Ash that is fine. We just need to decide what gets worked with each WG.

On Friday, September 9, 2016, Ash <[email protected]> wrote:

> Guys,
>
> That last bullet in the minutes is a little disconcerting. If there are in
> fact overlaps between MANO and Polestar WGs, it would be nice if they could
> be clarified with the whole list vs. just with Margaret.
>
> Sorry to be a pain. Just want to make sure we're all on the same page vs
> different ones.
>
> Best,
>
> Ash
>
> On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Min Yu <[email protected]
> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>> wrote:
>
>> Attendees: Anthony Soong, Bryan Sullivan, Larry Lamers, Margaret Chiosi,
>> Michael Bugenhagen, Prakash Ramchandran, Steven Wright, Tapio Tallgren,
>> Yunjun Zhang, Min Yu
>>
>>    -
>>
>>    Meeting Minutes/Agenda Approval: Approved
>>    -
>>
>>    User Scenarios of Pain Points and Priorities by Steven
>>    -
>>
>>       Steven noted that expansions and comments have been added to the
>>       Pain Points and a separate VNF Onboarding page
>>       
>> <https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?spaceKey=EUAG&title=VNF+Onboarding+and+Deployment>
>>       has been created on the EUAG’s wiki.
>>       -
>>
>>       A question was asked about the difference between “provider” and
>>       “operator” and if they have different requirements. A discussion then
>>       followed about the need to define these terms so the ecosystem operates
>>       from the same understanding. A suggestion was made that the Polestar WG
>>       could take this up as a future action item.
>>       -
>>
>>       In the VNF Options section, a question was raised regarding the
>>       VNF Package being a “single binary object.” Steven noted that replacing
>>       “binary” with “executable” perhaps helps clarify the meaning.
>>       -
>>
>>       A question was asked to define the OPNFV community as an actor.
>>       The attendees discussed whether this means OPNFV has a role to play in
>>       hosting technical validation of platform capability that enables VNFs
>>       rather than validating VNF packages in the market. A comment was made 
>> that
>>       if VNF onboarding is a feature in future OPNFV releases, OPNFV will 
>> also
>>       have a role in certifying that VNFs work with a particular release. The
>>       attendees generally agreed that it would be helpful for VNF vendors if
>>       operators start to outline what the processes are going to be, even 
>> though
>>       some are more business-oriented and do not apply to the OPNFV system. 
>> Such
>>       outlines would inform the vendors of the expectations and scope.
>>       -
>>
>>       Margaret polled attendees’ plans to attend a F2F meeting at ODL
>>       Summit in Seattle to further discuss this. She also mentioned there was
>>       some overlap between what the MANO WG and the Polestar WG are doing. 
>> Bryan
>>       confirmed there are some overlaps and will clarify them for Margaret 
>> after
>>       the call.
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Min Yu
>> Client Services Coordinator
>> The Linux Foundation
>> +1(530) 902-6464 (m)
>> [email protected]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>> Skype: minyudecorah
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> <javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','[email protected]');>
>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>>
>>
>

-- 
Margaret CHiosi
_______________________________________________
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Reply via email to