Re: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Survey Results

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Thanks Kenny. Who did the poll go to? It seems that it was just the current TSC.

While the current TSC will be the one deciding (read: voting), it would have 
been nice to get the temperature and opinion of the overall community (“all 
active members”), because ultimately the TSC should represent the community. 
Would it be feasible to extend the poll to all active ONAP members?

Thanks, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org  On 
Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Donnerstag, 17. Mai 2018 02:43
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] ONAP TSC Survey Results



Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation
kp...@linuxfoundation.org, 510.766.5945
San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone


___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC MEMBERS Approval/Acknowledgment Needed- Requesting Nexus3 downtime

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

+1

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org  On 
Behalf Of Kenny Paul
Sent: Mittwoch, 2. Mai 2018 01:47
To: onap-tsc 
Cc: Anil Belur ; Jeremy Phelps 

Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC MEMBERS Approval/Acknowledgment Needed- Requesting 
Nexus3 downtime
Importance: High

(bcc'd to onap-release to avoid cross posting)

When: Requesting May 2nd, 6:00 am to 7:00 am Pacific, Alternative: May 3, 6:00 
am to 7:00 am Pacific

What:  Increasing ONAP's Nexus3 server's heap size to 6 gig and enable 
additional logging

Why: Based upon a meeting today between the Community and LFIT - Part of 
ongoing work to address performance issues pulling docker images

Impact: Jenkins and Nexus3 will be unavailable during this time

Risk: Low

Background: Docker image pulls are subject to hanging in mid-stream for minutes 
at a time.  A recent network fix on the part of our service provider has 
addressed bandwidth issues which were contributing to this behavior, however 
with one bottleneck removed a new issue has been identified.   It is believed 
that the jobs are pausing whenever normal garbage collection tasks are 
triggered. The most likely cause of this is the result of the heap size being 
set to default values which is not taking full advantage of the memory 
available. This change will set the heap size to match what is currently in 
place for ONAP's Nexus2 server.  During this down time logging will also be 
enabled to track additional system information in the event that the planned 
fix does not correct the problem.

Alternative:  Leave system as-is until after the release



Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul, Technical Program Manager, The Linux Foundation
kp...@linuxfoundation.org, 510.766.5945
San Francisco Bay Area, Pacific Time Zone


___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Hi Phil,

thanks for the clarification – I missed the “end-user” constraint. Still IMHO 
it would make sense to have another option (“#4”) for a larger TSC included – 
which would allow for a broader organizational representation. Could you add 
that? Way we’d have pretty much the overall spectrum of options covered.

Thanks, Frank

From: Phil Robb 
Sent: Donnerstag, 19. April 2018 16:21
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Hi Frank.

The concern I'm trying to address is for the *service provider* platinum 
members, who a) are beginning plans to put ONAP as a critical piece of their 
infrastructure while b) not yet having had the chance to ramp up their 
developer teams and engage in the community because they are new to this whole 
process.  It was not intended to guarantee TSC representation by all Platinum 
Members, only the Service Provider Platinum members, so the TSC count would 
max-out in the low 20s not the low 30s.  However, some service providers will 
certainly be represented on the TSC by their developers so a likely TSC number 
would be high teens... 18 to 20; it's really the Service Providers that are 
"newer" to ONAP that we're trying to ensure have representation on the 
developer community leadership.  That's the fundamental concern I'm trying to 
address with the proposals #2 and #3.

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Apr 19, 2018 at 7:56 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>> wrote:
Thanks Phil. From reading through the options below, it seems as if there is a 
desire to get a broader representation of the contributing companies in the TSC 
than what would happen with just 15 TSC members. At the same time, with option 
#3 the TSC could eventually grow (worst case) to (15 + #of-LF-platinum 
members), which could be well above 40…. Could we consider some middle ground 
which caps the size of the TSC while still ensuring a broader representation of 
contributing companies? E.g.


