Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

Good morning Chaker, ONAP TSC (and proxies),

An updated version has been uploaded in JIRA including the feedback collected 
this morning (EMEA/APAC call).
Have a look at the slide 8, item #4.
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41

Many thanks and regards
Catherine


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#4042): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/4042
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27630566/21656
Mute #tac: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=tac&subid=2743226
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[gildas.lani...@huawei.com]

Hi Satyendra,

Welcome in board.
The specific document you are referring can be found at 
https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/4016?p=,,,20,0,0,0::Created,,%23tac,20,2,0,27630566

FYI, any email exchanged within the LF mailing list can be found at 
https://lists.onap.org .We have a lot of Archives.

Thanks,
Gildas
ONAP Release Manager
1 415 238 6287

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Satyendra Kr Verma
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 5:00 AM
To: Casey Cain ; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; 
stephen.terr...@ericsson.com
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Everyone,

As, I joined this community yesterday (3-Nov-2018) only, and did not receive 
the "draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the LFN TAC"

Will appreciate if somebody will send the above document.

Brief introdution about myself -

I am having 20 years of experience in Telecom OSS/BSS, specially Service 
Fulfillment (Provisioning and Activation) and Service Assurance (FCAPS) and 
worked with many large OSS/BSS transformation projects. Rest we can discuss, as 
we move ahead...

Thanks and Regards,
Satyendra
+91 7760988255

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> on behalf of Stephen 
Terrill mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>
Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2018 6:17 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac


Hi Chaker,



Thanks for the good summary.



My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don't see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don't 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don't see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.



I had one question though - the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding - I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn't see reported).



BR,



Steve



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Hello TSC members and proxies,



Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.



I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.



Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document



I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote



Please review and comment.



Regards,
Chaker















From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,



Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.



Thank you both for your feedback.

The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.



Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request



Many thanks & regards

Catherine



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Hi Srini,



Thanks for your input..



I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.

I plan to participate in the review, and I hope yo

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac - Session 1 (NAR)

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Hi Catherine,

Is this meeting still on?

Regards,
Chaker

-Original Appointment-
From: Lefevre, Catherine [mailto:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 7:35 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac 
- Session 1 (NAR)
When: Monday, November 05, 2018 7:00 PM-7:30 PM (UTC+01:00) Brussels, 
Copenhagen, Madrid, Paris.
Where: https://zoom.us/j/200103571


The TAC request was to review the Tungsten Fabric Project Data proposal.

https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/48/html/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten_fabric/project_data.html
If the ONAP TSC has any feedback then the TAC team was suggesting that we 
submit them directly to gerrit where the .rst file is located:
https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/20/docs/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten_fabric/project_data.rst<https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/>






-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#4027): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/4027
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27858125/21656
Mute #tac: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=tac&subid=2743226
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Brian]

Unfortunately I dont think TF is bring in new LFN companies but I could be 
wrong. LFN is pretty broad right now already.

Brian


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Alla 
Goldner
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 8:55 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi,

As far as  I understand, membership (and the fees our companies psy) is in LFN, 
therefore if one more project becomes part of LFN, it would actually mean 
spreading the same amount of money amongst more projects i.e. each project gets 
less.
This, of course, may not be TRUE in case this new project brings some new 
not-yet-LFN-members.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D474E5.9841AA00]

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 3:43 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Thanks Steve for the comments.

As for my comments  regarding the budget they were my personal conclusion. it 
would be useful to know how the budget would be handled, not only for these 
specific project, but for any/all future projects.


Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 7:48 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Chaker,

Thanks for the good summary.

My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don’t see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don’t 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don’t see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.

I had one question though – the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding – I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn’t see reported).

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello TSC members and proxies,

Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.

I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.

Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document

I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote

Please review and comment.

Regards,
Chaker







From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey – feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my 

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Alla Goldner]

Hi,

As far as  I understand, membership (and the fees our companies psy) is in LFN, 
therefore if one more project becomes part of LFN, it would actually mean 
spreading the same amount of money amongst more projects i.e. each project gets 
less.
This, of course, may not be TRUE in case this new project brings some new 
not-yet-LFN-members.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D4751F.F605D3C0]

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2018 3:43 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Thanks Steve for the comments.

As for my comments  regarding the budget they were my personal conclusion. it 
would be useful to know how the budget would be handled, not only for these 
specific project, but for any/all future projects.


Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 7:48 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Chaker,

Thanks for the good summary.

My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don't see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don't 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don't see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.

I had one question though - the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding - I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn't see reported).

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello TSC members and proxies,

Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.

I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.

Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document

I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote

Please review and comment.

Regards,
Chaker







From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Thanks Steve for the comments.

As for my comments  regarding the budget they were my personal conclusion. it 
would be useful to know how the budget would be handled, not only for these 
specific project, but for any/all future projects.


Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Stephen Terrill
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 7:48 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Chaker,

Thanks for the good summary.

My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don't see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don't 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don't see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.

I had one question though - the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding - I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn't see reported).

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello TSC members and proxies,

Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.

I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.

Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document

I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote

Please review and comment.

Regards,
Chaker







From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4

[onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac - Session 2 (APAC/EMEA)

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Romance Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T03
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=10
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN="Lefevre, Catherine":MAILTO:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-tsc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:The TAC request was to review the Tungsten Fabri
 c Project Data proposal.\nhttps://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl
 -jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/48/html/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten
 _fabric/project_data.html\nIf the ONAP TSC has any feedback then the TAC t
 eam was suggesting that we submit them directly to gerrit where the .rst f
 ile is located:\nhttps://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/20/doc
 s/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten_fabric/project_data.rst\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrai
 l) #tac - Session 2 (APAC/EMEA)
DTSTART;TZID=Romance Standard Time:20181106T103000
DTEND;TZID=Romance Standard Time:20181106T11
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E00890782AF80B75D401000
 01000DF2B56069ED12749BD6C93CF61D0743C
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20181105T123458Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:2
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://zoom.us/j/200103571
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:2
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:495302626
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR

[onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac - Session 1 (NAR)

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Romance Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T03
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=10
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN="Lefevre, Catherine":MAILTO:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-tsc@l
 ists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:The TAC request was to review the Tungsten Fabri
 c Project Data proposal.\nhttps://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl
 -jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/48/html/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten
 _fabric/project_data.html\nIf the ONAP TSC has any feedback then the TAC t
 eam was suggesting that we submit them directly to gerrit where the .rst f
 ile is located:\nhttps://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/20/doc
 s/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten_fabric/project_data.rst\n\n\n\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrai
 l) #tac - Session 1 (NAR)
DTSTART;TZID=Romance Standard Time:20181105T19
DTEND;TZID=Romance Standard Time:20181105T193000
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E008908444230B75D401000
 010002BADD2E172949546925C8DA6FA5C3C2B
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20181105T123423Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:1
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:https://zoom.us/j/200103571
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:493205474
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
BEGIN:VALARM
ACTION:DISPLAY
DESCRIPTION:REMINDER
TRIGGER;RELATED=START:-PT15M
END:VALARM
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

Good morning Chaker, Srini, Stephen and the other ONAP TSC members (and 
proxies),

My apologies for the delayed response.

I confirm that the TAC request was only to review the Tungsten Fabric Project 
Data proposal.
https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/48/html/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten_fabric/project_data.html

If we have any feedback then the TAC team was suggesting that we submit them 
directly to gerrit where the .rst file is located
https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/20/docs/lifecycle/lfn_entry/tungsten_fabric/project_data.rst

Concerning the Tungsten Fabric Spending, their requests are already considered 
and under review by LFN Finance committee.

I will setup a call later today in case of any additional question

Many thanks and regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Stephen Terrill
Sent: Sunday, November 04, 2018 1:48 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Chaker,

Thanks for the good summary.

My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don't see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don't 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don't see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.

I had one question though - the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding - I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn't see reported).

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello TSC members and proxies,

Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.

I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.

Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document

I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote

Please review and comment.

Regards,
Chaker







From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in 

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Satyendra Kr Verma]

Hi Everyone,

As, I joined this community yesterday (3-Nov-2018) only, and did not receive 
the "draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the LFN TAC"

Will appreciate if somebody will send the above document.

Brief introdution about myself -

I am having 20 years of experience in Telecom OSS/BSS, specially Service 
Fulfillment (Provisioning and Activation) and Service Assurance (FCAPS) and 
worked with many large OSS/BSS transformation projects. Rest we can discuss, as 
we move ahead...

Thanks and Regards,
Satyendra
+91 7760988255

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  on behalf of Stephen 
Terrill 
Sent: Sunday, November 4, 2018 6:17 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac


Hi Chaker,



Thanks for the good summary.



My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don’t see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don’t 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don’t see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.



I had one question though – the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding – I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn’t see reported).



BR,



Steve



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Chaker Al 
Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Hello TSC members and proxies,



Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.



I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.



Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document



I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote



Please review and comment.



Regards,
Chaker















From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,



Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.



Thank you both for your feedback.

The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.



Casey – feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request



Many thanks & regards

Catherine



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Hi Srini,



Thanks for your input..



I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.

I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.



Regards,
Chaker





From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac



Hi Catherine and Chaker,



My 2 cents.



There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.



Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?



Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S bas

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Stephen Terrill]

Hi Chaker,

Thanks for the good summary.

My assumption is that irrespective of this decision ONAP retains independence 
on how to relate to TF in terms of it being either another external controller 
or a technology that would bring benefit in ONAP. I don't see that we would 
conclude on a common view of those before the feedback is required, however 
with the assumption of the independence on how to relate to or adopt I don't 
foresee any reason not to move ahead.  I agree with the comments that it is 
critical that it becomes an open community etc, however I don't see the ONAP 
project reviewing that part as that would be upto TAC.

I had one question though - the summary indicated that this would bring in more 
Funding - I do not understand that conclusion from an ONAP Project perspective 
(i.e. inclusion of TF will not automatically result in neither more funding to 
LF nor to the project unless it comes with additional membership which I 
couldn't see reported).

BR,

Steve

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Chaker Al 
Hakim
Sent: Saturday 3 November 2018 17:55
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello TSC members and proxies,

Attached please find a draft version to the TF Proposal for inclusion in the 
LFN TAC.

I also  added  all the email exchanges related to this topic so that we are all 
reading the same threads.

Once I  have a community agreement on this proposal  I will  add it to the jira 
as a supporting document

I propose we do the review via  email as It might be too challenging to get a 
timeslot that is convenient to all the members and in time for next weeks vote

Please review and comment.

Regards,
Chaker







From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

I plan to set up a meeting early next week with the ONAP TSC to discuss. There 
seems to be different opinions/answers on what this request is all about.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Brian
Sent: Friday, November 02, 2018 8:50 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Cc: Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

We are in the review cycle for the TF official inclusion and the ONAP TSC Chair 
votes for the ONAP community on the LFN TAC so ... Chaker volunteered to do the 
analysis for ONAP Community on how we should vote.

I think this come up next Wednesday for a vote in LFN TAC.

Brian


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Chaker 
Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 6:44 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Cc: Casey Cain mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Thanks Phil.

Perhaps we should put this effort on hold until everyone has had a chance to 
weigh in on it.

Regards,
Chaker



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 1:36 PM
To: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Cc: Casey Cain mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello All:

A slight correction to Mazin's input.

The request isn't associated with TF changing it's state.  This is actually 
part of the "re-induction" review.  When TF went through it's original 
induction earlier in the year (starting in March), the Governing Board 
requested that an Induction Process be created and documented for any/all new 
projects seeking to join LFN so that all reviews would be consistent and 
equitable.  The TAC at that time requested to lead the creation of that process 
from the Governing Board (GB) and that request was granted.  The TAC then 
determined that it would take until September or so before it would be complete 
with the creation of the process.  That left the TF project in limbo for a 
signification period of time.  So the GB in June "Conditionally Approved" the 
induction of TF into LFN with the requirement that TF go through a re-induction 
once the Induction process was in place.  The TAC finished their work and 
produced the following two artifacts to guide inductions [0][1].

The TF project has filled out the Data Template here [2].

I'm not sure exactly what the TAC's request is to the ONAP community.  For 
that, I defer to Casey and Cathrine as I was unable to attend the meeting where 
this request was apparently made.

I hope this helps.

[0]https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/lifecycle/project_data_template.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__logs.opendaylight.org_releng_vex-2Dyul-2Dodl-2Djenkins-2D1_lfn-2Dprocess-2Drtd-2Dverify-2Dany_26_html_lifecycle_project-5Fdata-5Ftemplate.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=e3d1ehx3DI5AoMgDmi2Fzw&m=bxr2kSi8nhOWNIi0jqhp-SUJAqLB9PN47pWlPIdd_M0&s=-GZ7ye4PDVDdZHfgbzulOT8Wq87SAJwg9bdTvy5bI4o&e=>
[1]https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/principles.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__logs.opendaylight.org_releng_vex-2Dyul-2Dodl-2Djenkins-2D1_lfn-2Dprocess-2Drtd-2Dverify-2Dany_26_html_principles.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=e3d1ehx3DI5AoMgDmi2Fzw&m=bxr2kSi8nhOWNIi0jqhp-SUJAqLB9PN47pWlPIdd_M0&s=3JjFl4A4DL9r8N4aJNsR6mnwTSC4CqFlSKGa4cYN2Yw&e=>
[2]https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gerrit.linuxfoundation.org_infra_-23_c_12880_&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=e3d1ehx3DI5AoMgDmi2Fzw&m=bxr2kSi8nhOWNIi0jqhp-SUJAqLB9PN47pWlPIdd_M0&s=9pFfLgxdytpVt209u6rzqU9sg_0iUWyoeg7odEoSD-I&e=>

Best,

Phil.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:57 AM Chaker Al Hakim 
mailto:chaker.al.ha...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Thanks Mazin, that’s helpful.

So the question now seems to be more related to the process of promoting a 
project from incubation state to become a  fully approved LFN project.
If that’s the case then we would need to also look at 1) how other projects 
were promoted in the past, perhaps we can use (Akraino or Acumos as an example) 
 2) funding and resources and 3) impact on overall budget.

The other option is to collectively decide that a new process is needed to 
address this case, and to also address similar cases in the future, and would 
be considered a LFN governance item that the GB should take u

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Brian]

We are in the review cycle for the TF official inclusion and the ONAP TSC Chair 
votes for the ONAP community on the LFN TAC so ... Chaker volunteered to do the 
analysis for ONAP Community on how we should vote.

I think this come up next Wednesday for a vote in LFN TAC.

Brian


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org  On Behalf Of Chaker Al 
Hakim
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 6:44 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Cc: Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Thanks Phil.

Perhaps we should put this effort on hold until everyone has had a chance to 
weigh in on it.

Regards,
Chaker



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 1:36 PM
To: onap-tsc mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>
Cc: Casey Cain mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello All:

A slight correction to Mazin's input.

The request isn't associated with TF changing it's state.  This is actually 
part of the "re-induction" review.  When TF went through it's original 
induction earlier in the year (starting in March), the Governing Board 
requested that an Induction Process be created and documented for any/all new 
projects seeking to join LFN so that all reviews would be consistent and 
equitable.  The TAC at that time requested to lead the creation of that process 
from the Governing Board (GB) and that request was granted.  The TAC then 
determined that it would take until September or so before it would be complete 
with the creation of the process.  That left the TF project in limbo for a 
signification period of time.  So the GB in June "Conditionally Approved" the 
induction of TF into LFN with the requirement that TF go through a re-induction 
once the Induction process was in place.  The TAC finished their work and 
produced the following two artifacts to guide inductions [0][1].

The TF project has filled out the Data Template here [2].

I'm not sure exactly what the TAC's request is to the ONAP community.  For 
that, I defer to Casey and Cathrine as I was unable to attend the meeting where 
this request was apparently made.

I hope this helps.

[0]https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/lifecycle/project_data_template.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__logs.opendaylight.org_releng_vex-2Dyul-2Dodl-2Djenkins-2D1_lfn-2Dprocess-2Drtd-2Dverify-2Dany_26_html_lifecycle_project-5Fdata-5Ftemplate.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=e3d1ehx3DI5AoMgDmi2Fzw&m=bxr2kSi8nhOWNIi0jqhp-SUJAqLB9PN47pWlPIdd_M0&s=-GZ7ye4PDVDdZHfgbzulOT8Wq87SAJwg9bdTvy5bI4o&e=>
[1]https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/principles.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__logs.opendaylight.org_releng_vex-2Dyul-2Dodl-2Djenkins-2D1_lfn-2Dprocess-2Drtd-2Dverify-2Dany_26_html_principles.html&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=e3d1ehx3DI5AoMgDmi2Fzw&m=bxr2kSi8nhOWNIi0jqhp-SUJAqLB9PN47pWlPIdd_M0&s=3JjFl4A4DL9r8N4aJNsR6mnwTSC4CqFlSKGa4cYN2Yw&e=>
[2]https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gerrit.linuxfoundation.org_infra_-23_c_12880_&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=e3d1ehx3DI5AoMgDmi2Fzw&m=bxr2kSi8nhOWNIi0jqhp-SUJAqLB9PN47pWlPIdd_M0&s=9pFfLgxdytpVt209u6rzqU9sg_0iUWyoeg7odEoSD-I&e=>

Best,

Phil.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:57 AM Chaker Al Hakim 
mailto:chaker.al.ha...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Thanks Mazin, that’s helpful.

So the question now seems to be more related to the process of promoting a 
project from incubation state to become a  fully approved LFN project.
If that’s the case then we would need to also look at 1) how other projects 
were promoted in the past, perhaps we can use (Akraino or Acumos as an example) 
 2) funding and resources and 3) impact on overall budget.

The other option is to collectively decide that a new process is needed to 
address this case, and to also address similar cases in the future, and would 
be considered a LFN governance item that the GB should take up

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>] On Behalf Of 
GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 8:17 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Cc: Casey Cain mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Chaker,

My understanding that TF is an incubation project. Remember projects have 
different  lifecycle under LFN.
TF needs

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Thanks Phil.

Perhaps we should put this effort on hold until everyone has had a chance to 
weigh in on it.

Regards,
Chaker



From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Phil Robb
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 1:36 PM
To: onap-tsc 
Cc: Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hello All:

A slight correction to Mazin's input.

The request isn't associated with TF changing it's state.  This is actually 
part of the "re-induction" review.  When TF went through it's original 
induction earlier in the year (starting in March), the Governing Board 
requested that an Induction Process be created and documented for any/all new 
projects seeking to join LFN so that all reviews would be consistent and 
equitable.  The TAC at that time requested to lead the creation of that process 
from the Governing Board (GB) and that request was granted.  The TAC then 
determined that it would take until September or so before it would be complete 
with the creation of the process.  That left the TF project in limbo for a 
signification period of time.  So the GB in June "Conditionally Approved" the 
induction of TF into LFN with the requirement that TF go through a re-induction 
once the Induction process was in place.  The TAC finished their work and 
produced the following two artifacts to guide inductions [0][1].

The TF project has filled out the Data Template here [2].

I'm not sure exactly what the TAC's request is to the ONAP community.  For 
that, I defer to Casey and Cathrine as I was unable to attend the meeting where 
this request was apparently made.

I hope this helps.

[0]https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/lifecycle/project_data_template.html
[1]https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/principles.html
[2]https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/

Best,

Phil.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:57 AM Chaker Al Hakim 
mailto:chaker.al.ha...@huawei.com>> wrote:
Thanks Mazin, that’s helpful.

So the question now seems to be more related to the process of promoting a 
project from incubation state to become a  fully approved LFN project.
If that’s the case then we would need to also look at 1) how other projects 
were promoted in the past, perhaps we can use (Akraino or Acumos as an example) 
 2) funding and resources and 3) impact on overall budget.

The other option is to collectively decide that a new process is needed to 
address this case, and to also address similar cases in the future, and would 
be considered a LFN governance item that the GB should take up

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>] On Behalf Of 
GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 8:17 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Cc: Casey Cain mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Chaker,

My understanding that TF is an incubation project. Remember projects have 
different  lifecycle under LFN.
TF needs to become an approved full project for it to be like ONAP.

Phil or Kenny can provide the official position here.

Mazin


On Nov 1, 2018, at 1:03 AM, Chaker Al Hakim 
mailto:chaker.al.ha...@huawei.com>> wrote:

Hi Catherine,

Srini and I briefly discussed  this request at the Montreal F2f meeting. We 
both thought that TF is already a separate project under the LFN umbrella. 
Furthermore, I have seen some TAC budget slides recently that showed TF as  a 
separate  budget line item which, I believe,  means that it is a already a 
separate project.

Can we please get additional clarifications on this request so that we’re 
working the right action item. Or perhaps we can have a quick call with the LFN 
team to better understand the scope of this request.


Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey – feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Phil Robb]

Hello All:

A slight correction to Mazin's input.

