Srini, Thank you for input.
The details of K8S and how it should work with NFV need to be addressed at a more tactical level, because K8S is one of the technologies in CN paradigm. E.g: - Step 2+: when defining how a CN-based platform is composed of, how packaged CN-based testing tool is composed of - and how a vertical will use CN-based solution, e.g. at Edge Cloud project, or OVN4NFV project etc. You are very welcome to contribute to all of the details of technology, including but not limited to K8S. Thank you Bin -----Original Message----- From: Addepalli, Srinivasa R <srinivasa.r.addepa...@intel.com> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 8:39 AM To: HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com>; Tim Irnich <tim.irn...@suse.com>; AshYoung <a...@cachengo.com>; Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com>; Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com> Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org Subject: RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan Hi Bin, My 2 cents from strategy perspective. I see that Cloud native and micro services mentioned in your presentation. But I did not see any Kubernetes term used anywhere. Hence, I thought I would bring this up. So far, majority of the OPNFV focus seems to be supporting openstack based sites. Many edge deployments are talking about using K8S. That leads to supporting VNFs and CNFs using K8S. I feel that OPNFV community can lead this effort on "K8S for NFV" - from CNI requirements perspective, supporting various workloads (VM, container and Functions) and installation perspective. In summary, strategy perspective, "K8S for NFV" need to be considered, in my view. Some details: On CNI: OVN4NFV project started to develop OVN4NFV to work in K8S environment. But, there may be other CNIs that OPNFV community may be interested in such Nokia DANM and NSM (Network Service Mesh). Hence, I feel it is important for OPNFV community to list down requirements on CNIs for Network functions. On workloads: Docker is well known for bringing up containers. For VMs, there are multiple options - Virtlet and Kubevirt for example. It is good if OPNFV community discusses on how these can be supported. On software provisioning/installations: There are many installation in K8S world - Kubespray and others. I feel that it is important to study and consider new installers that are popular in K8S world and enhance them to use for NFV. Thanks Srini -----Original Message----- From: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of HU, BIN Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 7:40 AM To: Tim Irnich <tim.irn...@suse.com>; AshYoung <a...@cachengo.com>; Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com>; Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com> Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan Tim, Thank you for jumping in and offering your opinion. That's very helpful and valuable. If I understand correctly, Point #1 and #3 are actually the same question, i.e. what will we do in the next step? - As I clarified in the email https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4844&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=1h2UtM6XU8AenrGJ-Q8amy3LevJHiHk6H-e9Acwbe68&s=oMmmb5REJiKea-CVQ9n5qXl9oSrcGyhH6UxDZ93GNcU&e= and earlier in this thread https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4845&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=1h2UtM6XU8AenrGJ-Q8amy3LevJHiHk6H-e9Acwbe68&s=D7kWljFPFP2Ktnqa4r-a7LnuLvdTfBcgbUbm2lS_XII&e=, this is our 1st milestone or Step #1 to have a strategic plan. This milestone triggers the action of Step #2 and other following steps. Those steps (or actions) are outlined on slide #16. - Once we agree on the strategic plan, the action is the Step #2, i.e. to define the details of the portfolio of what we can offer. The example of details was illustrated in https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4845&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=1h2UtM6XU8AenrGJ-Q8amy3LevJHiHk6H-e9Acwbe68&s=D7kWljFPFP2Ktnqa4r-a7LnuLvdTfBcgbUbm2lS_XII&e=. - You can see the example of portfolio in https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4845&d=DwIFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=1h2UtM6XU8AenrGJ-Q8amy3LevJHiHk6H-e9Acwbe68&s=D7kWljFPFP2Ktnqa4r-a7LnuLvdTfBcgbUbm2lS_XII&e= is getting the balance of equal importance of tools and reference stacks, and maximizes the value of what we can offer. - I changed the wording of 1st bullet point on slide #16 to reflect your point of #1 and #3. This is the Step #2, the immediate action point triggered by the strategic plan. - I also changed wording on other bullets