Frank,
I really like your table. That is quite helpful.
Best,
Ash
From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) <fbroc...@cisco.com>
Sent: Friday, November 30, 2018 5:45 AM
To: Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com>; HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com>; Tim
Irnich <tim.irn...@suse.com>; Trevor Bramwell
<tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: AshYoung <a...@cachengo.com>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org;
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org; Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com>
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
In the TSC meeting, Manuel voiced a pretty important ask that might help the
discussion moving forward: "Cloud we create a table that compares OPNFV
today with the proposed future", assuming that we'd evolve along the path
that Bin started to articulate. The table format is to make things more
concrete and could help us in a second step to articulate where wed want to
focus on moving forward. This includes which additional work areas wed like
to inspire projects to work on (or even new projects to be created for).
I've tried to capture the current discussion and proposal into a table below
(see also attached in case groups.io messes up the formatting and color)
feel free to add/evolve/change per your understanding the below is just my
reading of Bins deck.
Thoughts?
Thanks, Frank
OPNFV today
Potential Evolution (changes in blue)
Design Outline requirements; Design NFV components and solution stacks
Design Outline requirements; Design NFV components and solution stacks;
Focus on cloud native and edge use cases.
Create Create new and/or enhance components (most often by working
upstream) to meet the design/requirements
Create Create new and/or enhance components (most often by working
upstream) to meet the design/requirements.
Compose Follow the design and create a running system from a set of
components
Compose Follow the design and create a running system from a set of
components
Deploy Install and run the composed system on a set of labs worldwide.
This includes enhancement and creation of specific test and deployment tools
(installers, XCI,..).
Deploy Install and run the composed system on a set of labs worldwide.
This includes enhancement and creation of specific test and deployment tools
(installers, XCI,..).
Test Test the installation, i.e. running system that represents an NFV
solution stack; as well as test specific aspects of a system. This includes
creation and enhancement of specific test and deployment tools. In addition,
this includes tooling for verification (OVP/CVP).
Test Test the installation, i.e. running system that represents an NFV
solution stack; as well as test specific aspects of a system. This includes
creation and enhancement of specific test and deployment tools. In addition,
this includes tooling for verification (OVP/CVP).
Tool suite: Compose individual tools into a tool suite.
Iterate/Automate Create guidelines and tooling for automated deployment,
testing, and test-results reporting.
Iterate/Automate Create guidelines and tooling for automated deployment,
testing, and test-results reporting.
Create a DevOps platform: Tooling to automatically compose the entire
DevOps workflow using cloud services. (Require migration from DIY hosted
labs/git/gerrit/Jenkins to cloud services like packet.net, github, circleCI,
..)
Operate Operate a set of servers/labs and services (git, gerrit,
jenkins,..). Offer Lab-as-a-Service (LaaS).
Operate Operate a set of servers/labs and services (git, gerrit,
jenkins,..). Offer Lab-as-a-Service (LaaS).
OPNFV Release artifacts:
* Scenarios installable NFV solution stacks (NFVI);
NFVI Platform
* Tools (mostly test/operations tools)
* OVP/CVP solution
OPNFV Release artifacts:
* Scenarios installable NFV solution stacks (NFVI);
streamlined, i.e. fewer scenarios; increased focus on CN and edge; NFVI
Platform
* Packaged testing/operations tool suite
* OVP/CVP solution
* DevOps Platform
-----Original Message-----
From: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
<opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> > On Behalf Of
Georg Kunz
Sent: Dienstag, 27. November 2018 18:46
To: HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com <mailto:bh5...@att.com> >; Tim Irnich
<tim.irn...@suse.com <mailto:tim.irn...@suse.com> >; Trevor Bramwell
<tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org <mailto:tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org> >
Cc: AshYoung <a...@cachengo.com <mailto:a...@cachengo.com> >;
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> ; opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
<mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> ; Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com
<mailto:mb...@suse.com> >
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
Hi Bin,
Hi all,
Due to the lively discussions during today's TSC call, the IRC minutes are a
little light [1]. However, I have to voice my concern that I cannot agree
with the following items:
[.]
14:41:31 <bh526r> #info Vote for strategy on Tuesday Dec 4
14:42:01 <bh526r> #info Hopefully everyone will agree
14:43:12 <bh526r> #info We need a decision on Dec 4 in order to trigger
following actions
14:43:35 <dmcbride> #topic budget discussion
14:43:45 <bh526r> #info Stalemate is not an option [.]
I don't understand why "we need a decision by Dec 4 in order to trigger
actions". I seriously appreciate your ambition to move this forward quickly
as the main intention is to strengthen OPNFV's position. However, I also
don't see why concrete actions are being blocked if there is no decision on
Dec 4.
A core value of open source communities is that those who are interested in
a particular topic, naturally tend to form a group which jointly works
towards a common goal. In our concrete scenario, we could i) form a devops
working group which works on fleshing out the details of the proposal,
and/or ii) find a group of interested people prototyping some of the
"cloud-based devops methodologies. None of such activities would be
considered a stalemate. The results of such _community-driven_ activities
would help to convince the entire community. A very successful example in
this regard is XCI, which was driven by a small group of people.