•   Fully elected TSC (per Chris/Steven’s proposal)

•   Per company cap at 1 person

•   TSC size: 30

Thoughts?

Thanks, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On 
Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Mittwoch, 18. April 2018 01:25
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>

Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

There has not been much discussion on this thread, so I assume that all 
relevant questions and comments have already been expressed regarding this 
topic of how best to populate the TSC and when to do it.  To that end, I will 
be calling for a vote on this topic during the TSC meeting on Thursday, April 
19th, 2018.  Please review the material below and provide comments or questions 
if you have any.  Also, please be prepared to vote on this topic, or have a 
delegate ready to vote in your stead on Thursday.  The format of the vote will 
be similar to the following:

First, we will vote on if we want to change the way we populate the TSC after 
Beijing or after Casablanca.  Remember that in order to change the date to 
after Casablanca (Nov. 2018), we will need a 2/3 super majority to modify the 
Charter with the new date.  So the first vote will be:

Shall the TSC modify the ONAP Charter to change the date in which the "Startup 
Period" ends (as defined in Section 2.b.i) to be November 16th, 2018? -1, 0, +1

If this vote passes, we are done for now.  If it does not pass with a 2/3 
approval, we will populate a new TSC shortly after Beijing is released.  To do 
so, we will vote on the following proposals:

Proposal #0
Abstain from voting on population method.

Proposal #1:
The TSC Accepts the "TSC Composition Proposal" presented by Chris Donley and 
Stephen Terrill during the TSC Meeting held on April 5th 2018.  The proposal in 
it's entirety is located here: 
https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/25439857/TSC%20Composition%20proposal%20v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1522934062000&api=v2

Proposal #2:
The TSC Accepts the "TSC Composition Proposal" presented by Chris Donley and 
Stephen Terrill during the TSC Meeting held on April 5th 2018 with the 
following amendment:
​That i​
n addition to
​ the​
15 elected TSC members
​ in the original proposal​
, each end-user Platinum Member of LFN that ha
​s​
been a part of ONAP and/or LFN for less than 12 months from the time of the 
election,
​is​
allowed to appoint a representative to the TSC.

​Proposal #3:
The TSC Accepts the "TSC Composition Proposal" presented by Chris Donley and 
Stephen Terrill during the TSC Meeting held on April 5th 2018 with the 
following amendment:
​That in addition to the 15 elected TSC members in the original proposal, ​each 
end-user Platinum Member of LFN who does not otherwise have a rep

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Thanks Phil. From reading through the options below, it seems as if there is a 
desire to get a broader representation of the contributing companies in the TSC 
than what would happen with just 15 TSC members. At the same time, with option 
#3 the TSC could eventually grow (worst case) to (15 + #of-LF-platinum 
members), which could be well above 40…. Could we consider some middle ground 
which caps the size of the TSC while still ensuring a broader representation of 
contributing companies? E.g.


·   Fully elected TSC (per Chris/Steven’s proposal)

·   Per company cap at 1 person

·   TSC size: 30

Thoughts?

Thanks, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org  On 
Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Mittwoch, 18. April 2018 01:25
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Composition Proposal

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

There has not been much discussion on this thread, so I assume that all 
relevant questions and comments have already been expressed regarding this 
topic of how best to populate the TSC and when to do it.  To that end, I will 
be calling for a vote on this topic during the TSC meeting on Thursday, April 
19th, 2018.  Please review the material below and provide comments or questions 
if you have any.  Also, please be prepared to vote on this topic, or have a 
delegate ready to vote in your stead on Thursday.  The format of the vote will 
be similar to the following:

First, we will vote on if we want to change the way we populate the TSC after 
Beijing or after Casablanca.  Remember that in order to change the date to 
after Casablanca (Nov. 2018), we will need a 2/3 super majority to modify the 
Charter with the new date.  So the first vote will be:

Shall the TSC modify the ONAP Charter to change the date in which the "Startup 
Period" ends (as defined in Section 2.b.i) to be November 16th, 2018? -1, 0, +1

If this vote passes, we are done for now.  If it does not pass with a 2/3 
approval, we will populate a new TSC shortly after Beijing is released.  To do 
so, we will vote on the following proposals:

Proposal #0
Abstain from voting on population method.