on slide #16 to reflect some more details in my prior messages. - See attached deck v0.7. Regarding your point #4, it is actually one of the following actions, i.e. to develop a marketing message to reflect our strategy. This is captured on the last bullet point on slide #16. Certainly, this is another action point we need to take after we agree on the strategy. Regarding your point #2, yes, we need all TSC members to contribute to those actions, including: - defining the portfolio - defining the implementation and roadmap - working with MWG to define marketing message. I also would expect that yourself will be able to help drive one of those actions, for example, working with MWG on marketing message to make sure that it gets known externally. With those changes on slide #16 (in attached v0.7), hopefully it gets the level of clarity you expected, and we can move forward. I am looking forward to your further contribution in executing this strategy, especially e.g. in working with MWG for our marketing message to get it known externally. Thank you again Bin -----Original Message----- From: Tim Irnich <tim.irn...@suse.com> Sent: Monday, November 26, 2018 6:37 AM To: HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com>; AshYoung <a...@cachengo.com>; Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com>; Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com> Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan Hi all, having read the entire thread again this morning, I'd like to offer the following thoughts to hopefully help us make progress: - We need to make sure the decision we take triggers action and change (since I think we all agree that we need to change something in OPNFV). To achieve this, we need to more clarity on the choices that are in front of us and their consequences. The current material does not do this clearly enough. It sort of says "we keep doing everything we already do and add a few things." IMHO it would be better is we described the change we want to achieve (i.e. in the form of "instead of [...] we want [...]"). - The fraction of TSC members that have actively participated in the discussion so far is way too low. I'd like to urge all TSC members to get engaged. Remember, we are elected by the OPNFV community, and this obliges us to do this type of work. We should not wait for clarity to be provided, we should actively contribute to obtaining it. - The discussion so far seems to revolve around a priority question: are we primarily doing (consumable) tools for CI/CD and testing, and merely produce reference stacks to have something to validate those tools against, or are the reference stacks the priority and the tools are a by-product? Or are both equally important? IMHO both depend on each other and OPNFV needs to maximize the value it provides in both domains. - In addition to doing things better or differently, we need to find better ways of _explaining_ what we do, since lack of clarity (or an outdated view) on OPNFV's mission & value proposition seems to be the key reason for declining investment. Let's remember that there's no other entity than the TSC left to do this work. Once we have renewed our value proposition, the most important next step is to make sure it gets known externally. Regards, Tim On 11/22/18 8:44 PM, HU, BIN wrote: > Manuel, > > > > Thank you for sharing your more thoughts here. I really appreciate > your time and thinking. > > > > I am not sure if Georg or Ash really meant that we never finished > anything completely. (Correct me if I am wrong). Here is the status: > > * We have integrated platform as our main product (through > installers). We have gone through 7 releases. The stable release > process is quite mature. And we are working on maturing XCI process. > * OVP / Dovetail is also quite stable and becomes mature recently. > * The underlying CI/CD pipeline, and related test framework and test > cases are able to support successful stable release and OVP/Dovetail. > > > > Of course, nothing is perfect, and there is room for further improving > Integrated Platform and OVP/Dovetail, including add-on features of > platform and test case coverage in Dovetail. This is more like > maintaining and evolving existing product. The potential is limited > IMHO. The reality is that despite we have those 2 flagship products > which are very successful and can be maintained and evolved further, > we are still losing investment significantly as you indicated in your > 3^rd concern. > > > > My take of what Georg and Ash really meant is that we need to be > carefully handling our existing products (i.e. Integrated Platform and > OVP/Dovetail), and we don't lose track of platform capabilities