For the August Governing Board meeting, we need to cover 3 specific areas (the first three headings below) in single slides.  Additional material has also been captured.

Wording for the three Slides

Description

(points below are mostly structural recommendations with a lot of flexibility! Probably do not appear on the Description slide)

Define Work Product, Interfaces and Dependencies

Two focus areas: requirements and development/implementation focused projects.

Work Products

Dependencies and Relationships

Approximate Timeline

Factors:

Estimate:  New project in operation in January 2021.


= =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Background Info = =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Goals for this Option/Description

  1. Create a proposal that has advantages for the Governing Board, OPNFV, and CNTT.
  2. Help everyone recognize that the completeness of conformance testing is the common goal of all, and a unique opportunity for the success of all.
  3. Foster Trust, Transparency, and Truth.

Advantages over Current Mode of Operation

  1. Keep Requirements and Test Code Development together: OPNFV as an opensource and integration project for both OpenStack and K8s virtualization layers.
  2. Increase Communication and understanding of the level of effort involved to complete tasks among all contributors.
    1. OPNFV Charter and Website have been updated several times since January to fit CNTT requirements and mindsets (OPNFV 2.0)
  3. CNTT continues to enjoy LFN support for Zoom bridges, Program Management, Wiki Pages, Event Planning, etc.
    1. Data from LFN Support Survey indicates that < … results>
  4. Participation in both OPNFV and CNTT activities are stimulated by forming a complete conformance solution community. 
  5. NewName Pros:
    1. send the message that it’s not business as usual
    2. help CNTT feel that it is joining a partnership vs. becoming a part of another organization and losing control.

Possible disadvantages

Use fact based points (check when done)

  1. CNTT stakeholders perceive some loss of visibility in the Industry once merged.
  2. Some CNTT Stakeholders leave because they don't like the outcome.
    1. 1[but some think they won’t leave for long. If they still need the common infrastructure that CNTT proposes, and if the merged community is successful, they will come back sooner or later]


Ildiko's further suggestions follow:

Description

Desired outcome of the merge

To create a single organization where the telecom operators can work together with vendors and other interested organizations and individuals to define, implement and test the cloud architectures that fulfill the requirements of telecom applications.

Implementation considerations

Work Product, Interfaces and Dependencies

Two kinds of focus areas: requirements- and implementation focused projects

Release artifacts

Dependencies and Relationships

Approximate Timeline

Factors

Estimate

New org in operation in January 2021