projects Lifecycle and Review Review the criteria associated to the lifecycle of a project from proposal, incubation, mature, Core and Archived, based on what we learned from other communities. Goal is to focus resources on most mature and adopted projects. | Discussions about security/vulnerability issues that are identified post-mortem (after project termination/archived) | Checklist for the PTLs is in progress Review will be performed as part of an architecture review outside the ONAP release cycle. | |
Release cadence in ONAP changes to a fixed cadence with three releases annually. The content of the releases is what is ready at the time of the releases. The proposal follows the same process as that used by other open source projects such as Openstack. | Formulate the process more fully. | Take the proposal to the TSC for approval. | |
+ Additional 5G Slicing topics |
|
Next focus on AAI