and > related test coverage when we look for new strategy. The strategy and > direction should evolve based on what we have and what we are good at. > From that viewpoint, I completely agree with them. So the strategy of > DevOps Platform, which includes the potential portfolio that includes > existing products, is the evolution based on what we have and what we > are good at, and opens potential for new market segment: > > * Expanded market segments: > o Existing 2 products are targeted to operators in terms of NFVI > (current segment) > o Potential portfolio expand the segment to all stakeholders and > other communities in terms of DevOps pipeline (new segment) > o Current segment is a vertical of new segment in this picture. So > those 2 segments are orthogonal. New market segment has little > cannibalization effect on current segment > o Thus we expand our addressable market with this new segment, > which potentially will support unlimited verticals in addition > to NFVI vertical. > * DevOps Platform, as a horizontal pipeline, is the theme, or a > "string", to connect all of our assets and projects together in a > systematic way: > o Horizontally, DevOps Platform combines our current CI/CD > pipeline, testing framework, and testing tools with the > potential to evolve to a more general-purpose pipeline, test > framework and tools with the options for customization that fits > different verticals. > + We already see the need of evolution to XCI cases > + DevOps Platforms open the path for further evolution to new > verticals in addition to NFVI. > o Vertically, all feature projects are seen as different verticals > of the DevOps platform > + Currently they are all very loose dots > + DevOps Platform, as a theme and horizontal "string", > connects those dots (and new verticals) together in a > systematic way > * So we have a theme, and a way (i.e. horizontal DevOps Platform) of > connecting all feature projects, and supporting other verticals in > industry > > > > I agree with your suggestion that we need to focus on implementing a > couple of products at one time. Thus at Step 2 Product Management and > Step 3 Implementation, we need to carefully define: > > * What are included in portfolio, e.g. those 5 I listed? Or more? Or less? > o Being included in portfolio does not mean it must be implemented > immediately > * What is the roadmap and timeline, and how to implement various > products in portfolio? > o How to package each product based on existing assets? > o How do we implement new product without impacting existing > product (i.e. evolution of platform capabilities and test coverage)? > o How to evolve/improve existing product to better fit the picture? > o What are the gaps? > o What are the dependencies and which dependency should be > implemented first? > o etc > > > > The key is the details of how to implement them and when, including > what are additional platform capabilities and additional test coverage > needed to evolve in existing products. > > > > Please let me know if you have additional comments and questions. I > would be happy to discuss more. > > > > Thank you > > Bin > > > > *From:* Manuel Buil <mb...@suse.com> > *Sent:* Thursday, November 22, 2018 9:33 AM > *To:* HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com>; Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com>; > Ash Young <a...@cachengo.com> > *Cc:* opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan > > > > Hey Bin, > > > > Let me try to answer combining a bit both email threads. Thanks for > replying by the way! > > > > In line with the ROI statement, as you were saying: "we are setting a > strategy based on potential addressable market and potential customer > needs, and our expertise and strength", I am afraid that the different > OPNFV product portfolio which you listed in the previous mail address > different markets and needs. This, in my opinion, will result in not > having a clear focus and thus still not increasing the ROI. I kind of > agree with Georg and Ash that so far we have probably been working on > too many areas (and maybe jumping onto the next new thing) and never > finished any completely. AFAIK, that's what our stakeholders claim, > right? Therefore, I am a bit afraid to jump onto the next new thing > with the devops line of work and that's why I was asking whether you > have some indications pointing to that market as an addressable one > for OPNFV (we definitely have skills in that area!). > > > > My suggestion would be to focus on one thing which could result in 2 > or > 3 "products". After a few years, I wonder if our "original product" of > OPNFV (the reference patform) is still interesting for anyone > (specially > stakeholders) and thus we should focus there. According to Georg and > Ash's mail, it seems they have some indications that it is and we are > not too late. Unfortunately, I can't really tell but I'll try to > investigate a bit :). > > > > Regards, > > Manuel > > > > On Wed, 2018-11-21 at 21:34 +0000, HU, BIN wrote: > > Hi Georg and Ash, > > > > Thank you very much for sharing your view and concern. > > > > First of all, please refer to the message I sent earlier that tried > to answer Manuel's concerns. That message outlines the > thought-process and my view to address Manuel's 3 concerns. > > > > Then back to your concern, i.e. integrated platform capability and > compliance toolset that we are having now. I am really sorry that if > there is a misunderstanding here. My view is that the offering (or > the delivered product) will be defined in Step 2 in detail (as a > Product Management function). My personal understanding is that what > we can offer is a portfolio instead of a single product. Our OPNFV > product portfolio may include: > > DevOps solution as outlined in User Story on slide #12. > > A packaged testing tool chain that can be offered standalone > > An Integrated Platform Capabilities grown from our DevOps pipeline > (our original product) > > A conformance testing solution of the integrated platform (our CVP / > Dovetail) > > A LaaS infrastructure solution > > Etc. > > > > Just like a cloud provider has a portfolio of products and services, > including fundamental IaaS, PaaS and SaaS solutions and services. So > it is a portfolio. > > > > Please note that I used the word "Product" to illustrate what we > can offer. It does not mean anything commercial. > > > > Hopefully I clarified it. Of course, we cannot do it all at one > time. so when we define product portfolio in Step 2, we also need to > define the roadmap and timeline in long term view. Once we have the > strategy, and then portfolio and roadmap, we will have a very good > story to market it and attract investment and resources back, and of > course the most important is to implement it with necessary resources. > > > > Please let me know if you have more questions. > > > > Thank you > > Bin > > > > From: Georg Kunz <georg.k...@ericsson.com > <mailto:georg.k...@ericsson.com>> > > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 9:04 AM > > To: Ash Young <a...@cachengo.com <mailto:a...@cachengo.com>>; HU, BIN > <bh5...@att.com <mailto:bh5...@att.com>> > > Cc: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>; > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > > Subject: RE: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan > > > > Hi Bin, Ash, all, > > > > I'd like to pick up Manuel's question about the value that our > stakeholders would like to see and Ash's point of building a > reference platform: I believe that both aspects point towards the > need for strengthening our compliance program - which is already > based on a broad base of great test tools. OVP does not yet consume > enough of the available tests for various reasons - having to admit > this as a former Dovetail PTL. But I also think that we can still > improve the capabilities of the OPNFV platform - by means of > integration and closing gaps upstream. This is a requirement for > adding additional tests covering NFV capabilities to the > corresponding test tools and then eventually to OVP. Additional NFV > capabilities we could think about include, for instance, L2GW, > SR-IOV, LBaaS, FWaaS - in addition to emerging use cases like edge > computing and cloud native computing, i.e., covering both OpenStack > and K8s-based deployments. > > > > So, in the context of the proposed DevOps approach, I am a little > concerned that we lose track of enabling platform capabilities which > are a requirement for the test tools and the compliance program. We > need to make sure that this does not get out of focus too much (in > my opinion). Specifically, if the main deliverable of OPNFV is an > integration and CI framework, who do we consider performs the > integration of components into a (reference) software stack: the > users of OPNFV (using the new toolchain) or still OPNFV itself, > leveraging the new toolchain? > > > > Best regards > > Georg > > > > From: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org> > <opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>> On > Behalf Of Ash Young > > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2018 4:24 PM > > To: HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com <mailto:bh5...@att.com>> > > Cc: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>; > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tsc] Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan > > > > Hi Bin, > > > > When we first created OPNFV, we set out to resolve the gaps we > needed for the NFVI, which we saw as missing in the various open > sourced projects. It was focused on NFV, not upon being the best > installer of OpenStack or some other component that we said could be > leveraged, but which was still deemed as not meeting our needs. I > don't feel we ever completed this task before moving on to > orchestration, because it became the next shiny thing. But what are > we orchestrating if things are not instrumented to be orchestrated > in a highly efficient manner. Recently, I met with an operator who > said that our SDN controllers were simply too slow to meet their > objectives. This statement is not intended as a slam of any of the > controller projects. It's just meant as a point of reference that > there's a need to implement a feature that is consumable for the > intended recipient. > > > > Your task and the task of the TSC is not an easy one. And I really > love how our CI/CD and DevOps folks have matured over these years. > But I think this cannot be the major mission for OPNFV. I think we > are still missing that E2E reference architecture and stack that be > easily leveraged. With that said, I do NOT propose we throw the baby > out with the bathwater. I'd like to propose a solution for > attracting more developers to our community and still develop > features and components that are missing, but which resolve the gaps > identified years ago. > > > > What we're doing is some really good stuff. But I would still like > to see a smaller group drive a tightly coupled framework that can be > easily leveraged by the consumers with a top level API, and which > can figure out how to best implement certain features/component > projects within OPNFV into this framework, and can also develop > whatever new features might be missing. > > > > At the end of the day, I have shortened my list of projects I am > participating in. I truly believe that OPNFV is very relevant and > needed, but struggles too much trying to be like other projects out > there. I'd love for us to get back to why we formed in the first > place. But whatever you and the other TSC members decide, I'll > support. We have already made provisions in our charter for what I > am asking for. But I do not wish to be the tail wagging the dog. I > see the need for these other things we're doing too. And I certainly > see the challenge that you're now wrestling with. I am looking > forward to an amazing year. > > > > Best, > > > > Ash > > > > On Tue, Nov 20, 2018 at 9:23 AM HU, BIN <bh5...@att.com > <mailto:bh5...@att.com>> wrote: > > Hello community, > > > > Thank you for the input and discussion of OPNFV Strategy and > Plan in the past 3 weeks, including in TSC discussion and Weekly > Technical Discussions. > > > > One critical role of TSC is to set up the direction and vision. > So please continue your input and discussion in the mailing list > in order to further mature the vision and strategy for the > future. We target for TSC to approve the strategy and vision > next week Nov 27 as the 1st milestone, if we can mature the > discussion. Then we can continue to work on next steps for > details of deliverables that fit our resource availability and > capability. > > > > Thank you and I am looking forward to more inputs and discussions. > > > > Bin > > > > From: HU, BIN > > Sent: Tuesday, October 30, 2018 10:16 PM > > To: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org > <mailto:opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org>; > opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org > <mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org> > > Subject: Discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan > > > > Hello community, > > > > At the 1st meeting of our new TSC today, we kicked off a > discussion of OPNFV Strategic Plan. The outline of the OPNFV > Strategic Plan includes: > > First 3 agenda items outline the current status of OPNFV (slide > #3-#8), which is a Problem Statement > > Slide #7 is a summary of input from new TSC members. > > Then it talks about key objectives of evolving OPNFV (slide > #10), focusing on > > Stakeholder-oriented business opportunity > > Technology excellence > > Community growth > > Slide #11-#13 talks about stakeholder-oriented business > opportunity, including > > Why should we evolve to DevOps platform > > A user story > > OPNFV new strategy, including addressing key roadblocks of other > communities including ONAP, OpenStack and Acumos > > Slide #14 talks about technology excellence, such as > cloud-native and microservices, edge, and