2019 09 04

Owned by Farheen Cefalu
Last updated: Sept 04, 2019
8 min read

Zoom meeting: 2019-09-04_tsc.mp4

Agenda

  1. Call for Scribe (minutes owner) Farheen Cefalu

  2. Roll Call & Quorum Check 

    Company

    Contact Name

    Attendance

    Alternate Contact

    Attendance

    AT&T

    Jack Murray Co-Chair

    x



    China Mobile

    Jinri Huang Co-Chair

    		x

    Deutsche Telekom 

    David Streibl




    NTT DOCOMO

    Masafumi Masuda




    O-RANge

    William Diego

    		xVincent Danno

    Verizon

    Viswa Kumar

    		x

    *Quorum: 50% or more of total TSC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.  We have a quorum and can vote on activities.  

  3. Review and Agree to Minutes of the Previous Meeting
    1. The minutes of the prior meeting were reviewed, and there were no corrections. On a motion made by huangjinri@chinamobile.com and seconded by William DIEGOMaza the minutes of the August 28, 2019 meeting were the approved by the TOC members. 
      1. VOTE: Vote taken, item passed.
  4. Review of Today's Agenda
    1. Jinri - Claudia, new agenda item.  WG3 raised an issue and would like to add it to today's agenda.
  5. Status of Open Action Items (Old Business)
    1. Action/ Thoralf Czichy read out the status of the issue with signing of the CLA and the open ticket. 2019-09-04: This is now resolved. Not sure where the problem was, but it's likely around companies where there are multiple CLA managers where multiple projects are managed. The whitelisting seems to work. I updated the instructions to properly also describe the case where there's only a CCLA and individual developers do not actually need to sign an additional ICLA. Also added some clarification in some of the steps: delta in "Signing Contributor License Agreement" 
      1. Naming is still a little confusing.
      2. China Mobile has some questions on CLA.  We have two licenses.  For CLA does the CLA manager have to sign both?
        1. Yes. Both should be signed.
        2. It is OK to have two people sign two licenses.  
        3. The platform is still young and there were challenges signing the CLA.
          1. Action/ Jack Murray talk to Former user (Deleted) about the issues with the signing of names on the CLA.
    2. Action/ Farheen CefaluCefalu add link to other upstream projects such as ONAP on the Release Planning page.
      1. Action/ Jack Murray will be working with Farheen Cefalu for the next weeks to coordinate the release schedule.
    3. Action/ Brian Freeman will send Architecture link to Jack Murray.
      1. Action/ Jack Murray will work with Farheen Cefalu
    4. Action/ Andrew Grimberg will check with the engineer of whether or not there is an automated process to auto-add the reviewers.
    5. Action/ Andrew Grimberg provide documentation and proposal.  
    6. Action/ Andrew Grimberg vet the TOC process with the TOC members.
    7. Action/ Andrew Grimberg provide clear instructions to TOC mail list on how TOC members can get a gerrit account and the process.
    8. Action/ Tracy Van Brakle  OSC Amber PoC ("Plug-fest").  We need the TOC to decide how (or if) the Linux Foundation should (or should not) promote this particular LFN event.
      1. Slides are on the wiki
      2. China Mobile is sponsoring O-RAN "Plug-fest" in parallel with an O-RAN-SC Amber PoC "Plug-fest".  Do you want to promote the PoC Plug-fest?  It will be on December 2nd.  The readout would be December 4th.  It will take place as a parallel track with some overlap. 
        1. China Mobile is planning to host the Plug-fest in December.  Is the PoC Plug-fest the same thing?
          1. This is proof of concept vs. a Plug-fest.  The O-RAN Alliance Plug-fest is featuring open front-haul.  We want to compliment that with mPlane.
    9. O-RAN Alliance has a particular structure with LF.  There is no marketing activity from LF.  It is all budgeted to the O-RAN Alliance.  They have done some activities in the past.  It is conservative because of how it is funded.  It is not a simple activity to get the LF to promote or do work around LF activities.  Unlike ONAP that has a marketing activity funded around it.  We should look at how we can some activity as a promotion of a plugfest.  But give more attention to the Amber activities.  We should pick this discussion up and we should see where we can do plug and play activities.  Most on the A1O1 side and the xApp near Real-time RIC.  Perhaps the simulator?  Does anyone know of an area that will have software at the end of release A? 
      1. We're trying to do a demo for NWC America around the December time frame. 
      2. Non real-time RIC?
        1. Demo ORAN 5G use cases with PNF Plug in Play.  Another demo, bulk management data that are 36PP aligned.  Show the hybrid architecture vs. hierarchical architecture using ONAP components.  One of the first things we did was to use the PoC Plugfest to promote the B release.
          1. LF and O-RAN Alliance will 
          2. Action/ Farheen Cefalu continue to keep the discussion open next week regarding Plugfest.
  6. Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
    1. Release Manager/Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
    2. Release planning link.
      1. PTLs update the email list of where they are at and what progress they have made.  Create a brief summary and then we will review the mail with the working groups.
    3. There is a WG review item.  What is your expectation?  How should we facilitate that?  I was going to request the WG co chair to cross check.  Can you give us some guidance? Guidance on the review.
      1. We will have time between development sprints 1 and 2 to review what sections of software.
        1. We should put together a clear list of what has been done.  Any demos of what is working and a quick discussion on what is planned for the next few releases.  Then hand off to O-RAN.
        2. Written document from each PTL to show the progress that has been made as a review checkpoint.  In future releases the demos will be a natural part of the process.
        3. Next Friday will be our bi-weekly TSC call where each WG and software community TOC should present their progress.  It's good to provide a summary of the overall progress.  Every two months is when we can report out on significant progress.  The milestones of reporting to O-RAN are tied to milestones in the software efforts.  Action/ Farheen Cefalu send a message to the PTLs to provide a one page summary of their progress.
        4. Action/ Farheen Cefalu add B release naming to the Agenda.
  7. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
    1. Non real time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) - John Keeney (Ericsson EST)
      1. Ericsson has ramped up their commitments to 10 developers.  
      2. Difficult to see a clear line of working with ONAP working with O-SC.  Concerned about coordination of the 10 developers between ONAP and O-SC.  TOC set up a process for upstreaming and project alignment.  Becoming difficult to provide a clear description of work items to the developers as the PTL.
        1. 5G is popular and ONAP wants to contribute.  It drives people to participate but it does create confusion and overlap.  We need to continue to get clarification.  ONAP is not the only non-real time RIC platform that is supported.  There are options for others.  
        2. The general discussions have been around the fact that it's an upstream project that will be used in our releases.  Clarify what is the platform and what are the services that run on the platform.  Some platform evolution has to be related to 5G.  This should be a discussion on our October agenda on how we deal with our relationship on our upstream projects. 
          1. Using released versions where possible. We are going to acquire and contribute back to projects such as ONAP.  We are looking at a G release when we will be using it.  We don't want to sit idly by.  We should set up a formal way to approach.
            1. We need to keep discussing and evolving our relationship.
    2. RIC Applications - Matti Hiltunen
    3. RIC Platform - Thoralf Czichy
      1. 2019-09-04: Some legal issues currently prevent us from contributing further to some of the RIC Platform repos. Legal discussion takes time. Solution should come in anything between 1 to 4 weeks delays. This also effects some of the RIC xApps (MC and UE Manager).  Consequences are there will be delays in the original plans to the RIC platform.
        1. All contributions or certain elements of RIC Platform?
          1. Certain elements.
    4. O-RAN Centralized Unit Former user (Deleted)
    5. O-RAN Distributed Unit High Sachin Srivastava
    6. O-RAN Distributed Unity Low Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated)
    7. O-RAN Radio Unit (TBD)
    8. Operations and Maintenance - Martin Skorupski
    9. Simulations - Alex Stancu
    10. Infrastructure - Xiaohua Zhang
      1. Talked to INSPUR according to Orange due to resource issues can not contribute to Release A.
        1. When Jack was at the LF OSS Linux Edge meetings discussed with Akraino project.  For the infrastructure project we need to put Akraino on the list of the upstream project that we want to have our relationship with.
    11. DOC - Weichen Ni
      1. I don't know how to test the docs structure.  I don't know how to set up the templates or the documentation structure.  How can I see if my docs works?

  8. Test & Integration Planning - Lusheng

    1. Every company should have one person who participates in the test and integration planning.  Companies should designate one person / representative as a part of that team.  Action/ Jack Murray will try to get a representative from each PTL to provide someone to participate in the integration and test team.
  9. Requirements Software Architecture Committee - Rittwik
    1. We have started the B release epics.  Encourage people to leave comments.  Reminder October meeting with the working groups.

  10. New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items

    1. Action/Claudio Coletti [DTAG] WG3 raising a concern of prospect of  E2 release by OSC.
      1. In WG3, due to slow progress, we decided to postpone our first release of the E2 specs of the E2 interface.  Information elements being captured and information model.  Release A targets November as release date which is not aligned with O-RAN perspective in WG3. Concerned about misalignment. As a WG co-chair it is important to guarantee WG3 is captured in the E2 implementation open release.  We are not cross checking the progress. Externally we should highlight WG3 is not going to deliver the E2.
        1. Challenges with moving the software forward and standards because we are early in the process.  Most of what we are doing in Release A is pre-specification.  We need to find the challenges in building something new.  
          1. Perception of something that looks like E2 prior to ORAN release. 
          2. There will be something that looks like E2 before O-RAN Alliance publishes.
            1. Agree that we (TOC) should come up with terminology and activity but we should not slow down the progress.
            2. We will not slow down in activities.  Concerned about the public perception of the disconnect.
        2. We're thinking of having an O-RAN Alliance demo and not sure how to take care of this issue.  It is coming from O-RAN Alliance.
          1. I am not concerned about the demo.  I am concerned about the November release and what it will look like compared to what the E2 specs.  Will we have public MACD and pre-spec.
            1. The documentation project can make E2 pre-spec.
            2. Jack - We need clarification on terminology from O-RAN Alliance.  There will always be something that may not be conforming to spec.  We have to figure out terminology O-RAN Alliance wants us to use.  The TOC needs to take up with O-RAN Alliance leadership and come up with an agreement.
          2. Action/ Claudio Coletti [DTAG] raise the issue with O-RAN Alliance.  What is O-RAN supposed to do.  How it should be published.  
          3. Jun Hyuk Song we don't know about message types and what kind of information elements it carries.  It is a serious concern.  I hope WG3 can look at the pre E2 spec to give us blessing or feedback.
            1. Each project has its own documentation.  
              1. They don't have documentation and that is why I am raising a concern.
                1. RIC Platform PTL: This is effected by legal issues.  There is a document floating around with WG3 but it is not in public repos yet because of legal issues.
                2. Communicate clearly that it is pre-specification and get it approved by legal. 
                3. Eventually when the document is public will it contain elaborate details? Yes, we will elaborate the details
            2. We have to trust that WG3 is going to work through the issues.  For us how we set up compliance with implementation of E2 with a mappable plugin structure.
          4. KPI monitor xApp concern.  We need to know E2 subscription message.  We don't have any information on it.  We are making up our own.  We need to have a pre-spec which is the only way to minimize issues between O-SC and WG3. 
            1. Action/ Farheen Cefalu add this to our agenda but this is a part of the software architecture issue.  
            2. Action/ Jun Hyuk Song start the dialogue on the email list regarding the KPI monitoring xApp concern.  
    2. Action/ Jack Murray 3GPP discussion
  11. Any Other Business (AOB)
  12. Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)
    1. Votes
      1. The minutes of the prior meeting were reviewed, and there were no corrections. On motion made by huangjinri@chinamobile.com and seconded by William DIEGO  the minutes of the August 28, 2019 meeting were the approved by the TOC members. 
        1. VOTE: Vote taken, item passed.
    2. Actions
      1. Action/ Jun Hyuk Song start the dialogue on the email list regarding the KPI monitoring xApp concern.  
      2. Action/ Claudio Coletti [DTAG] raise the issue of the E2 interface and WG3 schedule with the O-RAN Alliance.
      3. Action/ Jack Murray  continue discussion about Plugfest.
      4. Action/ Jack Murray talk to Former user (Deleted) about the issues with signing of names on the CLA.
      5. Action/ Jack Murray will be working with Farheen Cefalu for the next weeks to coordinate the release schedule with upstream projects.
      6. Action/ Andrew Grimberg will check with the engineer of whether or not there is an automated process to auto-add the reviewers.
      7. Action/ Andrew Grimberg provide documentation and proposal.  
      8. Action/ Andrew Grimberg vet the TOC process with the TOC members.
      9. Action/ Andrew Grimberg provide clear instructions to TOC mail list on how TOC members can get a gerrit account and the process.
      10. Action/ Farheen Cefalu send a message to the PTLs to provide a one page summary of their progress in the last four weeks to the TOC mailing lists.
      11. Action/ Jack Murray discuss B release naming convention.
      12. Action/ Jack Murray 3GPP discussion