2021 06 30

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): Masafumi Masuda

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair	x	James Li
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl		Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane		John Keeney	x
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
TIM	Andrea Buldorini	x
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang	x	Jackie Huang

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 06/23/2021 TOC meeting minutes, motion by MASAFUMI MASUDA, seconded by Ganesh Shenbagaraman. Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda
1. Thoralf-to-Jinri: Any news (after your Saturday mail) on the press release on when and in which format we intend to publish?
2. Discuss WG6 AAL request project and repo using BSD-3
Release Votes and Approval
1. D Release
  1. Jack: Matti, are we ready on RICAPP?
  2. Matti: No. We have to decide how much integration testing we want do for the release.
  3. Jack: What about RIC?
  4. Thoralf: We are ready. Integration test is also limited, but we can deploy.
  5. Jack: Did you branch the code?
  6. Thoralf: Yes.
  7. Jack: ODUHIGH?
  8. Manasi: We are ready to branch the code with limited integration.
  9. Jack: ODULOW?
  10. David Kinsey: There was an issue with alignment between ODULOW and Viavi.
  11. Jack: OAM?
  12. Matti: We are ready to branch.
  13. Jack: SIM?
  14. ALex: We are ready to branch.
  15. Jack: INF?
  16. Xiaohua: The code has been branched.
  17. Jack; NONRTRIC?
  18. John Keeney: We have branched.
  19. Jack: SMO?
  20. Mahesh: We have not been able to test in the lab. We have not branched yet but could.
  21. Jack: CII badging. ODUHIGH has gotten to passing. ODULOW is 91%. SMO is 78%.
  22. Jinri: The major issue is RICAPP.
  23. Jack: It's ODULOW and RICAPP.
  24. Matti: We could say that we do the final integration in the maintenance release.
  25. Jack: What would people's feeling about branching and packaging everything for July-2 release?
  26. Rittwik: We should document by PTLs the flows that have been tested in the release page at least.
  27. Jack: The decision is that all projects should branch that can branch, that the individual projects need to update the release page and that we will postpone the release date and vote for our next Wednesday meeting. How deoes that affect our PR?
  28. Jinri; PR is fine.
  29. Action point; PTLs to branch that can branch and to update the release page.
2. AAL project
  1. Jack: I had a discussion yesterday with WG6 on their work on the accelerator abstraction layer. It's part of an extension to DPDK contribution in Linux Foundation, but they want do that under O-RAN. The tricky part is that the community specifies BSD-3 as the contribution. What the request was to create a new project for the AAL project.
  2. Trishan: All incoming code on O-RAN SC is Apache 2.0, but for this particular repo, we would make the exception for BSD.
  3. Thoralf: How do you formally sign?
  4. Trishan: I will check.
  5. Jack: We may have to add a CLA. We'll get that clarification.
  6. Action point: Trishan to check if your have to sign a new agreement for the repo.
  7. Jinri: For this project, what is the expected output? Is it traditional coding or documentation?
  8. Jack: It would be both.
  9. Jiniri: If this is a stage-3 work, why is this to be in our software community instead of WG6?
  10. Jack; I believe this is the right way.
  11. Juha; Will we have a project proposal?
  12. Jack: I have a write up from WG6. We will talk about it next week and have a vote.
  13. Action point: Jack to present the write up about the AAL project to have a vote.
  14. John Keeney; Is there any plan to integrate the DPDK and the existing OSC functions?
  15. Jack: That would be a discussion around ODULOW and ODUHIGH.
  16. Ganesh: We will go through the document and will provide an update next week.
  17. Action point: Ganesh to provide an update from ODU point of view.
Copyright update
1. Jack: O-RAN Board meeting happened on Monday and they approved the 2 items that affect our work in the copyright space. They approved a clarification on the copyright on the IPR statement and also approved the SCCL license for our use in the OSC-P project.
2. Thoralf: Will there be a written summary?
3. Jack: Yes. The license and the fact that they approved it will be added to the O-RAN ALLIANCE web site.
4. Rittwik: What is the OSC-P?
5. Jack: O-RAN Specification Code Project.
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
Old business and Status of Open Action Items
1. Release preparation for "D" Release
  1. Action point: Jinri to organize release statement and PR for "D" Release.
2. "E" Release timeline.
  1. Action point: Jack to create "E" Release timeline and publish.
  2. Jack: After the "D" Release is out, let's get a short presentation to make sure we understand how the architecture looks like.
3. Repo clean-up:
  1. Jack: Every repo should be attached to a project with a PTL. House-keeping and due diligence are the responsibility of the PTL.
4. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release.
5. PTL company change.
  1. Jack: I got a message from Mahesh, PTL of SMO. He has moved from VMware to Juniper. We have to decide to do going forward. Hopefully he can attend next meeting and have a dialogue.
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
3. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
4. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)

2021 06 23

Recording: link to zoom recording

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): Masafumi Masuda

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair	x	James Li
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl	x	Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane	x	John Keeney
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang	x	Jackie Huang