Certainly, it is the job of all TSC members to actively participate in the
strategy definition and discussion and I urge everybody to do so. An open
source community works best if it is driven by personal motivation. For sure
it does not work well if deadlines for decisions about unclear directions
are put on a community without a clear understanding why.
That said, my current view on the proposal is the following: it broadens the
scope of the community (by a currently undefined amount), i.e., it adds on
top of what we are currently doing. I do not think that this is the right
approach given shrinking amounts of resources in the community - both in
terms of developers and funding. I believe we need to instead discuss, as an
alternative, if we should and can focus on a very specific, well-defined and
sought-after contribution to the ecosystem. I mentioned this in a previous
email already: based on input from stakeholders, I would argue for
strengthening the reference platform (as defined through comprehensive
tests) and the corresponding compliance program. This is my perspective for
sure - others might disagree and I'd love to discuss better proposals.
[1]
<http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2018/opnfv-meet
ing.2018-11-27-13.54.log.txt>
http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-meeting/2018/opnfv-meeti
ng.2018-11-27-13.54.log.txt
Best regards
Georg
-----Original Message-----
From: HU, BIN < <mailto:bh5...@att.com> bh5...@att.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 27, 2018 2:22 PM
To: Tim Irnich < <mailto:tim.irn...@suse.com> tim.irn...@suse.com>; Trevor
Bramwell < <mailto:tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org>
tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: AshYoung < <mailto:a...@cachengo.com> a...@cachengo.com>; Georg Kunz <
<mailto:georg.k...@ericsson.com> georg.k...@ericsson.com>;
<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org; Manuel Buil < <mailto:mb...@suse.com>
mb...@suse.com>
Subject: RE: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
Thank you for pointing out one possibility based on the assumption that the
same resources will do both work. The assumption itself may not be true
because there will be different resources to do different work in different
projects (which is the reality today).
So the resource availability is a key factor to consider when we approve the
new projects subsequently after we plan the product portfolio. When we have
dedicated resources to do each job, such possibility will be unlikely to
happen.
Thanks
Bin
-----Original Message-----
From: <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <
<mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> On Behalf Of
Tim Irnich
Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 11:59 PM
To: HU, BIN < <mailto:bh5...@att.com> bh5...@att.com>; Trevor Bramwell <
<mailto:tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org> tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org>
Cc: AshYoung < <mailto:a...@cachengo.com> a...@cachengo.com>; Georg Kunz <
<mailto:georg.k...@ericsson.com> georg.k...@ericsson.com>;
<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org; Manuel Buil < <mailto:mb...@suse.com>
mb...@suse.com>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
The way I understand Trevor's concern is that if we start spending more time
on packaging tools and supporting their usage downstream, there will be less
time for doing integration work and driving upstream production readiness.
Which is something I'm concerned about too.
Pretending that this problem doesn't exist isn't helpful IMHO.
Tim
On 11/27/18 2:11 AM, HU, BIN wrote:
> Trevor,
>
> Thank you for you clarifying it.
>
> The integration work is explicitly mentioned to be continued in 3rd bullet
on slide #13 of v0.8. I am attaching it again just in case you missed it.
That work will continue as usual. All related bug fixes and new features in
upstream will continue as usual too. So I am not sure why it is a concern
here.
>
> Regarding the concern of spending our time to help people use our tools,
isn't it the usual business we are supposed to do today? For example, after
we release Gambia, we are supposed to help people use it, right? There is a
"opnfv-user" mailing list for this purpose. There isn't much traffic though.
It means either everyone is an expert or no one is interested in using our
release. I wish it was because everyone is an expert, though the reality
might be opposite.
>
> Recently, someone asked me how to run Yardstick on Dovetail. Thanks Georg
for sharing the docs. I was really excited because finally someone is
interested in using our tool. So getting user to use our tools is exactly
what we want, right? Without users, I don't know how to show others our
value, frankly.
>
> So IMHO, spending our time to help user isn't a concern at all. It is what
we need. And there is no difference of supporting users, e.g. use OpenStack
by OpenStack community, use ODL by ODL community. Etc.
>
> If there is no user to support, we are in trouble because our deliverables
has no value.
>
> Let me know what you think, and if you still have concerns.
>
> Thank you
> Bin
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <
<mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> On Behalf
> Of Trevor Bramwell
> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 4:54 PM
> To: HU, BIN < <mailto:bh5...@att.com> bh5...@att.com>
> Cc: Tim Irnich < <mailto:tim.irn...@suse.com> tim.irn...@suse.com>;
AshYoung < <mailto:a...@cachengo.com> a...@cachengo.com>;
> Georg Kunz < <mailto:georg.k...@ericsson.com> georg.k...@ericsson.com>;
Manuel Buil < <mailto:mb...@suse.com> mb...@suse.com>;
> <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
>
> Hi Bin,
>
> Perhaps 'integrated' is a better word here than 'supported'. A lot of the
work in OPNFV involves integrating many of these upstream components which
in turn exposes bugs, or creates features that enable an NFV use case.
>
> I'm quite terrible with examples, but I'm sure others from the community
have time.
>
> Regards,
> Trevor Bramwell
>
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 12:26:33AM +0000, HU, BIN wrote:
>> Trevor,
>>
>> Thank you for your question.
>>
>> Can you give more details and examples of "doing what we're best at,
which is getting NFV supported by upstream projects."?
>>
>> Thank you
>> Bin
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Trevor Bramwell < <mailto:tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org>
tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org>
>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 4:17 PM
>> To: HU, BIN < <mailto:bh5...@att.com> bh5...@att.com>
>> Cc: Tim Irnich < <mailto:tim.irn...@suse.com> tim.irn...@suse.com>;
AshYoung < <mailto:a...@cachengo.com> a...@cachengo.com>;
>> Georg Kunz < <mailto:georg.k...@ericsson.com> georg.k...@ericsson.com>;
Manuel Buil < <mailto:mb...@suse.com> mb...@suse.com>;
>> <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
>>
>> Hi Bin,
>>
>> I'm still unclear on the first point: "Enabling and automating
stakeholders' business transformation into DevOps organization"
>>
>> From what I've read it seems like the suggestion is to package up
everything that makes up OPNFV (Platform, CI/CD piplines, testing /
verification / certification tools, etc.) and turn that into something that
can be deployed by a company internally.
>>
>> Is that what is being suggested here, or something else? And if so I'd be
concerned that we'd actually be reducing companies incentive to be involved,
or more of our time would be spent trying to support people using the tool
then doing what we're best at, which is getting NFV supported by upstream
projects.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Trevor Bramwell
>>
>> On Mon, Nov 26, 2018 at 09:04:57PM +0000, HU, BIN wrote:
>>> Tim,
>>>
>>> Not sure if you get a chance to follow the most recent discussion.
>>>
>>> The ask is merely to agree on a strategy (i.e. the vision and direction)
outlined on Slide #13, supported by the steps of actions summarized on slide
#16. See attached the most recent update v0.8.
>>>
>>> Please let me know if there is anything unclear here.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Bin
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <
<mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> On
>>> Behalf Of Tim Irnich
>>> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 12:57 PM
>>> To: HU, BIN < <mailto:bh5...@att.com> bh5...@att.com>; AshYoung <
<mailto:a...@cachengo.com> a...@cachengo.com>; Georg
>>> Kunz < <mailto:georg.k...@ericsson.com> georg.k...@ericsson.com>; Manuel
Buil < <mailto:mb...@suse.com> mb...@suse.com>
>>> Cc: <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
>>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan
>>>
>>> On 11/26/18 4:40 PM, HU, BIN wrote:
>>>>
>>>> If I understand correctly, Point #1 and #3 are actually the same
question, i.e. what will we do in the next step?
>>>
>>> No, I'm rather suggesting to make sure our understanding is complete
before we proceed. We clearly do not yet sufficiently understand what
exactly the decision is you're asking us to take, so we cannot proceed.
>>> Let's continue to work on this until we have the required clarity, and
then decide.
>>>
>>> Regards, Tim
>>>
>>
>>
>>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>> Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
>>>
>>> View/Reply Online (#4856):
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org
>>> _g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4856&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPc
>>> DOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=MsGFeXeJn1GRo-GvLejVXrmPgRHvZKjmVkiBKZgaQdc&s=j
>>> 9hLZ3q9g0pHbtq-b6cZkh4PaKLsKtMkaWRRHHHAcqQ&e=
>>> Mute This Topic:
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org
>>> _mt_27802341_557206&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1
>>> K_r6YIIHhw&m=MsGFeXeJn1GRo-GvLejVXrmPgRHvZKjmVkiBKZgaQdc&s=fTo_-Z8GU
>>> Aaz9sCAJyClb_m_LGWxF3_23Siiy8SJdtY&e=
>>> Group Owner: <mailto:opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org>
opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org
>>> Unsubscribe:
>>> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org
>>> _g_opnfv-2Dtsc_unsub&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf
>>> 1K_r6YIIHhw&m=MsGFeXeJn1GRo-GvLejVXrmPgRHvZKjmVkiBKZgaQdc&s=f8xgHpaw
>>> JHb8E2ELrIpuKGYOIZmFHT6fOJf7huGMVHM&e=
>>> [tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org]
>>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
--
Dr.-Ing. Tim Irnich, Senior Program Manager Developer Engagement
E-Mail: <mailto:tim.irn...@suse.com> tim.irn...@suse.com
Mobile: +49 172 2791829
SUSE Linux GmbH, GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB
21284 (AG Nürnberg)
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#22475):
https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/22475
Mute This Topic: https://lists.opnfv.org/mt/28277855/21656
Group Owner: opnfv-tech-discuss+ow...@lists.opnfv.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/unsub
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