a long-term vision of > cloud-services based toolchain > > Slide #15 talks about community growth > > Slide #16 talks about the next step to develop a detailed work > plan > > > > We would like community involvement in discussing OPNFV > strategic plan, and shaping OPNFV's future. So we plan to > discuss it in the Weekly Technical Discussion on Nov 8. > > > > Meanwhile, please feel free to give any feedback via email so > that the discussion on Nov. 8 will be more effective and productive. > > > > Thank you and look forward to everyone's involvement and feedback. > > > > Bin > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > > > View/Reply Online (#4834): > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g > _opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4834&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqM > gwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=vE1LEVCuVbnsSLoXx4QPPSUL5crjDqZdvsaBCC2ZSPg&s=TbredUg > uqDs5zkAfBCgq0PTdpR5nZZYqXZx6dEy4DRo&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_ > g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4834&d=DwQFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOq > Mgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=J5pIR4pi_iOHncZofSO2UVUxa-tyzXc0iy2yrpXdEvA&s=wugm_s > b6U1DB1kpbFBRroP3jl50JaFxyBocQlJ9_2pU&e=> > > Mute This Topic: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_m > t_27802341_675449&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6 > YIIHhw&m=vE1LEVCuVbnsSLoXx4QPPSUL5crjDqZdvsaBCC2ZSPg&s=JYKU4hgCwozy8Lj > TwQflEBWDcYe32Y5QQeAaEFxPmfE&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_ > mt_27802341_675449&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r > 6YIIHhw&m=J5pIR4pi_iOHncZofSO2UVUxa-tyzXc0iy2yrpXdEvA&s=p7YZ_hJGJ5xWCK > 8gyZXveG3JNrRiEOO7TXYXlGtyfRk&e=> > > Group Owner: opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org > <mailto:opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org> > > Unsubscribe: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g_opnfv-2Dtsc_unsub&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=vE1LEVCuVbnsSLoXx4QPPSUL5crjDqZdvsaBCC2ZSPg&s=KK55bd30e9inDMtfTuiGD9ZOmkx2SNAnpQDblYLK0ts&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g_opnfv-2Dtsc_unsub&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=J5pIR4pi_iOHncZofSO2UVUxa-tyzXc0iy2yrpXdEvA&s=X2eu8NNLTFn9wEMldInMIdHfRwUksDKxO_8ldtNlkZE&e=> > > [a...@cachengo.com] > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > > Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. > > > > View/Reply Online (#4845): > > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g > _opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4845&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqM > gwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=vE1LEVCuVbnsSLoXx4QPPSUL5crjDqZdvsaBCC2ZSPg&s=idbIf11 > mMJpauSW0AbbAvMYr5hcD5nanWYfpO1HR0Rc&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_ > g_opnfv-2Dtsc_message_4845&d=DwQFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOq > Mgwf1K_r6YIIHhw&m=J5pIR4pi_iOHncZofSO2UVUxa-tyzXc0iy2yrpXdEvA&s=Org9x- > umVvhU19nRu_cSEuM5NLguaKRukbORHzHWdBE&e=> > > Mute This Topic: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_m > t_27802341_675458&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r6 > YIIHhw&m=vE1LEVCuVbnsSLoXx4QPPSUL5crjDqZdvsaBCC2ZSPg&s=DQ8ZZtCmxaMEhc9 > yq6lSQKqyU72CZlkjuY-swY8k_JM&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_ > mt_27802341_675458&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r > 6YIIHhw&m=J5pIR4pi_iOHncZofSO2UVUxa-tyzXc0iy2yrpXdEvA&s=YJrsiNyAvken-x > X5QqFuXJZJ28ZfiLBJ8aooS_HwASY&e=> > > Group Owner: opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org > <mailto:opnfv-tsc+ow...@lists.opnfv.org> > > Unsubscribe: > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_g > _opnfv-2Dtsc_unsub&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_r > 6YIIHhw&m=vE1LEVCuVbnsSLoXx4QPPSUL5crjDqZdvsaBCC2ZSPg&s=KK55bd30e9inDM > tfTuiGD9ZOmkx2SNAnpQDblYLK0ts&e= > > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.opnfv.org_ > g_opnfv-2Dtsc_unsub&d=DwMFaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=6qPcDOqMgwf1K_ > r6YIIHhw&m=J5pIR4pi_iOHncZofSO2UVUxa-tyzXc0iy2yrpXdEvA&s=X2eu8NNLTFn9w > EMldInMIdHfRwUksDKxO_8ldtNlkZE&e=>b [mb...@suse.com] > > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- > -- Dr.-Ing. Tim Irnich, Senior Program Manager Developer Engagement E-Mail: 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 (#22435): https://lists.opnfv.org/g/opnfv-tech-discuss/message/22435 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] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
