Page History

Audio Recording

Minutes

1. Call for Scribe (minutes owner) Farheen Cefalu

2. Roll Call & Quorum Check 

   Company	Contact Name	Attendance	Alternate Contact	Attendance
   AT&T	Jack Murray Co-Chair	x
   China Mobile	Jinri Huang Co-Chair	x
   Deutsche Telekom	David Streibl	x
   NTT DOCOMO	Toshiro Kawahara	x
   Orange	Vincent Danno	x
   Verizon	Viswa Kumar	x

   
   

3. Review and Agree to Minutes of Previous Meetings
   1. The minutes of the prior meeting were reviewed, and there were no corrections. On motion made by David Streibl and seconded by Jinri the minutes of the June 29, 2019 meeting were the approved by the TOC members. 
      1. VOTE: Vote taken, item passed.
4. Review of Today's Agenda
   1. Jinri - Add Face to Face discussion 
   2. Vincent - Recommending to end times as scheduled.
   3. Lusheng - Approval from the TOC to accept Seed Code contribution.
   4. Jack - Proposing a project list for the "A" release discussion
5. Status of Open Action Items (Old Business) 
   1. Action / TOC take a vote on the Near Real Time RIC project proposal sent by Tapio Tallgren. 
      1. Scope would not include the RAN or ONAP except for testing purposes.  Our proposal is to have our project technical leader for the project.
      2. Jinri - we need a synchronization meeting once a month with WG3.  
         1. Vincent - Noting that this is not specific to this proposal.  We will have the same thing to consider for future projects.  We need to have the right tools in place here as we are doing in the Alliance.  We have to start somewhere so we have to be careful not to put too many barriers to what we want to do.  I think it is good to start the work.  Nokia has agreed to align with WG3. 
            1. Jinri - I don't want to hinder progress.  I want to make it crystal clear that we want to have this mechanism in place prior to starting to work.
               1. David S.  I agree with Vince.  It should be an important topic for the Tokyo meeting.
                  1. Jinri - it is on the agenda for the f2f.
                     1. Jack -  We have to have the discussions about whether the WG is tightly aligned with their work or more flexible. A lot of the non functional requirements are not in the domain of the work group in general and we have to work on the Alliance side to find out who will be working on those activities.  Yes, that is a part of this A release cycle.  I think it is important to work through that process.  It's probably more around requirements the PTL and the epic responsibilities.  To make them successful we have to support them.
                        1. David - We also need the synchronization between the requirements committee and the working groups.  I suggested to Claudio of WG3 was to join the calls of the requirements committee.  We need to create the space for the collaboration early on so everyone knows whats happening on all sides.
                        2. Vincent - this is an important discussion and we need to find the right balance between process and encouraging contributions.  If our process is too heavy we will not have contributions.  Keep subcommittees to a minimum.  We need a balance.  Because this is release A we are at the start and should encourage the work.  For now the lightweight ad-hoc process is fine.  It is good to add it to the agenda to the next meeting.  We can look at a long term framework not in release A but the future.  To summarize we should start with something simple.  Let's make sure we are addressing the question but we are keeping it simple. 
                           1. Jack I agree.  keep it simple move quickly and iterate.  It is the responsibility of TOC is oversight.  Votes are not permanent.  We can change in the future according to projects ability to grow.
                  2. Phil - Projects are around repos and the projects go hand in hand.  Is this on the Apache side or the O-RAN Alliance side?
                     1. I suggest we do this using a template for the process to create a project.  This template should bring up which license is being used.
                        1. Tapio this is under the Apache license.
                     2. Jack -  Is it the project or the repo that is defined by the license.
                        1. Phil - You can have two licenses in a repo but does the committer of the project want two licenses?  We want to make it clear up front when creating a project.  It's a question for the TOC.  
                        2. Jack - This is for Apache.  We're going to take it incrementally with projects first.  then PTL, then committers.
                        3. Phil - Tapio provided the list of committers who will have commit rights.
      3. The new NRT-RIC project and committers for the O-RAN SC was reviewed . On motion made by Vincent and seconded by David creating the Near Real time RIC project was approved by the TOC members. 
         1. VOTE: Vote taken, item passed.
      4. PTL role for the first Near Real Time RIC project.  Jack - I am in favor of the TOC voting for the PTL role.
         1. We have a proposal that Thoraf Czichy as the PTL.  Check Thoraf's Linked In profile.
      5. Make Thoralf the PTL for the Near Real Time RIC project. On motion made by Jack and seconded by David making Thoralf the PTL for Near Real Time RIC project was approved by the TOC members. 
         1. VOTE: Vote taken, item passed.

...