Proposal #1:
The TSC Accepts the "TSC Composition Proposal" presented by Chris Donley and 
Stephen Terrill during the TSC Meeting held on April 5th 2018.  The proposal in 
it's entirety is located here: 
https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/25439857/TSC%20Composition%20proposal%20v2.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1522934062000&api=v2

Proposal #2:
The TSC Accepts the "TSC Composition Proposal" presented by Chris Donley and 
Stephen Terrill during the TSC Meeting held on April 5th 2018 with the 
following amendment:
​That i​
n addition to
​ the​
15 elected TSC members
​ in the original proposal​
, each end-user Platinum Member of LFN that ha
​s​
been a part of ONAP and/or LFN for less than 12 months from the time of the 
election,
​is​
allowed to appoint a representative to the TSC.

​Proposal #3:
The TSC Accepts the "TSC Composition Proposal" presented by Chris Donley and 
Stephen Terrill during the TSC Meeting held on April 5th 2018 with the 
following amendment:
​That in addition to the 15 elected TSC members in the original proposal, ​each 
end-user Platinum Member of LFN who does not otherwise have a representative 
(elected) on the TSC, is allowed to appoint a representative to the TSC.

Shall the TSC approve one of the above proposed methods of populating the TSC? 
0, 1, 2, 3

Please let me know if this sounds reasonable or if there is another way you 
would like to vote on these options or others for this topic.

Thanks,

Phil.

On Wed, Apr 11, 2018 at 4:59 PM, Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>> wrote:
Hello ONAP TSC:

I would like to keep the discussion moving regarding how and when we might 
choose to change the method of populating the TSC.

From the discussions thus far, I do not believe I heard much pushback on the 
population method suggested by Chris D. and Stephen T. at last week's TSC 
meeting.  In general, it called for a TSC where anyone can self-nominate to run 
for a TSC seat, and those that are allowed to vote must have demonstrated some 
form of previous participation in the project including code contributions, 
wiki contributions, subcommittee participation/leadership, etc.

If we were to do something like that, the one significant concern is end user 
representation, in particular since several of our end users have just joined 
the project recently and are ramping up their plans, and developer capabilities 
to directly participate in the project.  Mazin has called for 50% end-user 
participation in the TSC, others have just expressed the general concern that 
the end users should still be represented "well" in the new structure.

We have also heard from several of the TSC members that now is not the right 
time to change the makeup of the TSC and we should leave it the same at least 
until Casablanca (Nov. 2018).  A vote was held on this with a significant 
number of voters 

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC meeting on Mar/22 - Giles Heron will be my alternate.

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Thanks Kenny. I also updated the wiki. Frank

From: Kenny Paul 
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. März 2018 15:42
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
Cc: onap-tsc ; Giles Heron (giheron) 

Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] TSC meeting on Mar/22 - Giles Heron will be my 
alternate.

Thanks Frank.
Please remember to update the Proxy 
List<https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Proxy+List>


Best Regards,
-kenny
On Mar 21, 2018, at 7:11 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>> wrote:


Unfortunately I won’t be able to attend the TSC meeting on Mar/22. Giles Heron 
(cc’ed) will be my alternate.

Frank
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org<mailto:ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org>
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] TSC meeting on Mar/22 - Giles Heron will be my alternate.

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Unfortunately I won't be able to attend the TSC meeting on Mar/22. Giles Heron 
(cc'ed) will be my alternate.

Frank
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] TSC Agenda point

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

We should probably also discuss the needs of the ONAP technical community for 
2018 - so that those can be rolled up into to the LFN TAC.
I'm not sure whether someone started a wiki to discuss those. Just in case, 
I've created a first draft at: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2018+Plans - 
and also added a line item to the agenda of the next TSC.
Appreciate if everyone could take a look, comment and potentially add.

Thanks, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Mittwoch, 21. Februar 2018 08:34
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] TSC Agenda point

Hi Kenny, Phil,

Just a heads up that I have placed an topic on the TSC agenda for this Thursday 
to request your feedback on the status of the implementation of the TSC 
decision (from 11/1) regarding the integration of coverity for static code 
scanning into the CI/CD toolchain.

Best Regards,

Steve.


[Image removed by sender. Ericsson]
STEPHEN TERRILL
Technology Specialist
POA Architecture and Solutions
Business Unit Digital Services

Ericsson
Ericsson R&D Center, via de los Poblados 13
28033, Madrid, Spain
Phone +34 339 3005
Mobile +34 609 168 515
stephen.terr...@ericsson.com
www.ericsson.com


[Image removed by sender. 
http://www.ericsson.com/current_campaign]

Legal entity: Ericsson España S.A, compay registration number ESA288568603. 
This Communication is Confidential. We only send and receive email on the basis 
of the terms set out at 
www.ericsson.com/email_disclaimer

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative to the LFN TAC

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Hi Phil,

Thanks for putting forward a recommendation. I support your suggested approach.

Regards, Frank

From: Phil Robb [mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Dienstag, 23. Januar 2018 14:16
To: CHAWKI Jamil IMT/OLN 
Cc: Stephen Terrill ; Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
; GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) ; Alla 
Goldner ; Gadiyar, Rajesh ; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org P ; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Hello All:

I appreciate everyone's thoughtful discussion on the topic.

This may be anecdotal evidence, but I note that OPNFV, and FD.io, who both 
still have TSCs populated by Platinum Designates chose to have the TSC Chair be 
the TAC representative (our option #1), while ODL, who has a fully 
community-elected TSC chose to allow any Committer to self-nominate and run 
(our option #3).  I have noticed that the ODL TSC, since being fully elected, 
often leans toward the broadest, most inclusive election process for most 
decisions.  I believe they assume that in the end the community will make the 
right choice if given the opportunity to choose.. including electing the TSC 
Chair for the TAC position if he/she runs for it... after all, the person got 
elected to the highest position within the project by the same method.

For ONAP, it may make sense to have Mazin fill the TAC representative role as 
TSC Chair (since he has indicated he is willing and able) until after the 
Beijing release.  Once we elect a new TSC post Beijing, let's give them the 
opportunity to discuss and agree upon the best way to populate the TAC Rep. for 
ONAP going forward from there.

If that idea resonates with the TSC, then I suggest we put a vote up for that 
during the TSC meeting this week.  ONAP is the last to decide their method, and 
I would like to get the first TAC meeting scheduled ASAP.

Best,

Phil.



On Tue, Jan 23, 2018 at 12:29 PM, 
mailto:jamil.cha...@orange.com>> wrote:
Hello
I agree with Steve that we need  to select an option. Phil do you have a 
proposal for selection?
Best
Jamil

Le 22 janv. 2018 à 23:45, Stephen Terrill 
mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>> a écrit :
Hi,

Originally there were three proposals put on the table, have we settled on that:

  1.  Just have the TSC Chair represent ONAP in the TAC
  2.  Have the TSC vote for some TSC member to represent ONAP in the TAC
  3.  Have the Committers vote for some Committer-At-Large to represent ONAP in 
the TAC
It sounds like we are settling on #2 but there were also voices for #1.

One approach is that after a TSC chair election and subsequent appointment, 
allow the TSC chair to decide to follow #1 or delegate it to the TSC #2 for 
that year.  If we were to agree with that, we should apply the same principle 
from now.

