I'm in total agreement and am happy to follow your lead. I would just like
to know too so that I can provide my input back into any of our resource
teams. Trying to support you.

On Fri, Sep 9, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Margaret Chiosi <
[email protected]> wrote:

> 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]> 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]
>>> Skype: minyudecorah
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>>> [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