2021
Company | Functions/Components implemented by contribution | Running Platform/ Environment | Source code repos | Description | License | committers | Language | Target Contribution Date | Status |
ORAN Alliance WG 6 | AAL FEC | x86 Server | aal_fec/profile | Why WG6 is considering splitting its AAL FEC specification into two portions to be published together in the July 2021 train – a) a formal specification document published through the normal O-RAN FRAND process that covers stage 1 and stage 2 specifications, and b) a stage 3 API document that covers data structures and programming language level details specific to open source implementations such as DPDK that would be published in ORAN OSC repo under a BSD license and referenced from the formal AAL FEC specification. The purpose is to enable easier ingestion of the ORAN FEC gaps identified by the ORAN community in upstream communities such as DPDK. What To facilitate this split, WG6 co-chairs would like to request an OSC repo titled aal_fec/profile to be created for the above purpose. The purpose of this repository would be to store stage 3 specification documents and in the future, header files as well as test artifacts for the AAL FEC profile. Releases from this repository will be aligned with ORAN specification release trains as we intend to publish the stage 3 specification updates conjointly with the main spec. License BSD – we would prefer a BSD license to be compatible with the upstream community (DPDK) with which the spec is to be aligned. | Exception request: BSD | niall.power@intel.com (PTL) | C/C++ | ToC consideration (June/30/21) |
2020-2019
Company | Functions/Components implemented by contribution | Running Platform/ Environment | Source code repos | Target Contribution Date | Status | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
repo name | Description | code license | committers | language | |||||
Lenovo | Abstraction Adaptation Layer | OpenStack Hypervisor | aal/lib | Apache2 |
done | |||
aal/logic | Apache2 |
done | |||
aal/mgmt | Apache2 |
done | ||||
aal/virt | Apache2 | C/C++ |
done | |||||||||
China Mobile | Integrated eNB | x86 Server | |||||||
Inspur | Infrastructure monitoring | x86 Server | imp/metal | Host Configuration Management | Apache2 | gaosong.lc@inspur.com, liutao.lc01@inspur.com, qiaoxj@inspur.com | Python | requested 2019/06/11, LF Ticket #76725 | |
imp/metal-api | Host management interface | Apache2 | gaosong.lc@inspur.com, liutao.lc01@inspur.com, qiaoxj@inspur.com | Python | requested 2019/06/11, LF Ticket #76725 | ||||
imp/fm | Host Fault Monitoring, Detection and Recovery | Apache2 | gaosong.lc@inspur.com, liutao.lc01@inspur.com, qiaoxj@inspur.com | Python | requested 2019/06/11, LF Ticket #76725 | ||||
Intel | DU layer 1 | x86 Server | o-du/phy | O-RAN DU Layer 1 | Apache 2 |
C/C++ | requested 2019/06/11, LF Ticket #76725 | ||||||||
Radisys | DU layer 2 and layer 3 | x86 Server | o-du | O-RAN DU | Apache 2 | C | requested 2019/06/11, LF Ticket #76725 | ||
o-du/l2 | O-RAN DU Layer 2 | Apache 2 | balaji.shankaran@radisys.com, somshekar.ydlapur@radisys.com | C | requested 2019/06/11, LF Ticket #76725 |
Guidelines:
Seed code preparation:
- Check dependency license
- Make sure they are compatible with the contribution license
- Remove company proprietary and internal information
- Internal information may include internal email addresses, URLs, etc
- Include LICENSES.txt file at root of the repo
- For Apache 2 and Creative Commons 4 licenses: LICENSES.txt
- For O-RAN Software License and Creative Commons 4 licenses: (to be added)
- Include license and copyright claim at the beginning of every source code file
- For Apache 2 (using language specific code comment format)
...
- Completing the columns under "Source code repos"
- Review your proposal with the Requirements and Software Architecture committee
- ToC approval of the creation and committers
- Making request to Linux Foundation
What is a project?
IS / HAS | IS NOT / DOES NOT |
---|---|
|
|
The basic steps for submitting a proposal
- Talk to community members first about the problem you think needs to be addressed.
- Draft a project proposal
- Meet with the RSAC committee for an initial review
- Address any concerns raised by the Architecture subcommittee scheduling a follow-up review if necessary
- A MINIMUM OF 2 WEEKS PRIOR TO MAKING YOUR PRESENTATION TO THE TOC your submission should be considered to be locked. Nothing else should be added or changed from that point on.
- Add your proposal presentation to an upcoming TOC at least two weeks in the future (you can do that yourself)
- Enter your proposal in the wiki (or email)
- Send email to toc@lists.o-ran-sc.org notifying the community that it has been posted and include a link to the proposal
The TOC considers many things when they look at approving a new project
Technology for the sake of technology won't cut it, neither will solutions in search of problems.
- Is your project addressing a real problem in the industry?
- How does this affect other projects?
- Does this advance our architecture?
- How does this fit with the next release? How about R+1, +2..?
- Does it increase our risk of delivering on time?
- Does it support multiple use case scenarios?
- Do you have enough resources?
- Are those resources new, or are you drawing resources away from other projects?
- Will this project make ORAN-SC more attractive to service providers?
- Would this simplify or complicate end user adoption?
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
The TOC will always look more favorably on project proposals that address gaps in existing ORAN-SC functionality vs. replacing existing functionality with a new proposal. |
Best Practices for successful proposal
- Always remember this is an open source community, not contract labor. No one is required to do anything.
- Talk to people from as many different different companies as possible in advance
- Ensure participation of at least 3-4 organizations, including at least one operator (preferably more)
- Circulate draft proposals among the community to obtain feedback before presenting to the Architecture subcommittee
- Respond promptly to any questions from the community, especially after you notify the TOC list.
Things to avoid
- Changing the architecture in the project proposal- Architecture changes should be discussed in the Architecture subcommittee before the new project is ever proposed
- Duplicating, moving, or changing functionality in existing projects, UNLESS
- Unless you have the full support from the existing project team that would be impacted
- Or the other project's component was designed to be modular and you are adding a driver
- Thinking someone has made a resource commitment just because they agree with something you said
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
The TOC will always look more favorably on project proposals that address gaps in existing ORAN-SC functionality vs. replacing existing functionality with a new proposal. |
Filling out your proposal
As you go through the proposal here are the things to keep in mind. Many of these are typical of the questions that you get asked over and over. A project proposal should answer six fundamental questions:
- WHO will be doing the work?
- WHAT do you propose doing?
- WHEN do you plan to deliver it?
- WHERE will you put your deliverables?
- WHY should we consider doing this?
- HOW does this fit into our architecture?
The Overview
What is the problem?
Why can’t it be solved in existing projects?
How do you propose we solve it?
The Architecture
- How does your proposal fit with the existing ORAN-SC architecture?
- This is the question that will ultimately receive the most scrutiny. If that cannot be clearly explained your project won't be taken seriously.
- Failing to adequately engage the Architecture subcommittee and failing to heed their input is a losing strategy. Although the subcommittee cannot approve or disapprove a project proposal its recommendation to the TSC is highly weighted.
- If you think that the problem to be solved is fundamentally an architecture problem then bring that issue up for discussion on an Architecture call first before you ever trying to proposing a new project.
- If you think that the ORAN-SC architecture needs to be modified in order to accommodate your project, be prepared for very long and drawn out review process that is unlikely to be approved.
The Resources
- This page is for listing commitments. DO NOT list people that you hope will get involved, or folks that you think might benefit, or even people that may have said, "I think this is a good idea." Only list those who have signed up to work on your project. Period.
- The PTL should have had some manner of direct 1:1 conversation with everyone listed to before making a proposal.
Info | ||
---|---|---|
| ||
Thinking of or speaking of companies or individuals as “proposed contributors” to your project will almost always get you into trouble. It is probably best to consider it to be a binary; either they directly committed resources to work on the project to you first hand, or they did not. Comments such as, "Yes, that sounds like a good idea", "Yes, my company would like something like that", or even "Yes, I'd be very interested in your project!" are not the same as someone saying, "Yes, I can work on your project". |
Source: Credit to ONAP community for new Project Proposal page guidelines, which we have replicated.