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: 19 January 2018 08:11
To: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
mailto:ma...@research.att.com>>; Alla Goldner 
mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; Gadiyar, Rajesh 
mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>; Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> P 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Thanks Mazin. Appreciated. IMHO it would be great if the TAC representative 
would also be part of the TSC.
Would it make sense to reassess the TAC representation post the composition of 
the a new TSC?

Thanks, Frank

From: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) [mailto:ma...@research.att.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 18. Januar 2018 19:03
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>>; 
Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>; 
Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> P 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Team,

I am happy to represent ONAP at TAC for one year. A new ONAP chair will need to 
be selected post Beijing release
so I will be stepping down as a Chair.

If there are several candidates who would like to represent ONAP at TAC then I 
suggest we go for a vote.
Phil can help us to start a nomination and voting process.

Mazin



On Jan 18, 2018, at 7:27 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>> wrote:

Given that during the transition period into the LFN structure some continuity 
would make sense, #1 would be the straight-forward choice, assuming that M

[onap-tsc] ONAP TSC meeting on Jan/25

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Dear ONAP TSC,

unfortunately I won't be able to attend the next ONAP TSC meeting. Giles Heron 
(cc'ed) will be my alternate for this meeting.

Regards, Frank
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative to the LFN TAC

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Thanks Mazin. Appreciated. IMHO it would be great if the TAC representative 
would also be part of the TSC.
Would it make sense to reassess the TAC representation post the composition of 
the a new TSC?

Thanks, Frank

From: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) [mailto:ma...@research.att.com]
Sent: Donnerstag, 18. Januar 2018 19:03
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) ; Alla Goldner 
; Gadiyar, Rajesh ; Phil 
Robb 
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org P ; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Team,

I am happy to represent ONAP at TAC for one year. A new ONAP chair will need to 
be selected post Beijing release
so I will be stepping down as a Chair.

If there are several candidates who would like to represent ONAP at TAC then I 
suggest we go for a vote.
Phil can help us to start a nomination and voting process.

Mazin




On Jan 18, 2018, at 7:27 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>> wrote:

Given that during the transition period into the LFN structure some continuity 
would make sense, #1 would be the straight-forward choice, assuming that Mazin 
has the cycles (Mazin, any thoughts?). Once we move to a newly composed TSC in 
May, we could also re-assess the question how we’d choose the TAC 
representative for ONAP.
BTW/ - several other communities, .e.g. FD.io<http://FD.io> and OPNFV went with 
the same approach – i.e. have the TSC chair also be the TAC representative.

Regards, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2018 21:41
To: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Yes.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology




From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 9:24 PM
To: Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Hello Rajesh and Alla:

Just so I'm clear on your +1s, you are agreeing with Jason's comment, with a 
preference for #1 unless the TSC Chair does not want to sign up for the 
responsibility, in which case we move to #2?

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Gadiyar, Rajesh 
mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>> wrote:
+1

From: mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> 
on behalf of Jason Hunt mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>>
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 9:38 AM
To: Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
Cc: "onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>" 
mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>>, 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>

Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

#1 makes the most sense to me, but if Mazin feels it's too much for the chair 
to take on, #2 is a fine backup option.


Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM

Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: djh...@us.ibm.com<mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>
Twitter: @DJHunt




From:Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
To:"HU, BIN" mailto:bh5...@att.com>>, Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>, onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Date:01/11/2018 11:00 AM
Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populatethe 
   ONAPRepresentative to the LFN TAC
Sent by:
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>




Support Option 1; as TSC Chair for a particular stream has broader 360 view of 
the program including roadmap, priorities etc.

thanks & regards,
Dhananjay Pavgi
+91 98220 22264

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of HU, BIN
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:24 PM
To: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Just FYI:
-  OPNFV TSC voted on Tuesday (Jan 9) to have TSC Chair to represent 
OPNFV in TAC
-  
fd.io<https://urldefense.proof

Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative to the LFN TAC

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Hi Lisa,

thanks – I didn’t mean to say that the TSC has to choose a MAC representative. 
I just meant that “the technical project” (i.e. ONAP) needs a representative on 
the MAC, and hence we (as a community) need to figure out how to choose this 
representative.