The request isn't associated with TF changing it's state.  This is actually
part of the "re-induction" review.  When TF went through it's original
induction earlier in the year (starting in March), the Governing Board
requested that an Induction Process be created and documented for any/all
new projects seeking to join LFN so that all reviews would be consistent
and equitable.  The TAC at that time requested to lead the creation of that
process from the Governing Board (GB) and that request was granted.  The
TAC then determined that it would take until September or so before it
would be complete with the creation of the process.  That left the TF
project in limbo for a signification period of time.  So the GB in June
"Conditionally Approved" the induction of TF into LFN with the requirement
that TF go through a re-induction once the Induction process was in place.
The TAC finished their work and produced the following two artifacts to
guide inductions [0][1].

The TF project has filled out the Data Template here [2].

I'm not sure exactly what the TAC's request is to the ONAP community.  For
that, I defer to Casey and Cathrine as I was unable to attend the meeting
where this request was apparently made.

I hope this helps.

[0]
https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/lifecycle/project_data_template.html
[1]
https://logs.opendaylight.org/releng/vex-yul-odl-jenkins-1/lfn-process-rtd-verify-any/26/html/principles.html
[2]https://gerrit.linuxfoundation.org/infra/#/c/12880/

Best,

Phil.


On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 10:57 AM Chaker Al Hakim 
wrote:

> Thanks Mazin, that’s helpful.
>
>
>
> So the question now seems to be more related to the process of promoting a
> project from incubation state to become a  fully approved LFN project.
>
> If that’s the case then we would need to also look at 1) how other
> projects were promoted in the past, perhaps we can use (Akraino or Acumos
> as an example)  2) funding and resources and 3) impact on overall budget.
>
>
>
> The other option is to collectively decide that a new process is needed to
> address this case, and to also address similar cases in the future, and
> would be considered a LFN governance item that the GB should take up
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Chaker
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] *On
> Behalf Of *GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 01, 2018 8:17 AM
> *To:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
> *Cc:* Casey Cain 
> *Subject:* Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely
> OpenContrail) #tac
>
>
>
> Chaker,
>
>
>
> My understanding that TF is an incubation project. Remember projects have
> different  lifecycle under LFN.
>
> TF needs to become an approved full project for it to be like ONAP.
>
>
>
> Phil or Kenny can provide the official position here.
>
>
>
> Mazin
>
>
>
>
>
> On Nov 1, 2018, at 1:03 AM, Chaker Al Hakim 
> wrote:
>
>
>
> Hi Catherine,
>
>
>
> Srini and I briefly discussed  this request at the Montreal F2f meeting.
> We both thought that TF is already a separate project under the LFN
> umbrella. Furthermore, I have seen some TAC budget slides recently that
> showed TF as  a separate  budget line item which, I believe,  means that it
> is a already a separate project.
>
>
>
> Can we please get additional clarifications on this request so that we’re
> working the right action item. Or perhaps we can have a quick call with the
> LFN team to better understand the scope of this request.
>
>
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chaker
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *Catherine LEFEVRE
> *Sent:* Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
> *To:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
> *Subject:* Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely
> OpenContrail) #tac
>
>
>
> Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,
>
>
>
> Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.
>
>
>
> Thank you both for your feedback.
>
> The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric
> proposal in the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of
> LFN.
>
>
>
> Casey – feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the
> TAC request
>
>
>
> Many thanks & regards
>
> Catherine
>
>
>
> *From:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *Chaker Al Hakim
> *Sent:* Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
> *To:* onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
> *Subject:* 

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Thanks Mazin, that’s helpful.

So the question now seems to be more related to the process of promoting a 
project from incubation state to become a  fully approved LFN project.
If that’s the case then we would need to also look at 1) how other projects 
were promoted in the past, perhaps we can use (Akraino or Acumos as an example) 
 2) funding and resources and 3) impact on overall budget.

The other option is to collectively decide that a new process is needed to 
address this case, and to also address similar cases in the future, and would 
be considered a LFN governance item that the GB should take up

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2018 8:17 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Cc: Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Chaker,

My understanding that TF is an incubation project. Remember projects have 
different  lifecycle under LFN.
TF needs to become an approved full project for it to be like ONAP.

Phil or Kenny can provide the official position here.