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 06/16/2021 TOC meeting minutes, motion by MASAFUMI MASUDA , seconded by Former user (Deleted). Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda
Release Votes and Approval
1. Trishan: We have Andrew from the release engineering team to discuss automated self service features.
2. Andrew: The proposal is that we enable the automated self service.
3. Thoralf: The only technical change is that after Info Yang model is changed it will be published to the TOC mailing list?
4. Andrew: Correct. We are proposing here is taking the government body requirement out of picture and moving to a mechanical process but you are still informed.
5. Thoralf: If we say we want to keep the old process, what would we do?
6. Andrew: Then we will keep the old process.
7. Jack: The vote would be to change the process. Approval of the proposed motion is that we would move to the automated process and rejection is to stay with the current process. From my standpoint, more automation is good.
8. Thoralf: It's a good thing and I don't see risks.
9. Decision: For the change to the automated process, motion by Andrew, seconded by huangjinri@chinamobile.com. Motion passed.
10. Andrew: We will make the change and let the TOC mailing list know.
Copyright update
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Action Point: Jinri to lead O-RAN White paper version 3.
2. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
3. Action Point: Jack Murray to work with O-RAN SFG to create a procedure for reporting bugs found during security badging in OSC.
4. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. Action Point: All to TOC members to consider working with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC. William DIEGOoffered to support this activity with help from others.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items
1. CII badging.
  1. Jack: We are hoping that the release happens next week. Regarding the CII badging, where are we on ODU HIGH?
  2. Manasi: We need to fix some errors first. We will get it done by this Friday.
  3. Jack: Has anyone from ODU HIGH been working with Intel?
  4. Manasi: We have been.
  5. Jack: How is SMO doing?
  6. Mahesh: It will be somewhere close to 100% this Friday.
  7. Action point: PTLs to complete CII badging process.
2. Release preparation for "D" Release
  1. Jack: Is RICAPP ready for release?
  2. Matti: No. In the OSC Lab, there are some issues. The latest E2 simulator is not working.
  3. Jack: Does anyone know the status?
  4. Ultan: I can help.
  5. Jinri: Has this integration not happened completely or it's ongoing but blocked by some issues?
  6. Matti: Some of the older versions worked.
  7. Jack: We haven't had volunteers stepping into the broader integration project. Where are you, RIC Team?
  8. Thoralf: We also suffer from the same problem. If somebody could try to deploy the Near-RT RIC platform and put xApp there, it would help.
  9. Jack: OCU is not active. Where are we on ODU HIGH?
  10. Manasi: After today's develop session, we should be able to declare completion for the "D" Release and cut the branch.
  11. Jack: OAM?
  12. Martin: We deployed the closed loop use case with Non-RT RIC Team and have configured with ODU HIGH using IPv4.
  13. Jack: Who are you working with on IPv6?
  14. Martin: Network setup team.
  15. Jack: SIM?
  16. Alex: We are good to go.
  17. Jack: INF?
  18. Xiaohua: It's ready to go by the end of this week.
  19. Jack: NONRTRIC?
  20. John Keeney: We are able to go.
  21. Jack: SMO?
  22. Mahesh: Issue has been testing in the OSC Lab.
  23. Jack: If we list out the functionality and note in the release documentation we've got this with the simulator, it's OK.
  24. Rittwik: Maybe in the maintenance release we can try non simulated way.
  25. Jack: Rittwik, did you get information about the switch?
  26. Rittwik: We are planning to insert the FH switch after the release.
  27. Jack: Jinri, have you hade any progress on writing?
  28. Jinri: We discussed "D" Release statement in the last EC. It has not decided whether we include it in the O-RAN PR or we need a separate PR. We still need contributing companies' quote.
  29. Action point: PTLs to wrap up "D" Release preparations.
  30. Action point: Jinri to organize release statement and PR for "D" Release.
3. "E" Release timeline.
  1. Action point: Jack to create "E" Release timeline and publish.
  2. Jack: After the "D" Release is out, let's get a short presentation to make sure we understand how the architecture looks like.
4. Repo clean-up:
  1. Jack: Every repo should be attached to a project with a PTL. House-keeping and due diligence are the responsibility of the PTL.
5. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release.
6. PTL company change.
  1. Jack: I got a message from Mahesh, PTL of SMO. He has moved from VMware to Juniper. We have to decide to do going forward. Hopefully he can attend next meeting and have a dialogue.
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
3. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
4. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)

2021 06 16

Recording: link to zoom recording

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): Masafumi Masuda

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair		James Li	x
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl		Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane		John Keeney	x
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang	x	Jackie Huang

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 06/09/2021 TOC meeting minutes, motion by MASAFUMI MASUDA , seconded by Juha Oravainen . Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda.
1. Thoralf-asks for: approval of this request https://lists.o-ran-sc.org/g/toc/message/463 (related to com/asn1c)
2. Decision: For the request for archiving the repo, motion by Thoralf Czichy , seconded by John Keeney (Ericsson EST) . Motion passed.
3. John Keeney: We are still blocked on adding the PTLs as committers to the IT/DEP repo. I' d like to raise the motion to explicitly approve the change.
4. Decision: For the request for the addition, motion by John Keeney (Ericsson EST) , seconded by Juha Oravainen . Motion passed.
5. John Keeney: Thoralf or I will open a LF support ticket.
6. Jack: Matti, you can follow up Felix?
7. Matti: Yes.
Release Votes and Approval
Copyright update
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Collaboration between OSC and O-RAN Alliance on an SMO project definition.
  1. Rittwik: I've been attending the SMO meetings. I'm trying to see if I can encourage EC to put priorities.
  2. Jack: What's the ask to the EC?
  3. Rittwik: EC is going to take a look at the summary and say go ahead with the MVP package.
2. Action Point: Jinri to lead O-RAN White paper version 3.
3. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
4. Action Point: Jack Murray to work with O-RAN SFG to create a procedure for reporting bugs found during security badging in OSC.
5. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. Action Point: All to TOC members to consider working with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC. William DIEGOoffered to support this activity with help from others.
  2. Jack: There are only 2 plugfest applications responded to the Call for Hosting. I want to make sure people are aware.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items.
1. Release process for "D" Release.
  1. Action point: Jack to talk to Felix and move forward the releae process for "D" Release targeting the release date of June 30 and TOC voting for approval on June 23.
  2. Action point: Jinri to organize release statement and PR for "D" Release.
  3. Rittwik: We have made some progress including closed-loop process usecases.
  4. Jack: We are in the process of getting FHGW in place?
  5. Rittwik: Thanks to Nokia.
  6. Jack: PTLs, any other items we need to address?
  7. Rittwik: Mahesh was buliding a SMO.
  8. Martin: He has artifacts on the same VM.
  9. Rittwik: I have a request to PTLs. If all the PTLs do the release process in the similar way, Felix's job will be easy.
2. "E" Release timeline.
  1. Action point: Jack to create "E" Release timeline and publish.
  2. Jack: After the "D" Release is out, let's get a short presentation to make sure we understand how the architecture looks like.
3. CII badging.
  1. Action Point: PTLs to wrap up CII badging.
  2. Jack: We are still pending on ODU HIGH.
  3. Manasi: We are waiting for a few responses from Near-RT RIC.
  4. Thoralf: I can ask them again.
  5. Jack: I have to follow up Intel.
4. Repo clean-up:
  1. Jack: Every repo should be attached to a project with a PTL. House-keeping and due diligence are the responsibility of the PTL.
5. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release.
6. PTL company change.
  1. Jack: I got a message from Mahesh, PTL of SMO. He has moved from VMware to Juniper. We have to decide to do going forward. Hopefully he can attend next meeting and have a dialogue.
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
3. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
4. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)

2021 06 09

Recording: 2021-6-9.m4a

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): Masafumi Masuda

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair	x	James Li
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl	x	Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane	x	John Keeney
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang		Jackie Huang	x

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 06/02/2021 TOC meeting minutes, Motion by MASAFUMI MASUDA, seconded by huangjinri@chinamobile.com. Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda.
Release Votes and Approval.
Copyright update
1. Jack: We had a meeting with representatives of ETSI committee. We are working on the path of getting a solution for a 3GPP project. I expect that Board meeting will approve the license. Then, we'll start process and procedures.
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Jinri: We had 2 OSC sessions in the virtual F2F meetings last week. There will be SMO sessions this week. There will be a Board meeting at the end of this month. TSC has approved the change of TOC members.
2. SMO discussions.
  1. Rittwik: Question is do we really need a functional division of SMO from implementation perspectives. Another question is if there is a slicing assurance component needed in SMO.
  2. Jack: We primarily focus on key APIs and interfaces that we need to make sure open and interoperable. A bigger question on SMO is that slice manager is above SMO or not. End users should not touch some components from security and other points of view.
  3. Mahesh: I agree.
  4. John Keeney: Implementation and software architecture is not within the scope of O-RAN Alliance. If slicing should happen inside the SMO, it's out of scope. It's about software architecture. If outside the SMO, it has to be specified as the requierment of O-RAN interfaces.
  5. Rittwik: Some vendors are opposit. This is a chance for us to bring up.
  6. Jack: David says WG1 identifies that slice management function is part of SMO. We need to get clarification. I don't believe direct customer access to SMO is acceptable.
3. Action Point: Rittwik to follow up the FHGW implementation.
4. Action Point: Jinri to lead O-RAN White paper version 3.
5. Action Point: All to review the SMO Feature Package(s) currently under discussion by the MVP-C.
6. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
7. Action Point: Jack Murray to work with O-RAN SFG to create a procedure for reporting bugs found during security badging in OSC.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items.
1. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. Action Point: All to TOC members to consider working with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC. William DIEGOoffered to support this activity with help from others.
2. Action Point: TOC members and whole community to indicate what do we really need to deliver in D- and E-releases to be successful and useful?
3. Collaboration between OSC and O-RAN Alliance on an SMO project definition.
4. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release
5. Action Point: PTLs to wrap up CII badging.
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
3. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
4. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
1. Release process for "D" Release.
  1. Thoralf: How do we physically release "D" Release?
  2. Jack: We are in the middle of the process. First, we do the license scans, second, review all the pieces and documentations in place and package things up. For integration use cases, have you been testing xApp and Near-RT RIC?
  3. Matti: We are still trying to get enough people's accounts on the OSC Lab.
  4. Rittwik: I also suggest that maybe some tests can be done by the teams. Who cuts the branch?
  5. Thoralf: It would be straightforward and simple that PTLs cut the branch. It's best to look at what has been done for "C" Release.
  6. We'll talk to Felix. Trishan, did you see the scans and results?
  7. Trishan: Yes.
  8. Jack: Mahesh, this is the first full SMO release. I'll have Felix connect with you.
  9. Mahesh: OK.
  10. Thoralf: What's the release date?
  11. Jack: June 30. Jinri, can you take the responsibility for release statement and PR?
  12. Jinri: Sure.
  13. Jack: The ideal is to take the TOC vote and approval on June 23.
  14. Action point: Jack to talk to Felix and move forward the releae process for "D" Release targeting the release date of June 30 and TOC voting for approval on June 23.
  15. Action point: Jinri to organize release statement and PR for "D" Release.
2. "E" Release timeline.
  1. Jack: I got to get "E" Release timeline and publish. Does anybody have any questions or concerns doing the same timeline as Cherry Release for “E” Release?
  2. John Keeney: My suggestion is to start requierment gathering for "F" Release before the end of "E" Release.
  3. Jack: I agree.
  4. Action point: Jack to create "E" Release timeline and publish.
3. Repo clean-up.
  1. John Keeney: We need to clean up repos in OSC.
  2. Jack: Trishan, is there a way to generate a report showing repos not attached to any projects?
  3. Trishan: Yes. We are reviewing it in the analytics platform.
  4. Jack: Every repo should be attached to a project with a PTL. House-keeping and due diligence are the responsibility of the PTL.
  5. Matti: We have some repos for Amber Release that have not been maintained. Is that against the open source philosophy?
  6. Trishan: Once repos get inactive, just get archived after updating the description and getting TOC approval.
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)

2021 06 02

Recording: 2021-6-2.m4a

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): Masafumi Masuda

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair		James Li
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl	x	Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane	x	John Keeney
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang		Jackie Huang	x

