15:02:43 #startmeeting OPNFV TSC 15:02:43 Meeting started Tue Dec 9 15:02:43 2014 UTC. The chair is ChrisPriceAB. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 15:02:43 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic. 15:02:48 #topic roll call 15:02:56 #info Chris Price 15:03:10 #chair frankbrockners 15:03:10 Current chairs: ChrisPriceAB frankbrockners 15:03:10 #info Uli Kleber 15:03:11 #info Bryan Sullivan 15:03:12 #info Wenjing Chu 15:03:15 #chair dlenrow 15:03:15 Current chairs: ChrisPriceAB dlenrow frankbrockners 15:03:19 #info Frank Brockners 15:03:20 #uli_ 15:03:29 #chair uli_ 15:03:29 Current chairs: ChrisPriceAB dlenrow frankbrockners uli_ 15:03:31 #info Moiz Arif 15:03:33 #info dlenrow 15:03:39 #chair rpaik 15:03:39 Current chairs: ChrisPriceAB dlenrow frankbrockners rpaik uli_ 15:03:47 #info Ashiq 15:04:18 uli_: https://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot 15:05:45 #info Tapio Tallgren 15:05:59 #info julien_ZTE 15:06:06 meetbot commands: http://meetbot.debian.net/Manual.html 15:06:38 #topic approve previous minutes 15:06:46 #info Palani 15:06:50 #info minutes approved by lack of dissent 15:06:58 #topic Agenda Bashing 15:07:16 #info Hui 15:07:25 #info look at holiday meeting schedule for end of year 15:07:57 #info want to discuss how we map OPNFV projects to upstream relatives 15:09:26 #info Trevor Cooper (Intel) 15:10:06 #topic holiday/end-of-year scheduling 15:10:45 #info suggest Dec 16 as last TSC meeting prior to January. 15:11:28 #info agree to meet 16th, CP propose we not meet on 23 due to peoples time-off 15:11:56 #info CP suggest we be prepared for Dec 18 TSC call if needed for progress/approvals 15:12:13 holiday in italy 15:12:20 #info CP suggest next TSC meeting occur Jan 6. Holiday in Italy 15:12:20 january 6th 15:12:34 january 7 is ok 15:13:08 #info Andrea 15:13:12 admire italy and germany 15:13:18 #info Andrea__ can't attend Jan 6, but can get proxy. Germany also conflicts 15:13:18 * ChrisPriceAB yes! 15:13:35 #info Frankbrockners suggests we switch to alternate date week of Jan 6. 15:13:49 #info Dirk Kutscher 15:14:00 #info propose Thursday Jan 8 as first TSC call of new year. 15:14:42 #info Considering taking testing meeting time slot at 7AM PT. 15:15:04 #info agreed 7-9 PT Thursday Jan 8 is first TSC call of 2015 15:15:18 #info agreed 7-9 AM PT Thursday Jan 8 is first TSC call of 2015 15:15:30 #agree 7-9 AM PT Thursday Jan 8 is first TSC call of 2015 15:15:41 #info agreed Greg Hall ( For Tom Nadeau ) 15:15:54 #action Ray to update the wiki w.r.t. Jan. 8th TSC call 15:16:04 #agree 7-9 AM PT Thursday Dec 18 is last call of of 2014 15:16:09 #topic collabortive developement projects 15:17:29 #info two primary approaches considered. Project is a use case and engages as needed upstream. Or Project is an upstream proxy/liaison and map to upstream. 15:17:47 #info are the collab development projects intended to be a SPOC for upstream contribution? Or will other projects be able to commit directly? 15:17:49 #info need to decide as community how these "collaborative" projects will be structured 15:20:27 #info CP says one issue to consider is duration of projects persistent or transient. 15:20:53 #info Bryan_ATT asks about exclusivity of upstream mapped projects 15:21:03 Current proposed Collaborative projects seem to be of the first kind , the use case 15:25:30 May be we can arrange by use case aggregating those that work on the same components of the upstream projects 15:26:00 As Open Stack is a very huge open source 15:26:14 #info Andrea suggests May be we can arrange by use case aggregating those that work on the same components of the upstream projects 15:26:51 #info Ashiq asks what is meant by use case? CP describes a feature spread across multiple upstreams 15:27:11 #info by features makes more sense to me, e.g. policy and the facillities (event pub/sub) that enable it 15:27:49 #info please use the term feature or function rather than use case... 15:27:58 #info Mike Lynch has suggested that use case orientation might allow better architectural control. CP suggests that this could lead to fragmented architecture upstream, reliant on upstream decisions. 15:28:35 #info Mike warns we want to become more than just a bunch of upstream artifacts. CP asks who are committers on those control points? 15:28:42 #info can you define "control points"? 15:29:12 #info Mike suggests we need a big picture architecture (owned by TSC) to inform the per-use-case approach 15:29:50 #info basic issue is bottom-up vs top-town control/influence on the platform/system we build 15:30:07 #info Mike advocating more TSC input into a system arch 15:31:12 #info CP suggests we continue discussin on mail lists. Not converging on a solution here. 15:31:51 #info CP reminds that when collaborative projects come up for creation review we need to have this figured out: How do we interact upstream? 15:32:47 #info FrankBrockners suggests the first collab project headed for creation should be the pilot and use context to figure this out. 15:33:04 is opnfv a platform for application development or an end user feature rich deliverable? I think the former ... which means architecture is the real requirement. So our "use cases" should really be for "generalized" features ... infrastructure. 15:34:51 #info dlenrow asks what is first collab in queue. Can we get them to volunteer to propose a way to interact upstream. 15:35:22 #info CP reminds that Telco KPI coming up for creation today and we can discuss more in that time slot 15:36:49 #topic Julien_ZTE asks clarification about where code/committing will live. CP clarifies mostly upstream. 15:37:01 #undo 15:37:01 Removing item from minutes: 15:37:13 #info Julien_ZTE asks clarification about where code/committing will live. CP clarifies mostly upstream. 15:37:28 #topic committer check for Octopus 15:37:38 #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/octopus/project_proposal 15:37:55 #info Final committer list for creation available 15:41:48 #info Uli suggest approval projects should be listed in some wiki pages 15:43:45 #info Octopus Committer list on wiki updated with 2x HP committers 15:44:16 #action Uli to further organize projects so it is clear what is approved, pending, etc. 15:44:56 #info CP reminds that projects don't go on main project page until approved. Keep proposed/unapproved off main project page 15:45:50 #startvote approve CI project creation based on final changes to proposal on wiki which just occurred? 15:46:00 #vote +1 15:46:02 vote +1 15:46:02 #vote +1 15:46:03 #vote +1 15:46:03 #vote +1 15:46:04 #vote +1 15:46:05 #vote +1 15:46:06 #vote +1 15:46:08 #vote +1 15:46:14 #vote +1 15:46:15 #vote +1 15:46:22 #vote +1 15:46:23 #endvote 15:46:50 #info I still don't know how to run the vote... 15:47:05 #agreed Octopus project approved for creation 15:47:16 congratulations Octopus 15:47:38 * ChrisPriceAB congratulations! 15:47:39 Just to clarify the state of the approved projects in the lifecycle, now are they declared in incubation ? 15:47:45 * ChrisPriceAB yes. 15:47:56 thanks 15:48:05 #info Parviz Yegani 15:48:24 #topic approval and committer check for Infra policy project 15:49:06 Andrea: Incubation is the state post proposal: See https://www.opnfv.org/developers/technical-project-governance/project-lifecycle 15:50:38 #info dlenrow and Staffan Blau to be added as committer, NEC also one to add. We're editing wiki in realtime now 15:51:15 #info ZTE is interested in copper, and I will check wheter we can put more resources in this project. 15:51:37 #info final edits get us two more committers and another contributor during call. 15:51:37 dirk, thanks 15:52:09 #startvote approve Copper project for creation based on final wiki edits just completed 15:52:22 #vote +1 15:52:23 #vote +1 15:52:27 #vote +1 15:52:28 #vote +1 15:52:28 #vote +1 15:52:29 #vote +1 15:52:29 #vote +1 15:52:29 #vote +1 15:52:30 #vote +1 15:52:30 #vote +1 15:52:39 vote +1 15:53:09 #endvote 15:53:55 #info previous vote cancelled. We needed to add one more committer 15:54:43 #startvote approve Copper project for creation based on final wiki edits just completed including Huawei committer 15:54:46 #vote +1 15:54:47 #vote +1 15:54:48 #vote +1 15:54:51 #vote +1 15:54:55 #vote +1 15:54:55 #vote +1 15:54:56 #vote +1 15:54:57 #vote 1 15:54:59 #vote +1 15:55:01 vote +1 15:55:06 #vote +1 15:55:09 #vote +1 15:55:09 #vote +1 15:55:09 #vote +1 15:55:21 This time for sure 15:55:27 #endvote 15:55:46 #agreed Copper approved for creation 15:55:51 * ChrisPriceAB congratulations 15:56:03 #topic new project creation reviews 15:56:38 #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/requirements_projects/high_availability_for_vnfs 15:57:06 #topic HA project 15:57:30 #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/requirements_projects/high_availability_for_vnfs 15:59:53 ambiguous committer/contributor section will likely push final approval until next time? 16:00:15 #info early deliverables are gap analysis and report/survey of use cases and HA approaches 16:01:18 #info later work to define HA APIs derived from req.s. Also work on capabilities exchange APIs for diverse hardware/state 16:01:44 #info analyze existing OpenStack HA work and consider extensions and enhancements. 16:09:29 #info discussion of API requirements vs creating info models. CP proposes we change language to specify API requirements. Change made on proposal page. 16:10:45 just cleaned up the committers list 16:11:59 also cleaned up the Scope section to talk about "requirements for HA API" 16:12:05 see https://wiki.opnfv.org/requirements_projects/high_availability_for_opnfv?&#scope 16:17:05 dlenrow: just added ODL to https://wiki.opnfv.org/requirements_projects/high_availability_for_opnfv?&#dependencies 16:17:27 frankbrockners: thx 16:20:26 updated https://wiki.opnfv.org/requirements_projects/high_availability_for_opnfv?&#scope to reflect the comment from Parvis to consider HA for the SDN controller 16:20:44 #info Parviz concerned that ETSI spec referenced may be too broad of scope 16:22:43 #info Following the discussion, the proposal got updated to speak of "requirements for HA API" (not define HA API), removed the "maintainer" from list of contributors and committers, added "study HA for SDN controller" to the scope 16:25:34 how about harden 16:26:39 https://wiki.opnfv.org/requirements_projects/high_availability_for_opnfv 16:27:32 #startvote approve HA for VNFS for project creation? Vote +1, 0, or -1. 16:27:39 #vote +1 16:27:41 #vote +1 16:27:41 #vote +1 16:27:42 #vote +1 16:27:42 #vote +1 16:27:42 #vote +1 16:27:43 #vote +1 16:27:45 #vote +1 16:27:50 #vote +1 16:27:59 #vote +1 16:28:01 #vote +1 16:28:02 #vote +1 16:28:05 #info +1 16:28:14 #endvote 16:28:32 #agreed HA for OPNFV approved for creation 16:28:41 thanking you very much 16:28:43 Welcome HA project & team 16:28:54 #topic project bootstrap/get-started 16:29:07 #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/get_started/get_started_project_proposal 16:30:39 #info Basic setup to deploy platform and run a couple of VNFs in a standard config as a starting point for dev/integration. 16:31:02 #info We have access to systems and folks are starting to make things work. 16:31:45 #info Need to approve and execute as this is the foundation to build all our deliverables. Big diverse group of contributors and committers. 16:32:01 #info planning to have something working for Rel 1.0 in March 2015 16:36:06 #info the point of the project is not about VNFs, but about the framework, so I don't understand why there is so much focus on VNFs in this discussion. 16:36:27 * ChrisPriceAB I think the point was to ensure cross pollination with the testing groups. :) 16:38:12 #info usijng CentOS as Linux foundation for now... 16:38:37 #info we can add Bin Hu as a contributor now or later 16:39:09 #startvote approve Bootstrap/get-started for project creation? Vote +1, 0, or -1. 16:39:14 #vote +1 16:39:17 #vote +1 16:39:18 #vote +1 16:39:18 #vote +1 16:39:19 #vote +1 16:39:19 #vote +1 16:39:21 #vote +1 16:39:23 #vote +1 16:39:24 #vote +1 16:39:25 #vote +1 16:39:26 #vote +1 16:39:30 +1 16:39:30 #vote +1 16:39:31 #endvote 16:39:51 #agreed Bootstrap/get-started approved for creation 16:40:00 Welcome bootstrap project 16:40:38 #info FrankBrockners reminds that this is moving fast and communication occurs daily on IRC. Meeting info on Wiki. Webex as needed 16:41:30 #topic project proposal Telco KPI 16:41:48 #link https://wiki.opnfv.org/collaborative_development_projects/opnfv_telco_kpi_monitoring 16:47:51 Do Telco KPIs not include any network infratructure? This appears to be vswitch or VM KPI monitoring, not as broad as Telco KPI based on description. Where is system view of traffic that includes pswitches, etc. ? 16:48:31 Folks, need to run - ChrisPrice will fill in for me for the vote 16:58:40 #agree the name is easy to confused 17:01:56 #info project name & repository name repository suggested for the project 17:02:12 #info plan to adjust repo name, project name, and then vote (without extensive discussion) next TSC call 17:02:24 #endmeeting