Mazin



On Nov 1, 2018, at 1:03 AM, Chaker Al Hakim 
mailto:chaker.al.ha...@huawei.com>> wrote:

Hi Catherine,

Srini and I briefly discussed  this request at the Montreal F2f meeting. We 
both thought that TF is already a separate project under the LFN umbrella. 
Furthermore, I have seen some TAC budget slides recently that showed TF as  a 
separate  budget line item which, I believe,  means that it is a already a 
separate project.

Can we please get additional clarifications on this request so that we’re 
working the right action item. Or perhaps we can have a quick call with the LFN 
team to better understand the scope of this request.


Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey – feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)]

Chaker,

My understanding that TF is an incubation project. Remember projects have 
different  lifecycle under LFN.
TF needs to become an approved full project for it to be like ONAP.

Phil or Kenny can provide the official position here.

Mazin


On Nov 1, 2018, at 1:03 AM, Chaker Al Hakim 
mailto:chaker.al.ha...@huawei.com>> wrote:

Hi Catherine,

Srini and I briefly discussed  this request at the Montreal F2f meeting. We 
both thought that TF is already a separate project under the LFN umbrella. 
Furthermore, I have seen some TAC budget slides recently that showed TF as  a 
separate  budget line item which, I believe,  means that it is a already a 
separate project.

Can we please get additional clarifications on this request so that we’re 
working the right action item. Or perhaps we can have a quick call with the LFN 
team to better understand the scope of this request.


Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>; Casey Cain 
mailto:cc...@linuxfoundation.org>>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey – feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 5:07 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac
Importance: High

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jira.onap.org_browse_TSC-2D41&d=DwMFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Hi Catherine,

Srini and I briefly discussed  this request at the Montreal F2f meeting. We 
both thought that TF is already a separate project under the LFN umbrella. 
Furthermore, I have seen some TAC budget slides recently that showed TF as  a 
separate  budget line item which, I believe,  means that it is a already a 
separate project.

Can we please get additional clarifications on this request so that we're 
working the right action item. Or perhaps we can have a quick call with the LFN 
team to better understand the scope of this request.


Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2018 12:27 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; Casey Cain 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 5:07 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac
Importance: High

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jira.onap.org_browse_TSC-2D41&d=DwMFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=U_NsekOwRbMcph1s8P0KcYAALS-fkIUd2budq1xYaBw&s=uLLE0jj_UN5plGEcC_FPauNcM_yVeCyhXLG6fjTVjd0&e=>

Thanks in advance for your support.

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT&T Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 47

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

Good afternoon/morning Chaker, Srini, Casey,

Thank you Chaker to take the lead on this action item.

Thank you both for your feedback.
The request from the TAC team was not to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal in 
the context of ONAP projects, but to review it as being part of LFN.

Casey - feel free to add any comment in case of I have miscaptured the TAC 
request

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 6:12 PM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 5:07 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac
Importance: High

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__jira.onap.org_browse_TSC-2D41&d=DwMFAw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=U_NsekOwRbMcph1s8P0KcYAALS-fkIUd2budq1xYaBw&s=uLLE0jj_UN5plGEcC_FPauNcM_yVeCyhXLG6fjTVjd0&e=>

Thanks in advance for your support.

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT&T Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 475 77 36 73
catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com<mailto:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com>

TEXTING and DRIVING... It Can Wait

AT&T
BUROGEST OFFICE PARK SA
Avenue des Dessus-de-Lives, 2
5101 Loyers (Namur)
Belgium



NOTE: This email (or its attachments) contains information belonging to the 
sender, which may be confidential. proprietary and/or legally privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
content of this is strictly forbidden. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please immediately notify the sender identified above



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3991): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3991
Mute This To

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Hi Srini,

Thanks for your input..

I am actually very familiar with TF (Contrail)  from my previous life. However, 
I did volunteer my time even though I have not had a chance to review the 
proposal.
I plan to participate in the review, and I hope you will too, either as a lead 
or as a participant as I do have both an ISP view and a vendor view on this 
topic.

Regards,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Srini
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 11:59 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 5:07 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac
Importance: High

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41

Thanks in advance for your support.

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT&T Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 475 77 36 73
catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com<mailto:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com>

TEXTING and DRIVING... It Can Wait

AT&T
BUROGEST OFFICE PARK SA
Avenue des Dessus-de-Lives, 2
5101 Loyers (Namur)
Belgium



NOTE: This email (or its attachments) contains information belonging to the 
sender, which may be confidential. proprietary and/or legally privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
content of this is strictly forbidden. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please immediately notify the sender identified above



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3986): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3986
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27630566/21656
Mute #tac: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=tac&subid=2743226
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Srini]

Hi Catherine and Chaker,

My 2 cents.

There are two contexts I guess feedback is given.

Usage of TF in ONAP: TF in many ways similar to ODL in terms of role and 
capabilities. ODL is chosen by ONAP as base for CCSDK/SDNC/APPC. Is TAC asking 
to see whether TF can be leveraged by ONAP in place of ODL?

Using TF in sites as site level SDN controller : In case of Openstack based 
sites, it is really up to the site administrator and from ONAP perspective it 
is  transparent as ONAP leverages Neutron API.  In case of K8S based sites, 
there is some support required in ONAP (Multi-Cloud) based on SDN controller 
chosen at the site. K8S Multi-Cloud intend to support OVN, flannel, SRIOV-NIC 
based networks initially (R4) and get community feedback on other networking 
controllers (Yes, we see requests coming to us to support Contiv and TF, but 
the decision to be made at right time based on interest from SPs on the site 
level SDN controllers).

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Chaker Al Hakim
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 8:41 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) 
#tac

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 
[mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 5:07 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac
Importance: High

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41

Thanks in advance for your support.

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT&T Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 475 77 36 73
catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com<mailto:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com>

TEXTING and DRIVING... It Can Wait

AT&T
BUROGEST OFFICE PARK SA
Avenue des Dessus-de-Lives, 2
5101 Loyers (Namur)
Belgium



NOTE: This email (or its attachments) contains information belonging to the 
sender, which may be confidential. proprietary and/or legally privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
content of this is strictly forbidden. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please immediately notify the sender identified above



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3985): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3985
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27630566/21656
Mute #tac: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=tac&subid=2743226
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Chaker Al Hakim]

Hi Catherine,

Please count me unless you have found a lead already.

Thanks,
Chaker


From: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
Catherine LEFEVRE
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2018 5:07 AM
To: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: [onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac
Importance: High

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41

Thanks in advance for your support.

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT&T Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 475 77 36 73
catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com<mailto:catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com>

TEXTING and DRIVING... It Can Wait

AT&T
BUROGEST OFFICE PARK SA
Avenue des Dessus-de-Lives, 2
5101 Loyers (Namur)
Belgium



NOTE: This email (or its attachments) contains information belonging to the 
sender, which may be confidential. proprietary and/or legally privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
content of this is strictly forbidden. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please immediately notify the sender identified above



-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3984): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3984
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27630566/21656
Mute #tac: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=tac&subid=2743226
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-tsc] Review Tungsten Fabric proposal (formely OpenContrail) #tac

[Catherine LEFEVRE]

Dear TSC (or proxy),

We have been requested by the TAC to review the Tungsten Fabric proposal.
I have added the links related to this proposal to the JIRA TSC-41 task.

I need somebody to take the lead regarding this activity.
Can one of you assign this task to herself/himself while the others can post 
any feedback to the JIRA ticket? thanks
Due Date: Nov 5th, 2018 End of your Day?
https://jira.onap.org/browse/TSC-41

Thanks in advance for your support.

Many thanks & regards
Catherine

Catherine Lefèvre
AVP Software Development & Engineering

AT&T Labs - Network Cloud & Infrastructure
D2 Platform & Systems Development
ECOMP/RUBY/SPP-NEAM-Appl. Servers/SIA
ONAP TSC Chair


Phone: +32 2 418 49 22
Mobile: +32 475 77 36 73
catherine.lefe...@intl.att.com

TEXTING and DRIVING... It Can Wait

AT&T
BUROGEST OFFICE PARK SA
Avenue des Dessus-de-Lives, 2
5101 Loyers (Namur)
Belgium



NOTE: This email (or its attachments) contains information belonging to the 
sender, which may be confidential. proprietary and/or legally privileged. The 
information is intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity(ies) 
named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 
that any disclosure, distribution or taking of any action in reliance on the 
content of this is strictly forbidden. If you have received this e-mail in 
error please immediately notify the sender identified above


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#3980): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/3980
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27630566/21656
Mute #tac: https://lists.onap.org/mk?hashtag=tac&subid=2743226
Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-