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 05/26/2021 TOC meeting minutes, Motion by John Paul Lane, seconded by Juha Oravainen. Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda
1. Rittwik: We should discuss OSC meeting for tomorrow.
2. Jack: Let's do that under the O-RAN-related business.
Release Votes and Approval.
Copyright update
1. Jack: We have 2 agenda items for the Board meeting: 1) approval of the new copyright license and 2) modification of the IPR policy.
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Tomorrow's OSC meeting:
  1. Jack: Rittwik can cover topics for the F2F meetings.
  2. Rittwik: We have couple of items. I'll go over what was expected in "D" Release and have PTLs cover what was done. And for "E" Release, we have the disaggregated best agent and the continuation of DU/RU interaction as well as the closed-loop use case. We need to consider Network Slicing is on the table or not. After that, we will discuss what the requests are from OSC. We need basic things. Let's see what kind of feedbacks we will get. "E" Release planning starts this month, right?
  3. Jack: Yes, it's the end of this month as we wrap up the "D" Release.
  4. Rittwik: We should push the EC to prioritize FM and PM data models and information modes ahead of the other MVPs. Is that a good enough message?
  5. Jack: Is that what will be done in the SMO compared to the other modules?
  6. David Kinsey: It's not only in the SMO. There are more elements to work together.
  7. Jack: We just need a better way to track activities across the modules. Challenge is how to keep interest in the other topics as well. RegardingSlicing, is that creating a module in the SMO or somewhere else?
  8. Rittwik: There are 3 components we need to create. I don't think we can get there that quickly. We just want to construct basic slices.
  9. Mahesh: Implementation has to happen on each of the network elements.
  10. Rittwik: Probably we can leverage some of what ONAP has done. That's just a thought. We are discussing use cases we can think of. Keep in mind that a lot of design discussions are still happening.
  11. Jack: Issue is lining up stuff in SMO and other resources to work on?
  12. Rittwik: This is our request to O-RAN Alliance.
  13. Jack: For the work that got to be done across the OSC, has there been discussion?
  14. Rittwik: We just had a initial initial discussion last week.
  15. David Kinsey: We haven't had a full conversation. We will show only the 2 elements. All depends on what we can do. We don't know. We need to have a clear definition of scope. There hasn't been a lot of definitions coming from O-RAN.
  16. Rittwik: Request is Network Slicing is on the table or should we do design work first.
  17. John Keeney: I don't know if we want to develop whole new NSMF. We will have to talk about that.
  18. Rittwik: We just had an initial discussion. Back to earlier question, what is MVP's relation to OSC. Do we need to validate all the specs coming out as part of MVP package? Does the OSC cirtify and budge? My suggestion was to let that OSC check it first as a gating factor then release it as a package. We need your guidance.
  19. Jack: Any thoughts or opinions?
  20. John-Paul: It's a good initiative. Challenges are to get alignment and to coordinate across WGs. Maybe we should pick subsets and build piece by piece.
  21. David Kinsey: That's what we've been asking for. Take the simple stuff first, not focus on new features. Design has to be more mature.
  22. John-Paul: I agree. MVP-C can set cirtain use cases and features for the release, then it comes down to WGs with the priority set and the resources available.
  23. David Kinsey: I agree. We couldn't develop, certify or demonstrate actual features wihtout definition. That's a limitation of our gating function.
  24. Jack: How do we progress? MVP is a much broader program. Challenge is how we advance things. O-CU is going to be a more major obstacle. We don't have to follow whole MVP, but we need to have idenfiable progress. It's a challenge, but let's continue dialogue. We need to make significant progress in "D" Release. Is RSAC aligned on deliverables for "E" Release?
  25. David Kinsey: We haven't had specific discussions yet.
  26. Rittwik: For tomorrow, let's focus on "D" Release and just give them a tease for "E" Release.
  27. Mahesh: We have to get basic workings. Near-RT RIC, O-DU and O-RU are existing and some of them are able to communicate with SMO.
  28. Jack: O-RU is using M-plane from O-DU. Do we have the implementation?
  29. David Kinsey: O-DU Low doesn't have a NETCONF client yet. The other apect is hybrid mode.
  30. Jack: Any progress on FHGW?
  31. Rittwik: Viavi has shipped TM500. Nokia IXR is being prepared.
2. O-RAN White papper version 3:
  1. Jack: Activity is going on. Just to make sure wider commnity gets visibility.
  2. David Kinsey: There was a thread and a dialogue.
  3. Jack: Jinri owns that action item. Send him a note.
3. Action Point: All to review the SMO Feature Package(s) currently under discussion by the MVP-C.
  1. Jack: Currently under discussion. It is important to aligne on SMO and where the resources coming from. There is challenges. MVP-C may be much more ambitious than we can take on.
4. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
5. Action Point: Jack Murray to work with O-RAN SFG to create a procedure for reporting bugs found during security badging in OSC.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items.
1. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. Action Point: All to TOC members to consider working with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC. William DIEGOoffered to support this activity with help from others.
2. Action Point: TOC members and whole community to indicate what do we really need to deliver in D- and E-releases to be successful and useful?
3. Collaboration between OSC and O-RAN Alliance on an SMO project definition.
4. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release
5. Old business: CII badging
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. D Release Timelin
3. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
  1. Action Point: All PTLs to amend the OSC D highlights section for their project by May 26th
4. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
  1. Action Point: Former user (Deleted) will reach out from SMO to identify any support which can be offered. PTLs are also key to this.
  2. Action Point: Adding PTLs as committers to the INT project could help to expedite the integration and verification progress for OSC D release. PTLs to follow up with Trishan de Lanerolle providing LF IDs to be added to the relevant YAML file.
    1. Trishan: I have made the request and 5 PTLs have received LF IDs.
    2. Mahesh: Getting OSC lab integration effort is important.
    3. John Keeney: Response rate from LF is slow. We are supposed to be releaseing it next week.
    4. Trishan: I'll chase it down. SMO is missing.
    5. Jack: Who would be given that role?
    6. Mahesh: I'll provide that.
    7. John Keeney: I know another ticket which has been open for several weeks to fix some information in the analytics dashboard.
    8. Trishan: It wasn't prioritized. Let's follow it up off-line.
    9. Jack: It is important. We need to clean up.
5. CII badging:
  1. Jack: We talked about CII badging last week.
  2. Mahesh: I can try to add a few items to show some progress.
  3. Jack: What do we have to do to close O-DU High and Low?
  4. Sphoorthi: I've been working on it.
  5. Jack: Any major blocker?
  6. Sphoorthi: Nothing. We will provide update.
  7. Jack: We need to wrap up.
6. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)

2021 05 26

Recording: TOC 20210526

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): John-Paul Lane

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair		James Li	x
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl	x	Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane	x	John Keeney
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang		Jackie Huang	x

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 05/19/2021 TOC meeting minutes, Motion by John-Paul Lane, seconded by Former user (Deleted). Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda
1. Rittwik raised O-DU low and high integration for today's agenda.
Release Votes and Approval.
1. John Keeney: I'd like to request approval to edit certain SonarQube rules. Common set of SonarQube quality rules after each commit, report is then generated with list of bugs, code standards etc. Some of these rules are overly restrictive and inappropriate. More details included in John's email.
2. Trishan: It would be good to have a process for administering changes. Changing at project level could get messy.
3. David: Agree with Trishan. Maybe disable the reporting function instead of editing the rules?
4. Jack: This would normally be done in coordination with the INT team (and Trishan) to ensure there is commonality & consistency with the approach across all projects. Unfortunately, the INT team has been under-resourced. Can we amend the motion to address the specific SonarQube rule ('Java var') and then consider a processgoing forward?
5. John K: Yes, that is acceptable. I raise a motion to disable specific SonarQube rule around 'Java var' .
6. John K: This would be for Non-RT RIC, SIM and Portal projects.
7. Jack: Is there any reason why this would not apply to all projects?
8. John K: I am not aware of any blocker to this but PTLs might want to comment.
9. John K makes motion to change specific rule. David seconded. Motion passed.
10. Jack: Motion passed for this specific rule. Need to discuss how to handle going forward.
11. Trishan: Please include me on the LF ticket, John.
12. John K: Yes, will do.
Copyright update
1. Jack: Copyright is completed. Focusing on language and wording to enable IPR discussions with O-RAN board. No proposed changes to licensing or the process around the license. On track. Expectation is that this will be voted on the upcoming O-RAN board meeting.
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Jinri: Major focus still on virtual F2F meeting. Sent link to wiki page to email reflector. Action point: Rittwik to post link to F2F meeting schedule. Trishan: can we get a version of the osc sessions posted on osc wiki. non-member participants in the osc can't access the oran alliance wiki
2. Jinri: Preparation continues for white paper input from OSC.
3. Jinri: TSC leadership asked for update on the INT project resourcing issues (no PTL assigned at this time).
4. Jack: I got a call and I have talked with several EC members about this issue. There has been some progress - James from CMCC is getting more involved with the test lab. Discussed with Rittwik & Mahesh that as SMO expands, another resource could be found to support the INT activity. Felix can support / participate but we are still looking for someone to step in to the INT PTL role to coordinate across the projects. We are at the point where we need to get ready for the OSC release (security scans etc.).
5. Jinri: Haseeb has raised a question over email. When you get some time, can you have a look at this please?
6. Mahesh: Yes, we are reviewing internally and will respond shortly.
7. Jack: There is a lot of SMO conversation outside of OSC / O-RAN Alliance. Encourage all in OSC to get involved and support OSC SMO project in providing clear guidance on what OSC SMO should / could be.
8. Action Point: RSAC co-chairs (Former user (Deleted) & David Kinsey [AT&T]) and PTLs to follow-up with huangjinri@chinamobile.com on suggestions for O-RAN Virtual F2F agenda items. Target date for submissions 05/14/2021.
9. Action point: huangjinri@chinamobile.com / James Li to share white paper and clarify process for making contributions.
10. Action Point: huangjinri@chinamobile.com to follow up with RSAC and PTLs on suggested OSC input into version 3 of O-RAN White Paper.
11. Action Point: All to review the SMO Feature Package(s) currently under discussion by the MVP-C.
12. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
13. Action Point: Jack Murray to work with O-RAN SFG to create a procedure for reporting bugs found during security badging in OSC.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items.
1. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. William is supporting this activity on a limited time availability.
  2. Action Point: All to TOC members to consider working with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC. William DIEGOoffered to support this activity with help from others.
2. Action Point: TOC members and whole community to indicate what do we really need to deliver in D- and E-releases to be successful and useful?
3. Collaboration between OSC and O-RAN Alliance on an SMO project definition.
  1. Jack: Who owns the MVP in the O-RAN Alliance?
  2. Rittwik: MVP-C co-chairs but there is a lack of dedicated SMO responsible(s) in the Alliance.
4. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release
5. Old business: CII badging
  1. Jack: We are at the stage where all projects should hit 100% for CII badging.
  2. SMO: We know this project has certain challenges which will take us past our deadline.
  3. RICAPP: Matti Hiltunen will look at this over the coming days.
  4. Near RT RIC: Great job. Passing.
  5. O-CU: No active code. Only a test fixture.
  6. O-DU (High): 81%. Marked incorrectly as 'Incomplete' in the wiki. Sachin Srivastava to follow up with Trishan to update.
  7. O-DU (Low): Progress looks good. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) is working to close out the remaining issues.
  8. OAM: Alex Stancu to talk with Martin Skorupski to close out the remaining issues.
  9. SIM: Passing.
  10. INFRA: Jackie Huang to follow up with Xiaohua Zhang and team to get the remaining issues closed out. Will follow-up with Trishan offline for additional support.
  11. Non-RT RIC:
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. D Release Timelin
3. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
  1. Jack: Do you have any sense on how the MVP will influence our OSC E requirements?
  2. Dave: Not at this stage. MVP is working at a higher level and we need more detailed information. We also need the basics in place before we can discuss advanced use case support.
  3. Rittwik: Agree. Raised this issue with Hank. Need to get the basics in place before we look at more advanced use cases. For SMO, our ask is to get the minimum needed for FM, PM and O1 across all functions in the O-RAN architecture. Which WG should coordinate SMO top down perspective?
  4. Jack: Can we put together a capabilities list per project so we can identify gaps and track progress towards achieving delivery of the building blocks?
  5. Rittwik: If there is consensus in this group to focus on the basics then we can work to deliver the basics in OSC.
  6. David: Yes, once we have identified the capabilities we can track technical debt across the projects.
  7. Mahesh: I would add CM to the list:
  8. David: Absolutely, FCAPS is the ask here.
  9. Jack: If we had a couple of slides it would help to focus attention.
  10. Rittwik: Yes.
  11. Jack: There is pressure to maintain interest outside of this group. We can help maintain focus by identifying higher level uses which demonstrates value to the overall industry. However, the basics must be delivered. Without this, it is hard to generate and keep external interest.
  12. Jinri: Do you wish to bring to O-RAN TSC? Next meeting in Friday next week, then 2 weeks afterwards.
  13. Jack: Next week may be too soon.
  14. Rittwik: Could discuss at the O-RAN Virtual F2F?
  15. Jack: Introduce the topic in the F2F and then go in more detail to a subsequent TSC meeting.
  16. Rittwik: Can O-DU (High) and O-DU (Low) engage on testing?
  17. Zhimin: Yes, we are talking with Alex Han to try to progress this issue.
  18. Jack: This is one of the blocking issues so it would be great if we could get this closed out.
  19. Action Point: All PTLs to amend the OSC D highlights section for their project by May 26th.
    1. Near-RT RIC: done (highlights sections includes what is done; status section includes what has been dropped from original plans)
4. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
  1. Felix: Who can help with the OSC D release readout?
  2. Jack: We need this by end of June. Each PTL has been updating the OSC D highlights for their projects. We can look to re-use this list.
  3. Felix: I can coordinate with PTLs to prepare instructions for E2E testing which can also be included in the OSC D release readout.
  4. Jack: We should only focus on what has been delivered for OSC release. The highlights from PTLs can help guide this.
  5. Action Point: Former user (Deleted) will reach out from SMO to identify any support which can be offered. PTLs are also key to this.
  6. Action Point: Adding PTLs as committers to the INT project could help to expedite the integration and verification progress for OSC D release. PTLs to follow up with Trishan de Lanerolle providing LF IDs to be added to the relevant YAML file.
5. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)
1. Motion passed to allow editing of the SonarQube Java var rule for the Non-RT RIC, SIM and OAM projects. Action Point: John Keeney (Ericsson EST)to follow up with Trishan to disable the rule. Need to agree a process for handling these types of rules going forward.
2. Action point: Former user (Deleted) to post link to OSC sessions at the upcoming O-RAN vF2F meeting schedule. Trishan asked if we can get a version of the OSC sessions posted on OSC wiki. Not all OSC participants can access O-RAN alliance wiki.
3. Action Point: All PTLs (except SMO) to ensure the CII badging is at 100% in time for the OSC D release.

