Versions Compared

Old Version 16

changes.mady.by.user ramki krishnan

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Shuki Yulzari

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

The Service Orchestration Workflow Development and Testing~The September Developers Event is for ONAP developers, by ONAP developers. Your contributions and needs are what will drive the agenda for all of these sessions.  To build the agenda for the we are soliciting Topics for discussion from the community.  Ideally these are questions that you need a deeper understanding of in order to make progress or deep-dive information sharing in a particular area.

...

Community Members provide Topic recommendations Aug. 3 - Sept. 1510

Attendees self-select Topics of interest Sept. 16 11 - 2015

Agenda set Sept. 2118

...

TOPIC RECOMMENDATIONS


Anchor
TH3
TH3


Amsterdam M4 Code Freeze Milestone Review  

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion. M4 Code Freeze Review of all Amsterdam Projects. TSC will vote on the projects and depending on the findings, TSC will need to decide on:
        1. projects who pass M4
        2. projects that will need to be removed from Amsterdam
        3. projects that will need some adjustements
  • Targeted Audience: anyone but PTLs and TSC voting members attendance is expected. In case a PTL cannot physically attend, please delegate one committer who can answer questions.
  • Date: Wednesday, Sept 27 for 1 pm to 5 pm
  • Topic Leader: Gildas Lanilis gildas.lanilis@huawei.comTopic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 4 hours
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Beijing Milestone Approval

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Enforcing an "Upstream first" approach to ONAP

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

External Open Source collaboration (OPNFV, ODL, etc.) and required actions 

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

External Standards Coordination and required actions with a different SDO 

...

Anchor
M6
M6


Training: On the Importance of adopting Scrum and Estimating 

  • Description: Discussion on the benefits of applying Scrum techniques and Poker Planning for Estimating.
    1. Why is Scrum important for the Team. How to apply Scrum for distributed Team
    2. You can't swallow more that you can shew: Estimating with Poker Planning will make the team more realistic.

Beijing Release Calendar Proposal

...

Joint Architecture/Usecase subcommittee meeting 

...

R2 (Beijing) Architecture

  • Description: A discussion to firm-up open issues in the R2 architecture and status.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 1 hour presentation for information of current state, but also a more indeep parallel workshop.
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

R2 (Beijing) use cases approval 

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 30-45 minutes
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Usecase subcommittee meeting 

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Installation hands-on

  • Description: Sharing on ONAP installation
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 2h
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Modeling

...

Enforcing an "Upstream first" approach to ONAP

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:

...

  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Use-Case deep dive

  • Description: Description of the call flows used for one use-case for R1
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 1h
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Microservice Bus Tutorial

...

Anchor
TH11
TH11


External Open Source collaboration (OPNFV, ODL, etc.) and required actions  

  • Description: Description of the topic and the objective/outcome desired at the end of the discussion.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion. (Jamil Chawki for OPNFV)
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:

...

  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

...

Introducing CLI Model engine &  Tutorial

  • Description: As part of this session, audience will learn about the CLI model engine capabilities and how to develop ONAP commands using it just by writing YAML file with zero line of code, CLI model engine produce Commands directly from YAML.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 1h 
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Integration / Testing

  • Description: In this session, we'll discuss the current ONAP quality, issues, available features, etc.,  based on what we have tested in CSIT, Developer lab, End to End Testing, etc.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 2h 
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

How to use ONAP Developer Lab

  • Description: In this session, we'll introduce how to leverage developer lab and its strategy,  and as optional the audience could get chance to try it themselves.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 2h 
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

ONAP Development Tutorial

  • Description: Development environment setup, testing, ONAP development flow, Vagrant, etc. will be introduced in this session.
  • Topic Leader: The person that is knowledgeable enough to lead and moderate this discussion.
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 2h 
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)

Control Loop - E2E

...

Anchor
TH6
TH6


External Standards Coordination and required actions with a different SDO   

  • Description: Analysis of the external SDOs progress which may related to ONAP and potential cooperation
  • Topic Leader: Hui Deng

...

  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration:

...

Workshop Title: ONAP Multi Cloud Architectural vision for R2 and beyond

Goal:                               Advance Multi Cloud beyond the current proxy implementation to address ONAP platform level issues across all use cases

Moderator(s):                 VMware, Wind River

Primary Contact:           Ramki Krishnan, VMware, ramkik@vmware.com

Topic 1:   Standardized Infrastructure and Application class statistics Model

Anchor
W3
W3


Joint Architecture/Usecase subcommittees' meeting 

Anchor
W4
W4


Joint Architecture/Usecase/Modeling subcommittees' meeting 

Anchor
TH10
TH10


ONAP security subcommittees' meeting   

  • Description: A discussion and feedback on ONAP security topics:  Static Code Scanning; CII Badiging program certification feedback (CLAMP team); Credential Management
  • Topic Leader: Stephen Terrill; (together with a CLAMP team memember)
  • Volunteer Note Taker: Pawel Pawlak pawel.pawlak3@orange.com 
  • Estimated Duration: 1 hour
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
W5
W5


Operator Perspectives on R2 (Beijing) Architecture 

Anchor
W7
W7


R2 (Beijing) use cases/platform capabilities first presentation to the TSC 

Anchor
TH15
TH15


Usecase subcommittee meeting  


Installation hands-on

Anchor
M8
M8


Kubernetes ONAP deployment overview and hands-on  

Anchor
TH2
TH2


Modeling 

Anchor
T2
T2


Residential vCPE Use-Case deep dive 


VoLTE Use-Case deep dive 

Anchor
M2
M2


Microservice Bus Tutorial 

Anchor
M3
M3


Introducing CLI Model engine &  Tutorial 

  • Description: As part of this session, audience will learn about the CLI model engine capabilities and how to develop ONAP commands using it just by writing YAML file with zero line of code, CLI model engine produce Commands directly from YAML.
  • Topic Leader: user-67d6f
  • Volunteer Note Taker: user-67d6f
  • Estimated Duration: 1h 
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
T1
T1


Integration / Testing 

  • Description: This session will give an overview of ONAP status from Integrtaion / Testing point of view:
    1. ntegration testing process and its status:
      1. UT
      2. CSIT
      3. Integration lab, this includes pair testing rules for each project, this includes a brief on how to use the lab in general, Stephen and Yang will give details later
      4. End to End lab status overview for vCPE, VoLTE  (deep dive will be covered in another two sessions) and vFW / vDNS
      5. Integration deployment strategy for Amsterdam: assets requirement and deployment topology, quick review of how to use heat template to deploy ONAP in Integration lab
    2. Integration testing practice and results from Orange open lab

Anchor
M4
M4


How to use ONAP Community Lab 

Anchor
W2
W2


R2: Non-functional requirements proposals  

Anchor
M1
M1


ONAP Development Tutorial 

Anchor
T8
T8


Control Loop - E2E 

Anchor
M5
M5


LF Productivity and Process Town Hall Session  

  • Description:  Everyone has their favorite tool they want to use to work and communicate more efficiently.   The LF IT Department gets requests to add new tools or functiuonaluty on an almost daily basis, but accomodating all of these isn't feasable.  We need a more complete strategy for supporting your needs and this Monday session is intended to gather community input and share ideas on what is working well and can be improved upon in the area of tools and processes.  NOTE: This is not a technical "how-to" session.
  • Topic Leader:Kenny Paul  Tech. Program Manager, The Linux Foundation
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last email
  • Estimated Duration: 1hr
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
M7
M7


Documentation: how to describe detailed call flows 

  • Description: To undestrand the various ONAP component inteactio, call flows description are very impôrtant. They are currenly used in various projects  and use-cases. Various tools are used to describe call flows with various levels of details. This session will present a way to describe some detailed call flows with API calls between various components using PlantUML.
  • Date: TBD
  • Topic Leader: Eric Debeau - Orange
  • Volunteer Note Taker: 
  • Estimated Duration: 30'
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
TH12
TH12


Future Plan for the Development of Holmes 

  • Description:  The basic analysis capability of Holmes will be available by R1. We want to discuss how to enhance the functionalities to make Holmes be able to support more use cases and scenarios. Besides, we want to have a brief introduction on the vision of a smarter and more general analysis application based on the big data components provided by the ONAP community. 
  • Topic Leader: Guangrong Fu
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last email
  • Estimated Duration: 1hr
  • Interested to attend:

VoLTE E2E Service Design Demo

  • Description:  David Shadmi from SDC team gave a small group people a demo of VoLTE E2E service design by using early version of SDC, it was very helpful. We would like to see the same demo with the latest SDC code and bigger audience to get the feedback.  
  • Topic Leader: David Shadmi
  • Volunteer Note Taker: Yang Xu
  • Estimated Duration: 1hr
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
TH1
TH1


End-to-End Model Driven VNF Lifecycle Management/Modeling 

  • Description: As part of the VNF SDK project, VNF modeling subproject has been focusing on establishing a consistent end-to-end approach for VNF and VNF package modeling in R2. We have identified several starting point for standardization of these models. What we need to do next is to agree on what models and/or standards are going to be applicable at what stages of the VNF lifecycle.

    We will start with the VNF model, as it is seen by VNF developers, inclusive of compute/storage/network hardware requirements, telemetry and policy specification, and identified how this information is ingested and trasformed into other models as part as part of VNF on-boarding (SDC), instantiation (SO/VF-C/Optimization/Policy) and operation (APPC/VFC/Optimization/Policy).

    We will also need to understand how policies and telemetry apply across the VNF management lifecycle, at what point they are defined, who gets to define them and how they are blended/federated with policies already provided during VNF on-boarding.

Anchor
T9
T9


Enhancing ONAP to orchestrate container VNFs using container orchestration as VIMs 

  • Description: Release 1 ONAP instantiates VNFs as VMs in compute farm using VIMs such as Openstack which manages VM. Increasing VNF density on each node, need for multiple networks/slices, Services using SFC and reduced bringup & network latency requirements in market such as 5G and vCPE  are driving container based VNFs.  This project proposal is to enhance ONAP to support VNFs as containers in addition to VNFs as VMs by container orchestration as VIM instead of VM manager like openstack.
    • Objective/Outcome desired:
      • Get consensus on crawl/walk/run direction.
      • Get agreement on K8S as container VIM in R2
      • Get feedback on proposed architecture and changes to various ONAP projects.
      • Get an understanding that VNFs as container is needed for ONAP R-2 use cases(5G-RAN and vCPE)

Anchor
TH9
TH9


DCAE New Features and Enhancements for Beijing and Future Releases 

Anchor
TH13
TH13


SDC: R2 Backlog Discussion 

Anchor
TH8
TH8


VID: R2 Backlog Discussion  

  • Description: Presenting and further gathering of R2 candidate requirements
  • Topic Leader: David Shadmi 
  • Volunteer Note Taker: 
  • Estimated Duration: 1 hours
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
TH44
TH44

AAI: R2 Backlog Discussion  

  • Description: Presenting and further gathering of R2 candidate requirements
  • Topic Leader:Colin Burns
  • Volunteer Note Taker: 
  • Estimated Duration: 1 hours
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend:

Anchor
TH14
TH14

AAI: Graph DB Evolution 

  • Description: Discuss Beijing plans to move to JanusGraph, migration strategies, etc.
  • Topic Leader: Jimmy Forsyth
  • Volunteer Note Taker: 
  • Estimated Duration: 1 hours
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend:
         

Anchor
TH7
TH7


Service Orchestration Workflow Development and Testing  

Anchor
T10
T10


TOSCA Native Service Orchestration Design 

Anchor
TH5
TH5


ONAP Modeling: long-term strategy vs short-term tactics  


  • Description: Discuss goals, challenges and approaches to define an ONAP modeling long-term strategy (R2 and beyond), with the emphasis on E2E service automation, in sync with long-term architecture and driven by ONAP Service Provider requirements, and the short-term tactics (R2) in support of the long-term strategy; consider requirements, architecture, info models, data models, and DSLs in this order, and discuss the landscape of standards and open source communities contributing to them. Make specific long-term strategic, as well as specific short-term tactical recommendations for ONAP and other SDOs/open source communities.
  • Topic Leader: Michael Brenner, Cloudify, michael@cloudify.co
  • Volunteer Note Taker: First Last  email
  • Estimated Duration: 1.5 hrs
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend:

Workshop Title: ONAP Multi Cloud Architectural vision for R2 and beyond

Goal:                               Advance Multi Cloud beyond the current proxy implementation to address ONAP platform level issues across all use cases

Workshop Lead:            VMware

Primary Contact:           Ramki Krishnan, VMware, ramkik@vmware.com

Estimated Duration:      3 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:     Before Architecture and TSC meetings. After lunch scheduling is desired since some folks are connecting from US and may not be able to attend in person. 

Interested in Attending:

Slides: ONAP-mc-workshop-agenda.pdf

Minutes on Multi-Cloud follow up and R2 scope discussion (09/28/2017): Multi-Cloud follow up and R2 discussion.pdf

Anchor
T4
T4

Subtopic 1:   Multi-Cloud Architectural Vision Introduction 

Description:   This session will focus on discussion of the evolution of the Multi-Cloud framework for R2 and beyond, to address some of the platform gaps and move towards a more extensible and consistent cloud mediation layer. We would like to introduce a few key focus areas for this evolution, both in term of the use cases, architectural design principles, and integrations.

Architectural focus: Model Driven API for cloud infrastructure, Standardized cloud telemetry management, and policy driven cloud agnostic deployment.

Deep-dive subtopics (2, 3 and 4) towards achieving this vision are listed below for convenience

  • Performance & Isolation - "Towards a performance-aware and portable cloud-agnostic Infrastructure"
  • SDN - "Architectural options for Multi-vendor SDN Controller and Multi Cloud Deployments in a DC"
  • FCAPS Telemetry - "Standardized Infrastructure class statistics Model" 

Suggested Audience:      ONAP-OF, OOM, SDN-C, SO, VF-C, APP-C, DMaaP

Estimated Duration:        1.5 hrs

Subtopic Lead:                 VMware

Presenters:                       AT&T, VMware, Wind River, Intel

Slides:                               ONAP-mc-intro.pdf

Anchor
T5
T5


Subtopic 2: Performance & Isolation - "Towards a performance-aware and portable cloud-agnostic Infrastructure" 

Description:                    Multi-vendor cloud portability and interoperability while delivering performance is a mandatory feature of distributed DC deployments. The practical challenge in achieving this goal is the lack of standardization of Platform-aware and QoS features, for example extra specs in OpenStack, which results in a vertically integrated solution. This session will focus on how Multi Cloud can offer policy standardization and translation as a microservice for platform-aware and QoS features (hard-guarantee, min-guarantee, best effort etc.) for addressing this challenge and how NFV application classes such as IMS/EPC Control/Data Plane can benefit from this framework.

Suggested Audience:     VNF Requirements/Modelling, A&AI, Policy, SO, VF-C, APP-C, SDC

Estimated Duration:       .5 hrs.

Subtopic Lead:                Bin Yang, Wind River, bin.yang@windriver.com 

Presenters:                      Wind River, Intel

Slides:                              ONAP-mc-performance-isolation.pdf

Anchor
T6
T6

Subtopic 3:  SDN - "Architectural options for Multi-vendor SDN Controller and Multi Cloud Deployments in a DC" 

Description:                    Multi-vendor components in a DC including underlay, overlay, gateway and SDN Controllers for the same pose various architectural challenges in terms interoperability, security etc. This session will focus on an in depth analysis of the architectural options including related efforts such as OpenStack Gluon. This proposal also addresses communication latency-bound multi-side physical DCs which can be treated as a single virtual DC for management purposes.

Suggested Audience:    SDN-C, SO, VF-C, APP-C, SDC, OOM

Estimated Duration:       .5 hrs.

Subtopic Lead:               AT&T

Presenters:                     AT&T, Intel, Huawei, VMware

Slides:                             ONAP-mc-sdn.pdf

Anchor
T7
T7

Subtopic 4:   FCAPS Telemetry - "Standardized Infrastructure Class statistics Model" 

Description:                   This session will focus on a hierarchical cloud-platform-aware architectural framework with separation of collection, storage, processing functions and real-time vs historical analytics components. In this framework, Multi Cloud will deliver a standardized infrastructure and application class statistics model for driving ONAP component/VNF placement/change management across distributed DC multi cloud instances through ONAP-OF, DCAE and other components. The benefit to ONAP platform, across all use cases, will be delivering the best performance and security while minimizing cost.

Suggested Audience:     ONAP-OF, DCAE, A&AI, Policy, OOM, SDN-C, DMaaP, OOM

Estimated Duration:        2 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:       Before Topic 4, Architecture and TSC meetings.

Discussion Lead(s):        VMware, Wind River, AT&T (to confirm)

Topic 2:  Towards a performance-aware and portable cloud-agnostic infrastructure

Description:                    Multi-vendor cloud portability and interoperability while delivering performance is a mandatory feature of distributed DC deployments. The practical challenge in achieving this goal is the lack of standardization of Platform-aware and QoS features, for example extra specs in OpenStack, which results in a vertically integrated solution. This session will focus on how Multi Cloud can offer policy standardization and translation as a microservice for platform-aware and QoS features (hard-guarantee, min-guarantee, best effort etc.) for addressing this challenge and how NFV application classes such as IMS/EPC Control/Data Plane can benefit from this framework.