Regards, Frank

From: Lisa Caywood [mailto:lcayw...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Donnerstag, 18. Januar 2018 17:59
To: Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
Cc: Alla Goldner ; Phil Robb 
; Gadiyar, Rajesh ; 
onap-tsc ; onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Frank, this is not accurate. There will be workgroups under the MAC focused on 
Project-level marketing. It's my expectation that those workgroups will liaise 
regularly with their corresponding TSCs as has been the case all along. And 
those workgroups also report to the MAC. But TSCs do not need to have 
representatives on the MAC.

Regards, Lisa

On Thu, Jan 18, 2018 at 6:11 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) 
mailto:fbroc...@cisco.com>> wrote:
BTW/ - on a related topic – from what I understand, the marketing committee 
(MAC) is also to include 1 rep from each Technical Project (where possible): We 
probably also need to choose a representative for the MAC.

Frank

From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: Donnerstag, 18. Januar 2018 13:27
To: 'Alla Goldner' mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Given that during the transition period into the LFN structure some continuity 
would make sense, #1 would be the straight-forward choice, assuming that Mazin 
has the cycles (Mazin, any thoughts?). Once we move to a newly composed TSC in 
May, we could also re-assess the question how we’d choose the TAC 
representative for ONAP.
BTW/ - several other communities, .e.g. FD.io and OPNFV went with the same 
approach – i.e. have the TSC chair also be the TAC representative.

Regards, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2018 21:41
To: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Yes.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D3908B.27C03C40]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 9:24 PM
To: Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Hello Rajesh and Alla:

Just so I'm clear on your +1s, you are agreeing with Jason's comment, with a 
preference for #1 unless the TSC Chair does not want to sign up for the 
responsibility, in which case we move to #2?

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Gadiyar, Rajesh 
mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>> wrote:
+1

From: mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> 
on behalf of Jason Hunt mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>>
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 9:38 AM
To: Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
Cc: "onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>" 
mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>>, 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>

Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

#1 makes the most sense to me, but if Mazin feels it's too much for the chair 
to take on, #2 is a fine backup option.


Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM

Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: djh...@us.ibm.com<mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>
Twitter: @DJHunt




From:Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
To:"HU, BIN" mailto:bh5...@att.com>>, Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>, onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Date:01/11/2018 11:00 AM
Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populatethe 
   ONAPRepresentative to the LFN TAC
Sent by:
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-

Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative to the LFN TAC

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

BTW/ - on a related topic – from what I understand, the marketing committee 
(MAC) is also to include 1 rep from each Technical Project (where possible): We 
probably also need to choose a representative for the MAC.

Frank

From: Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
Sent: Donnerstag, 18. Januar 2018 13:27
To: 'Alla Goldner' ; Phil Robb 
; Gadiyar, Rajesh 
Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Given that during the transition period into the LFN structure some continuity 
would make sense, #1 would be the straight-forward choice, assuming that Mazin 
has the cycles (Mazin, any thoughts?). Once we move to a newly composed TSC in 
May, we could also re-assess the question how we’d choose the TAC 
representative for ONAP.
BTW/ - several other communities, .e.g. FD.io and OPNFV went with the same 
approach – i.e. have the TSC chair also be the TAC representative.

Regards, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2018 21:41
To: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Yes.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D3906E.96CDFA40]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 9:24 PM
To: Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Hello Rajesh and Alla:

Just so I'm clear on your +1s, you are agreeing with Jason's comment, with a 
preference for #1 unless the TSC Chair does not want to sign up for the 
responsibility, in which case we move to #2?

