Re: OPNFV/CNTT FMO Call
Hi Vincent –
All good questions. In my mind, short-term is that CNTT remains a separate track, but the roles and responsibilities between GSMA and OPNFV are better defined. Due to the strictures of the GSMA, it seems like an upstream approach from CNTT to GSMA will work better at least for now. I think we can revisit this in the future. Also, unlike LFN and most of the other foundations we are working with, GSMA is a closed organization that only allows its members to participate in the process. The bigger question is the relationship with OPNFV – is CNTT a sub group within OPNFV, or a feeder group that provides the requirements and the architectures, that get translated into the Implementations that are tested by the OPNFV groups. Just some earl AM thoughts.
From: vincent.danno@... [mailto:vincent.danno@...]
Hi Scot, all
Is this exercise meant to look at:
a- What CNTT should be today? (short term focus)
b- Or what it should be in the target? (long term focus)
In the (a) approach, typically we identify gaps, we try to close them by clarifications, adjustment and improvements by delta compared to the starting situation. This is kind-of bottom-up.
In the (b) approach, typically we identify the ultimate ideal target, and build a path which is not necessarily made of deltas, but allows more radical change. This is kind-of top-down.
I have the feeling we are looking at (a) only. Looking at (a) is very fine. My question is: how are we going to address (b)?
In order to exemplify my question: at the launch of CNTT, it was assumed CNTT would be temporary and that the specification work, e.g. RM/RA would end up in GSMA. This is an example of what could be a non-delta change. However I don’t see this kind of questions is addressed for now.
From: STEELE, SCOT [mailto:SS8171@...]
Good day to all,
In preparation for tomorrow’s FMO call I am requesting that you review the following:
Current Mode Gaps/Issues/Scope definition: https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=34608020
And finally, the definition of “Disagree and Commit”: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disagree_and_commit
I ask that you all review the mindset required for disagree and commit, , and be prepared to apply it to tomorrow’s discussion.
Our objective for tomorrow is to reach agreement on the Scope boundaries, and actions the communities must take to move forward in the current mode, minimally on the “1” stream. As such please know that the meeting facilitation will be done to focus us on that outcome.
Thank you for your participation and I look forward to our reaching conclusion tomorrow.
Scot Steele, MS Organization Development
Principal System Engineer– Org Development
Office 707 461 8279
Mobile 678 654 5994
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.