This is a moderated panel of telecom operators involved with OVP 2.0 (cloud native), the program responsible for guiding requirements and verifying infrastructure and cloud native functions to be harnessed in operators' evolving plans. Panel participants will be guided in a discussion that covers:
What is OVP 2.0, how will it help with adoption of cloud native network functions, how can it achieve simplification and standardization based on guiding principles?
What are the benefits for operators who adopt cloud native technologies (Infrastructure and cloud native network functions), certified and verified through OVP 2.0?
How does OVP 2.0 align with CNTT, other projects from Linux Foundation (e.g., CNCF), and industry initiatives?
How do operators plan to use the program?
Minutes
Very Interactive panel Q&A: TheRecordingis the Canonical Source of Information!
Need CNTT specifications for infrastructure to line-up with CN workload needs: Integration tools to manage operate and maintain are needed
Opinion: CNF deployment is highly dependent on success in 2 areas:performance and operations.
CNF Testbed is a showcase for how different CN elements can work together and offerservices.
Different levels of Services: Examples include Self-Healing, OAM: CNF Conformance requires construction according to Cloud-Native Principles. Quality of Service should be included.
What value can OVP 2.0 provide to Operators? And what can we learn from previous OVP efforts?
Need to certify that Operator's Infrastructure isgood enough to run CN functions/workloads. Need to understand the demarcation between Infrastructure, Operations, and CNFs. Reduce Integration testing and the time involved.
Need more than a "standard", only a piece of paper! Also, CN-principles emphasize automation of operations so that systems don't have to be watched 24x7 (babysitting).
Can OVP reduce Integration and Conformance testing by 10%? - then that is sufficient value to use it. Operators have turned into integrators to use multiple vendor products.
How does OVP 2.0 align with other projects?
CNTT for requirements, Also ETSI NFV
OPNFV for benchmarking/performance
CNCF for workload cloud-native-ness
ONAP for alignment on service creation with CNFs
TIP using CNTT specifications for deployment
It's more and more difficult to find the right forum - too many! Fragmentation will slow-us down.
Value of OVP is the Meaning of the Badge! UL (Underwriter's Laboratories) is a an example - you won't get shocked when you plug an electrical appliance into the wall.
Most CNCF projects are about Rigorous Testing, also Project Graduation provides assurance. Long legacy of best practices for application development. May use other Communites:FD.iodoes it all day, for VPP... Others have a wider view (See previous OPNFV K8s Benchmarking Session).
Look into more for the badging program
We get out of it what we put into it, and recognize that each operator will still need to do their own testing! Cover LCF and common functions and let operators do the rest.
Are there usecases that badging is NOT covering? bring them in!
Action items
Type your task here. Use "@" to assign a user and "//" to select a due date.