#opnfv-meeting: OPNFV TSC
Meeting started by ChrisPriceAB at 14:59:31 UTC
(full logs).
Meeting summary
- Roll Call (ChrisPriceAB, 14:59:35)
- Chris Price (ChrisPriceAB,
14:59:41)
- Frank Brockners (frankbrockners,
15:00:17)
- Julien (Julien-zte,
15:00:24)
- Edgar StPierre (edgarstp,
15:00:28)
- Approval of previous minutes of meeting (ChrisPriceAB, 15:01:09)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/wiki/tsc#november_24_2015
previous minutes (ChrisPriceAB,
15:01:15)
- previous minutes approved without
comment (ChrisPriceAB,
15:01:24)
- Agenda Bashing (ChrisPriceAB, 15:01:34)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/wiki/tsc#december_1_2015
Current TSC Agenda (ChrisPriceAB,
15:01:43)
- Bryan Sullivan (bryan_att,
15:02:11)
- Milestone D update (ChrisPriceAB, 15:03:14)
- Debra reports that milestone D reporting is
looking good, however projects are reporting issues looking forward
to milestone E (ChrisPriceAB,
15:03:53)
- Chris Wright (cdub,
15:03:58)
- more details to be addressed during the weekly
project call, Debra will run 1-1 project discussions following
milestone D (ChrisPriceAB,
15:04:20)
- OPNFV Plugfest, needs and support (ChrisPriceAB, 15:04:43)
- Ashlee Young (ashyoung,
15:04:50)
- Vikram Dham (VikramDham,
15:05:18)
- Brian Skerry (bjskerry,
15:05:47)
- Certification & Compliance committee
desires to have plugfest events after each release. First one
targeting March-June timeframe post Brahmaputra (rpaik,
15:07:14)
- ChrisPriceAB notes that a working group from
the tehcnical community is needed (e.g. testing/integration) for
Plugfests (rpaik,
15:08:17)
- dlenrow (dlenrow,
15:09:04)
- ACTION: ChrisPriceAB/Wenjing will send a note to the mailing
list to start the conversation on Plugfest working group
(rpaik,
15:09:10)
- Q1 Hackfest Collab-Summit and ONS discussion (ChrisPriceAB, 15:09:24)
- Parviz Yegani (Parviz,
15:09:34)
- ACTION: rpaik to send
out a survey to the community to identify where we would get the
best attendance. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:17:11)
- OPNFV security initiative: Badge program engagement (ChrisPriceAB, 15:18:22)
- It is fine now (Julien-zte,
15:19:15)
- https://www.coreinfrastructure.org/programs/badge-program
information on the badge program (ChrisPriceAB,
15:23:02)
- lhinds walks through some of the prerequisites
to OPNFV earning badges (ChrisPriceAB,
15:23:40)
- many of the items address security specific
considerations in our existing ways of working that can be
incrementally implemented. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:24:16)
- ashyoung asks what mechanisms are needed to
trigger a security evaluation (ChrisPriceAB,
15:25:29)
- https://wiki.opnfv.org/security/securecode
(lhinds,
15:25:36)
- lhinds encourages community support for the
security impact assessment group (ChrisPriceAB,
15:26:20)
- Tapio Tallgren (ttallgren,
15:26:49)
- can you sign me up as a security
reviewer? (ashyoung,
15:28:09)
- lhinds outlines the main areas of needed work
is around the code analysis system. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:28:57)
- chrispriceab asks if we should as a community
implement a badge program through our security group (ChrisPriceAB,
15:31:20)
- bjskery asks what the impact is of our upstream
components if they are not participating. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:31:50)
- lhinds answers that we should focus on what we
provide upstream and internally a a starting point (ChrisPriceAB,
15:32:13)
- bjskerry asks if there is a timeframe that
needs to be achieved with this initiative for security
issues? (ChrisPriceAB,
15:32:40)
- lhinds answers that there is a recommended
criteria for a timeframe to address security issues (ChrisPriceAB,
15:33:14)
- cdub chimes in and agrees that security if
important, but is trying to undersand how OPNFV as an integration
project achieves the badge (ChrisPriceAB,
15:34:48)
- parvis asks what areas of security we are
focused on? (ChrisPriceAB,
15:35:09)
- lhinds & cdub answer that it spans across
all areas. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:35:44)
- lhinds outlines this provides a reccomended
framework for us to help focus on security as a community. Best
practices for our internal activities will need to be done
internally within OPNFV. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:37:19)
- https://github.com/linuxfoundation/cii-best-practices-badge/blob/master/doc/criteria.md
(lhinds,
15:38:26)
- cdub asks if this is something we should focus
on or if there are higher priority items. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:39:39)
- the Security Group is from Linux Foundation or
OPNFV? (Julien-zte,
15:39:45)
- lhinds answers this helps us address the issues
we are working on. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:39:56)
- https://www.coreinfrastructure.org/
(rpaik,
15:40:25)
- AGREED: The TSC has a
concensus for the security group to pursue the badge program
(ChrisPriceAB,
15:41:53)
- Pharos LF & Community lab use for Brahmaputra release processing (ChrisPriceAB, 15:42:05)
- https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/brahmaputra_release_testing
proposal for testing and deployment in Brahmaputra (ChrisPriceAB,
15:43:31)
- fdegir outlines that there will be resource
constraints for Brahmaputra testing if we constrain our release
testing to be done only on the LF labs. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:44:05)
- fdegir outlines the discussion extends to CI
processes, stable artifact usage and testing tools for the
Brahmaputra release. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:45:00)
- fdegir describes that the most important action
is to allow more labs to be used for the release. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:45:50)
- chrispriceab asks how we know which labs will
provide the needed capability (ChrisPriceAB,
15:46:38)
- fdegir answers that Pharos and pharos
compliance will be used to evaluate the applciability of the
labs (ChrisPriceAB,
15:46:59)
- fdegir states that bare metal labs are
required (ChrisPriceAB,
15:47:26)
- trevorintel states that we need to identify
which labs qualify for release purposes and can they be dedicated
for release purposes. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:48:09)
- this would require developmental labs to be
re-purposed for release testing during the release candidate phase
of Brahmaputra. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:48:55)
- fdegir describes that we should re-purpose
these labs now in order to work through issues that may pop
up. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:49:19)
- ashlee asks if she is able to get extra pods is
there someone available to help configure them for release
purposes (ChrisPriceAB,
15:51:44)
- chrispriceab states the question as; does the
TSC approve the use of community labs for the release of
Brahmaputra? (ChrisPriceAB,
15:53:16)
- hkirksey describes that while the cetral lab
may not be mandatory, hardware portability is a goal we should
maintain for Brahmaputra. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:54:04)
- frankbrockners describes that portability
should be impicit in the CI whereby the lab is not coupled in any
way to the deployment of the software. (ChrisPriceAB,
15:55:35)
- Status of community labs
https://wiki.opnfv.org/pharos_rls_b_labs (trevor_intel,
15:56:33)
- +1 (ashyoung,
15:58:20)
- AGREED: the TSC
agrees to allow the use of Pharos community equipment for release
testing. (ChrisPriceAB,
16:00:14)
Meeting ended at 16:00:46 UTC
(full logs).
Action items
- ChrisPriceAB/Wenjing will send a note to the mailing list to start the conversation on Plugfest working group
- rpaik to send out a survey to the community to identify where we would get the best attendance.
Action items, by person
- ChrisPriceAB
- ChrisPriceAB/Wenjing will send a note to the mailing list to start the conversation on Plugfest working group
- rpaik
- rpaik to send out a survey to the community to identify where we would get the best attendance.
People present (lines said)
- ChrisPriceAB (54)
- ashyoung (10)
- fdegir (8)
- TomNadeau (6)
- Julien-zte (5)
- rpaik (5)
- collabot (4)
- VikramDham (3)
- bryan_att (3)
- cdub (2)
- lhinds (2)
- edgarstp (2)
- frankbrockners (1)
- dlenrow (1)
- trevor_intel (1)
- ttallgren (1)
- Parviz (1)
- bjskerry (1)
- aricg (1)
Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.