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Gadiyar, Rajesh 
mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>> wrote:
+1

From: mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> 
on behalf of Jason Hunt mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>>
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 9:38 AM
To: Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
Cc: "onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>" 
mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>>, 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>

Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

#1 makes the most sense to me, but if Mazin feels it's too much for the chair 
to take on, #2 is a fine backup option.


Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM

Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: djh...@us.ibm.com<mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>
Twitter: @DJHunt




From:Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
To:"HU, BIN" mailto:bh5...@att.com>>, Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>, onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Date:01/11/2018 11:00 AM
Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populatethe 
   ONAPRepresentative to the LFN TAC
Sent by:
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>




Support Option 1; as TSC Chair for a particular stream has broader 360 view of 
the program including roadmap, priorities etc.

thanks & regards,
Dhananjay Pavgi
+91 98220 22264

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of HU, BIN
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:24 PM
To: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Just FYI:
-  OPNFV TSC voted on Tuesday (Jan 9) to have TSC Chair to represent 
OPNFV in TAC
-  fd.io<http://fd.io> voted the same today to have TSC Chair represent 
fd.io<http://fd.io> in TAC, if I am not mistaken.

Option 1 is used by both of our sister communities under the same LFN.

Just an FYI.

Thanks
Bin

From: 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org]
 On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 7:08 AM
To: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: [onap-tsc] We need to de

Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative to the LFN TAC

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Given that during the transition period into the LFN structure some continuity 
would make sense, #1 would be the straight-forward choice, assuming that Mazin 
has the cycles (Mazin, any thoughts?). Once we move to a newly composed TSC in 
May, we could also re-assess the question how we’d choose the TAC 
representative for ONAP.
BTW/ - several other communities, .e.g. FD.io and OPNFV went with the same 
approach – i.e. have the TSC chair also be the TAC representative.

Regards, Frank

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Donnerstag, 11. Januar 2018 21:41
To: Phil Robb ; Gadiyar, Rajesh 

Cc: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Yes.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D39060.09F2E5D0]

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 9:24 PM
To: Gadiyar, Rajesh mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>>
Cc: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Hello Rajesh and Alla:

Just so I'm clear on your +1s, you are agreeing with Jason's comment, with a 
preference for #1 unless the TSC Chair does not want to sign up for the 
responsibility, in which case we move to #2?

Best,

Phil.

On Thu, Jan 11, 2018 at 12:41 PM, Gadiyar, Rajesh 
mailto:rajesh.gadi...@intel.com>> wrote:
+1

From: mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>> 
on behalf of Jason Hunt mailto:djh...@us.ibm.com>>
Date: Thursday, January 11, 2018 at 9:38 AM
To: Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
Cc: "onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org" 
mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org>>, 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>

Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

#1 makes the most sense to me, but if Mazin feels it's too much for the chair 
to take on, #2 is a fine backup option.


Regards,
Jason Hunt
Executive Software Architect, IBM

Phone: 314-749-7422
Email: djh...@us.ibm.com
Twitter: @DJHunt




From:Dhananjay Pavgi 
mailto:dp00476...@techmahindra.com>>
To:"HU, BIN" mailto:bh5...@att.com>>, Phil Robb 
mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>, onap-tsc 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Date:01/11/2018 11:00 AM
Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populatethe 
   ONAPRepresentative to the LFN TAC
Sent by:
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org




Support Option 1; as TSC Chair for a particular stream has broader 360 view of 
the program including roadmap, priorities etc.

thanks & regards,
Dhananjay Pavgi
+91 98220 22264

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of HU, BIN
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 10:24 PM
To: Phil Robb mailto:pr...@linuxfoundation.org>>; 
onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP 
Representative to the LFN TAC

Just FYI:
-  OPNFV TSC voted on Tuesday (Jan 9) to have TSC Chair to represent 
OPNFV in TAC
-  fd.io voted the same today to have TSC Chair represent 
fd.io in TAC, if I am not mistaken.

Option 1 is used by both of our sister communities under the same LFN.

Just an FYI.

Thanks
Bin

From: 
onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org]
 On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, January 11, 2018 7:08 AM
To: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Subject: [onap-tsc] We need to decide how to populate the ONAP Representative 
to the LFN TAC

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

Now that ONAP is a part of the Linux Foundation Networking (LFN) Directed Fund, 
we need to decide how we are going to populate our ONAP Representative in the 
LFN Technical Advisory Council (TAC).

As a reminder, the Scope of the responsibilities of the TAC are:
=
•Scope of responsibility
•Recommend acceptance or removal of projects under the Umbrella to be approved 
by the Governing Board
•Focus on activities that drive collaboration and integration across projects 
(e.g. collaborative development, testing, etc)
•Elected TAC Chair provides guidance to Governing Board on investment needs of 
the project communities

=

Some of the options for us to populate our representative include:
1) Just have the TSC Chair represent ONAP in the TAC
2) Have the TSC vote for some TSC member to represent ONAP in the T

Re: [onap-tsc] Planning for ONAP TSC Elections

[Frank Brockners (fbrockne)]

Hi Phil,

your suggestion to keep the current structure stable until Beijing is released 
makes sense. I also support your proposal to form a task force which compiles a 
suggestion for TSC composition and membership in the “stable” phase moving 
forward. Other projects which move to LFN have taken a similar approach, i.e. 
form a WG and aggregate suggestions. Should such a task force be established, 
I’d like to participate.

Thanks, Frank


From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Mittwoch, 13. Dezember 2017 16:03
To: onap-tsc 
Subject: [onap-tsc] Planning for ONAP TSC Elections

Hello ONAP TSC Members:

As documented in the ONAP Project Charter, the TSC is tasked with figuring out 
how to populate the TSC in a meritocratic manner beginning 12 months after the 
project launch, which was March 2017.  Hence it is time to start planning this 
transition.  To kick this process off, I have the following suggestions:

- Given that March 2018 is in the middle of the Beijing release cycle, I 
suggest we postpone the TSC election until directly after the Beijing release 
in late May.  We should discuss and approve our method of populating the TSC by 
the end of March, but not actually execute it until late May or early June.  
Please let me know if you think this is a good or bad idea.

- I suggest we form a small workgroup to create an initial proposal for 
discussion with the broader TSC.  Some topics to consider when architecting the 
TSC makeup include:
- Constituencies.  Are there different constituencies that need 
representation on the TSC?
- PTLs.  Having an election of PTLs to populate the TSC one possible way to 
do it.  These PTLs may be from different constituencies, or just At-Large.
- Committers-At-Large (CALs).  Some seats can come from the committer 
community at large.
- Particular Roles.  Possibly have the PTL from the Integration Team, or 
the Release Manager as voting members of the TSC as an example of "special" 
roles that should have TSC representation.
- Company Caps - To ensure that a single company does not have too much 
voting power within the TSC, a limit (usually defined as a percentage) is 
imposed on how many TSC members can come from the same organization (or 
affiliated organization).
- TSC size.  Common guidance is to keep the TSC size somewhere between 7 
and 19.  11,13, and 15 are common sizes.  Depending on how the TSC is populated 
the size may vary or may be static.

Please let me know your thoughts.  If you think a workgroup to put an initial 
proposal together is a good idea, please indicate that.  If you think we should 
have a few open discussions to set an initial direction please indicate that.  
If a workgroup seems reasonable, and you would like to participate in that 
group please indicate that as well.

I look forward to the discussion.

Thanks,

Phil.
--
Phil Robb
Executive Director, OpenDaylight Project
VP Operations - Networking & Orchestration, The Linux Foundation
(O) 970-229-5949
(M) 970-420-4292
Skype: Phil.Robb
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc