cgl compliance

[joe.macdonald@xxxxxxxxxxxxx (Joe MacDonald)]

Hi Dave,

On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 14:19 -0400, Dave Sullivan wrote:

> Hi,
> 
> I have a question in regards to CGL compliance.
> 
> If there is an open source package that provides the functionality as 
> described by a CGL requirement.  And that open source package and can be 
> compiled and installed on the Registering Linux OS Applicant.  Does that 
> count as compliance?


I'm not quite getting your question, but I think it's just that I'm
missing where you're coming from.

Consider a requirement:

        
        RLB.1.0: Five Nines Reliability  P1
        
        LF CGL specifies that carrier grade linux shall experience no
        more than five minutes, twenty five seconds of down-time each
        calendar year of use other than regularly scheduled maintenance
        periods.


And now Cavendish Farms Linux does not claim CGL compliance, because
they have no way of ensuring they meet RLB.1.0.  Then along comes Bob
Software, who creates an application specifically for CFL that ensures
CFL will be able to meet RLB.1.0, which completes all of the P1
requirements CFL needs.

Are you asking "Can CFL now claim CGL compliance even though they don't
ship it?"  Or are you asking "Can Bob Software claim CFL is now CGL?"
Or is there something else you were wondering about what Bob's
application would mean to CFL and CGL?


Joe MacDonald, Member of Technical Staff, Wind River
direct 613.270.5750  mobile 613.291.7421  fax 613.592.2283   
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.linux-foundation.org/pipermail/lf_carrier/attachments/20080807/61b8ae4e/attachment.htm