2021 05 19

Recording: TOC 20210519

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): John-Paul Lane

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair		James Li	x
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl		Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane	x	John Keeney
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego	x	Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman	x	Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang	x	Jackie Huang

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 05/12/2021 TOC meeting minutes, Motion by John-Paul, seconded by Ganesh. Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda
1. Trishan: Testing framework project would like to remove certain files. Added to release votes and approval.
2. John K: Swami (SPOC between ONAP and OSC) has stepped down from that role. Process ongoing to recruit representative. Could someone from TOC / RSAC act as representative back to ONAP? Add to O-RAN related business. William can try to help liaising with ONAP. Not as SPOC but can assist with others.
Release Votes and Approval.
1. Jack: We got a request from the test framework to remove files which shouldn't be part of open source.
2. Trishan. There are 3 config files which were accidentally published into the gerrit repo. Looking for permission to purge them from the repo. Impact is minimal as OTF is not an architectural component in OSC and the files are not actively used by the OSC software components.
3. Jack: I make a motion to remove these files. Jinri: Seconded. No objections. Motion passed.
Copyright update
1. No meeting last week due to public holiday in Europe. Meeting scheduled this week to finalise FAQs and other issues of process. Working towards getting this proposal approved at the upcoming O-RAN board meeting.
2. Action Point: Each company legal team should review the license and provide feedback through TOC.
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Jinri: Mahesh has requested to include SMO session at upcoming O-RAN vF2F.
2. Jinri: Working on OSC inputs to O-RAN white paper. Currently working on draft and will send it to TOC for review and comments. May 27th is deadline for OSC input.
3. Jack: Anything which you need for vF2F?
4. Rittwik: We would like to include an agenda item for OSC E release. Tie it with the OSC D release update. 1 hour total should suffice.
5. Jinri: I will include.
6. Xiaohua: Does OSC wish to consider submissions for O-RAN Plugfest?
7. Jack: Submissions comes from company representatives. OSC has faced challenges with the integration activity in D release. Need to see if there are any sponsors to drive contributions into plugfest.
8. Tracy: Third plugfest is coming up in November. There will be demonstrations of the latest OSC release (or even pre-release software). Still gathering a list of contributions for November. PoC plugfest is early November so it doesn't align with the formal OSC E release but that should not be a blocker to maker demos. Sophisticated E2E behaviour and use cases building on previous plugfest topics of O1, A1 etc.
9. Rittwik: For MWC Barcelona we are trying to put something together for traffic simulators, anomaly detection etc. We could re-use / extend some of this work for November's plugfest. Is there something we should do for November now?
10. Tracy: It's still early in the process. Currently looking for interested parties. Email containing more information will be distributed by the O-RAN TIFG soon.
11. Juha: Here is a Link to plugfest timeline
12. Rittwik: Can someone please distribute the white paper so we can understand the input from OSC?
13. Jack: Action point: James to share white paper and clarify process for making contributions.
14. Action Point: RSAC co-chairs and PTLs to follow-up with Jinri on suggestions for O-RAN Virtual F2F agenda items. Target date for submissions 05/14/2021.
15. Action Point: Jinri to follow up with RSAC and PTLs on suggested OSC input into version 3 of O-RAN White Paper.
16. Action Point: All to review the SMO Feature Package(s) currently under discussion by the MVP-C.
  1. Rittwik: We've been discussing in RSAC. Reviewing IM/DM models work to date from WG10. Trying to understand what is needed for SMO models from the November. train Tracy, myself, Martin, Dave, Mahesh are keeping an eye on trying to identify minimum requirement for SMO. It's important that each WG contributes some of the models to stitch together the end to end view. May be challenging to get agreement across WGs, however we continue to engage in the discussion.
17. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
  1. Rittwik: We would like a badging process for IM/DM models which will allow each component in OSC to build on top of usable models from the Alliance.
  2. Tracy: The model is contribution driven. We need each WG and OSC to engage in the process.
  3. Jack: This links back to the O-RAN copyright discussions. I expect OSC to establish a repo to hold models which will be used by OSC under the terms of the O-RAN Alliance copyright license. OSC will have permission to copy the models and modify them. O-RAN Alliance will have the right to take any modifications to the O-RAN specifications back to the Alliance. Of course, 3GPP models are a different issue...for now.
  4. Tracy: All O-RAN models, up to now, have been verified / validated with OSC releases within the O-RAN PoC / plugfest.
  5. Rittwik: We would like to formalise this verification / validation to show value from the OSC E release.
18. Action Point: Jack to work with O-RAN SFG to create a procedure for reporting bugs found during security badging in OSC.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items.
1. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. Action Point: Request for a TOC member to work with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC.
  2. Jack: TIFG is not really considering OSC in its plans. It is more WG focused for working through its verification approaches. I think OSC has an important role in interoperability. OSC should be the normalised "standard" for some of this interoperability. We need someone from TOC to be more involved in that activity.
  3. William: I might be able to give some support to this activity. However, I would need support from others in the TOC.
  4. Jack: That's good. We would like to broaden the involvement of the TOC members in these types of activities. Thank-you, William, for joining that discussion.
2. Action Point: TOC members and whole community to indicate what do we really need to deliver in D- and E-releases to be successful and useful?
  1. Jack: Bring things to RSAC which promotes OSC value to operators. More complete functionality is a focus. Getting the stack more operational is a must. Please engage with RSAC on any requirements / models / ideas you may have which brings value to OSC.
3. Collaboration between OSC and O-RAN Alliance on an SMO project definition.
  1. Jack: Covered by Rittwik above.
4. 5G Super Blueprint status - tabled for D and E, will be reevaluated for F release
5. Old business: CII badging
  1. Jack: This has been discussed in recent weeks. Expectation is that all teams (except SMO) meets CII badging goals in OSC D.
Standing Agenda Items (Brief Status of Ongoing Activities)
1. Release Manager Trishan de Lanerolle /Release Planning: Weekly TOC Scheduling
2. D Release Timelin
3. Former user (Deleted) Requirements Software Architecture Committee
  1. Rittwik: Started to put some items together for E release. Need to understand full picture for OSC D progress so we can include at the vF2F. Can PTLs update the regular release wiki to summarise their projects'
  2. Jack: Do all PTLs know where to publish OSC D status?
  3. Rittwik: Go to Releases - D Release - link.
  4. Jack: Action Point: All PTLs to amend the OSC D highlights section for their project by May 26th.
  5. Jack: The OSC E release requirements planning should be kicked off in early July. We need to know where our gaps are in capabilities. I will publish an E release calendar.
4. Integration and Test (PTL needed)
  1. Jack: Felix has kindly offered some time to help us over the OSC D release line. Will work with James. Action Point: Rittwik will reach out from SMO to identify any support which can be offered. PTLS are also key to this.
  2. John K: Could the PTLs be made committers in INT project to expedite the process?
  3. Jack: Any concerns over this?
  4. Rittwik: This would definitely help to expedite matters.
  5. Jack: How do we add PTLs to committer for INT?
  6. Trishan: There is a process to update the YAML file with the names and LF IDs of the interested parties. Send me the names and I will follow-up.
5. Report out from PTL: Stand-Up & Report Out on Blockers
  1. Mahesh Jethanandani Service Management and Orchestration (SMO)
  2. John Keeney (Ericsson EST) Non-Real Time RIC (RAN Intelligent Controller) (NONRTRIC)
  3. Matti Hiltunen RIC Applications (RICAPP)
  4. Thoralf Czichy RIC Platform (RIC)
  5. @gusu O-RAN Centralized Unit (OCU)
  6. Sachin Srivastava O-RAN Distributed Unit High (ODUHIGH)
  7. Zhimin Yuan (Deactivated) O-RAN Distributed Unit Low (ODULOW)
  8. Martin Skorupski Operations and Maintenance (OAM)
  9. Alex Stancu Simulations (SIM)
  10. Xiaohua Zhang Infrastructure (INF)
  11. Weichen Ni Documentation (DOC)
  12. (TBD) O-RAN Radio Unit (ORU)
New Agenda Items (New Business): New Items Submitted (+speaker) & Open Call to TOC For Additional Items
Planning for Next Meeting
Any Other Business (AOB)
1. Trishan: New project / seed code guidelines are lacking on the wiki. I updated the OSC Wiki with guidelines (from ONAP). TOC members, please review the material and revert with any feedback.
Meeting Summary (resolutions, new action items, etc.)
1. Action Point: Each company legal team should review the O-RAN Software license and provide feedback through TOC.
2. Action point: James to share O-RAN white paper with the TOC and clarify process for suggesting contributions.
3. Action Point: All PTLs to amend the OSC D highlights section for their project by May 26th.
4. Action Point: Rittwik will reach out from OSC SMO to identify any support which can be offered to the INT project. PTLs also central to integration for OSC D release.

2021 05 12

Recording: TOC 20210512

Agenda

Call for Scribe (minutes owner): John-Paul Lane

Roll Call & Quorum Check

Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x	David Kinsey
China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair		James Li	x
Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl	x	Ondřej Hudousek
Ericsson	John-Paul Lane	x	John Keeney
NTT DOCOMO	Masafumi Masuda	x	Anil Umesh
Nokia	Juha Oravainen	x	Thoralf Czichy
Orange	William Diego		Vincent Danno
Radisys	Ganesh Shenbagaraman		Sachin Srivastava
Wind River	Xiaohua Zhang		Jackie Huang

*Quorum: 50% or more of total TOC voting members unless excluded due to attendance.

Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meeting
1. Decision: For the 05/05/2021 TOC meeting minutes, Motion by John-Paul, seconded by Jinri. Motion passed.
Review of Today's Agenda
Release Votes and Approval.
Copyright update
1. Jack: Last week's copyright meeting worked on FAQ to produce more clarity. No updates to the license itself. Next steps are to present to O-RAN EC and Board. Also, some are interested in presenting to ETSI. O-RAN Alliance will follow a process for releasing specifications under this license. OSC will create a repo under OSCP for code contributed under this license.
2. Jack: Just want to provide some background. The TOC is responsible for two separate activities each with their own unique charters - 1) The OSC under LF and; 2) the O-RAN Specification Code Project under O-RAN. Each activity has its own license (OSC uses Apache 2.0 and OSCP uses an O-RAN license). The new O-RAN Software Copyright license comes under OSCP.
3. Matti: Does O-RAN have permission to publish 3GPP software e.g. ASN.1 code?
4. Jack: Not yet. They are working on trying to get agreement with ETSI 3GPP. This will take a little longer to discuss and conclude.
5. Jack: One of the first things we will have to do is create a new repo under OSCP. The TOC will be asked to approve this process once O-RAN Alliance signs off.
6. John-Paul: Will Friday's O-RAN copyright meeting proceed as planned? It is a public holiday in many European countries which may affect participation.
7. Jack: I wasn't aware it was a public holiday. I will talk with Hank and see if we push the invitation to next week.
8. Juha: Is it ok to have a mix of code repos under different licenses? Does it cause any issues?
9. Jack: It will require some discipline from contribution teams to ensure the appropriate license has been copied over and the process has been follwoed. In terms of combining different licenses in the code, the general principle is that the most restrictive license applies.
10. Action Point: Each company legal team should review the license and provide feedback through TOC.
O-RAN-related business (marketing, WG interaction, TSC/EC update etc.)
1. Jinri: There are a few things to share:
  1. Jinri gave an OSC report to TSC last Friday. May require some follow up, especially in relation to AMD interest.
  2. Jinri reported the proposes TOC membership structure to O-RAN EC. The EC has canvassed interest from Reliance Jio and TIM about replacing Verizon on the TOC. Reliance Jio are not in a position to explore at the moment.
  3. The next O-RAN Virtual F2F meeting is scheduled for June. At last Friday's TSC call, the WG co-chairs were asked to consider a list of cross-WG topics for discussion at the F2F. OSC will have at least one slot at F2F. Looking to RSAC co-chairs and PTLs for suggested agenda items. One suggested agenda item is to present status of OSC D release as well as the current planning activity for OSC E. Action Point: RSAC co-chairs and PTLs to follow-up offline with suggestions to Jinri. First round of feedback is needed by end of this week (05/14/2021).
  4. Three years ago O-RAN published the first version of its white paper. Last year, version 2 of the white paper was released where the content was quite different (led by UCTG and WG1). Now, version 3 of white paper (still led by UCTG) shall be created with a view to publishing during MWC Barcelona timeframe (internal O-RAN approval end June, publish early July). TSC puts a lot of importance on this version of the white paper. Content will not simply focus on use cases or deployment scenarios. MVP-C, open source and test & integration will also be included. Purpose of the paper is to demonstrate O-RAN progression to the overall industry. OSC needs to provide input to this white paper. Action Point: Jinri will follow up with RSAC and PTLs on suggestions for OSC input.
  5. Juha: Is white paper draft (version 3) visible in O-RAN Alliance?
  6. Jinri: Not yet. I will distribute preliminary version shortly.
2. Action Point: All to review the SMO Feature Package(s) currently under discussion by the MVP-C.
  1. Rittwik: There will be a meeting later today with the MVP-C to discuss SMO. We will ask the MVP team to focus on specifying feature packages for O1 YANG models across all WGs. Getting a working set of O1 models from every WG is perhaps THE most important activity for OSC SMO. The target is to run models through pyang validator by November. From O2 perspective, cloud discovery and registration should be available in time for the July train. These are the minimum set of SMO activities we would like to agree with Alliance.
  2. Jack: Functional O1 and O2 interfaces are critical for SMO. I would like to see something on data management too. So, you have your basic communications and your basic data management components in place. Then, you can build your use cases on top. As a question, how do you gauge success in terms of O1 model coverage? Need some measure of success.
  3. Rittwik: Agree. We will approach this in phases. This needs to come from the individual working groups in the O-RAN Alliance. The specification needs to be usable by OSC.
  4. Tracy: How soon do you need November train models to deliver to SMO for OSC E?
  5. Rittwik: September is the deadline OSC SMO is working towards.
  6. Tracy: Quality of model content is driven by engagement from O-RAN members.
  7. Rittwik: Good models are 'a must'. Sometimes we think we have good content but then we try to integrate E2E and find that it doesn't stand up. It's important that we agree an E2E view and plan for model deliverables from WGs.
3. Action Point: All to consider engaging with WG10 for the IM / DM modelling tool chain discussion.
4. Action Point: Jinri to include an agenda item on the O-RAN Alliance TSC meeting for reporting security badging bugs back to the SFG.
  1. Jinri: This items was reported to the O-RAN TSC last Friday. A further meeting with O-RAN EC needed.
  2. Jack: Also need to work with SFG to put in place a procedure for reporting bugs found during the security badging activity in OSC.
  3. Jinri: Can some of the TOC membership take an action to drive this?
  4. Jack: I'll take this action point.
Old business and Status of Open Action Items.
1. Update from TIFG meeting with OSC.
  1. Jack: TIFG meeting 10am EST 05/05/2021. The main discussion was how OSC could / should participate in the TIFG activities. TIFG is currently busy with establishing criteria for OTICs and badging. It is requesting input from the WGs for these items. Participation from OSC in these activities was raised. Ideally, OSC should have someone to act as point of contact here. Action Point: Request for a TOC member to work with TIFG on an ongoing basis to represent OSC. Please think about it and I will raise again next week.
  2. Tracy: Is there also interest in seeing if OTIC site could double up as an integration & testing site for OSC?
  3. Jack: I just need someone to represent OSC in these types of discussions.</

2021 Q2 (Apr, May, Jun)

2021 06 30

2021 06 16

2021 06 09

2021 06 02

2021 05 26

2021 05 19

2021 05 12