Suggested Audience:    VNF Requirements/Modelling, A&AI, Policy, SO, VF-C, APP-C, SDC

Estimated Duration:       2 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:      Before Topic 4, Architecture and TSC meetings.

Discussion Leads(s):     Wind River, ?

Topic 3:   Architectural options for Multi-vendor SDN Controller and Multi Cloud Deployments in a DC

Description:                    Multi-vendor components in a DC including underlay, overlay, gateway and SDN Controllers for the same pose various architectural challenges in terms interoperability, security etc. This session will focus on an in depth analysis of the architectural options including related efforts such as OpenStack Gluon, in-band OAM features for latency sensitive applications such as VoLTE and suggest deployment options for various releases. This proposal also addresses communication latency-bound multi-side physical DCs which can be treated as a single virtual DC for management purposes.

Suggested Audience:    SDN-C, SO, VF-C, APP-C, SDC

Estimated Duration:       2 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:      Before Topic 4, Architecture and TSC meetings.

Discussion Leads(s):     Huawei, AT&T (to confirm)

Topic 4:  Multi-Cloud Architectural vision Summary and Next Steps

Description:                    This session will focus on summarizing the discussion on the aforementioned three topics and define concrete next steps towards making progress for R2 and beyond for Multi Cloud and other relevant ONAP component capabilities. For convenience, the aforementioned three topics are listed below

  • Standardized Infrastructure and Application class statistics Model
  • Towards a performance-aware and portable cloud-agnostic infrastructure
  • Architectural options for Multi-vendor SDN Controller and Multi Cloud Deployments in a DC

Suggested Audience:     All PTLs

Estimated Duration:        2 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:       After topics 1, 2 and 3 and before Architecture and TSC meetings.

...

minimizing cost.

Suggested Audience:      ONAP-OF, DCAE, A&AI, Policy, OOM, SDN-C, DMaaP

Estimated Duration:        .5 hrs.

Subtopic Lead:                 AT&T

Presenters:                       VMware, Wind River, AT&T, Intel

Slides: ONAP-mc-fcaps.pdf

Anchor
TH4
TH4

Kubernetes vs Dockers Swarm supporting ONAP-OOM on multi-cloud multi-stack environment 

Description:  ONAP was set originally to support multiple container platform and cloud through TOSCA. In R1 ONAP and OOM is dependent completely on Kubernetes. As there are other container platforms such as Docker Swarm that are gaining more wider adoption as a simple alternative to Kubernetes. In addition operator may need the flexibility to choose their own container platform and be open for future platform. We need to weight the alternatives and avoid using package managers as Helm that makes K8s mandatory.

The use of TOSCA in conjunction with Kubernetes provides that "happy medium" where on one hand we can leverage Kubernetes to a full extent while at the same time be open to other alternative. In this workshop, we will compare Kubernetes with Docker Swarm and walk through an example of how ONAP can be set to support both platforms using TOSCA.

            

Suggested Audience:    SDN-C, SO, VF-C, APP-C, SDC, OOM

Estimated Duration:       1 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:      Before Architecture and TSC meetings.

Topic Lead               :      Cloudify

Presenters               :      Cloudify, AT&T (to confirm)

Interested in Attending:

SLIDES 

Amsterdam Release Lesson Learned

Description:  The purpose of this topic is to share preliminary Amsterdam Release Lesson Learned, to reflect together on how everything went and then to decide what changes we want to make in the next ONAP release (i.e. Beijing), answering the following questions:

  • What worked well?
  • What did not work well?
  • What actions can we take to improve our process going forward?

Suggested Audience:    Anyone but ONAP Release Manager and PTLs are expected

Estimated Duration:       1 hrs.

Desired Scheduling:      No preference

Topic Leader:     Catherine Lefèvre (AT&T)

Volunteer Note Taker: Gervais-Martial Ngueko (AT&T)

Interested in Attending:



VID: R2 Backlog Discussion  

  • Description: Presenting and further gathering of R2 candidate requirements
  • Topic Leader: David Shadmi 
  • Volunteer Note Taker: 
  • Estimated Duration: 1 hours
  • Link to data Source (if applicable)
  • Interested to attend: