Page Comparison

5/31 - Discussed A1 flow. See A1 section

6/21 - Presented SON Use Kohn in Architecture Sub-Committee. Got Approval. See JIRA and slides below

6/28: Created

4/19 Vishal needs info on A1 policy schema for ANR use case. Discussed details. Shankar to follow up.

4/26: Discussed control loop message formats for PCI and ANR and ANR policy schema. They are using same Policy name but different Control-Loop name and

different Action. See sample messages in file. Changes to ANR message format and control loop policy has impact on SON-Handler MS and Policy.

5/3 Discussed message format for A1-based action. DMaaP message for ANR based needs to change to send payload aligned with A1 policy.

Requirement on SON Handler MS

5/16: Discussed the problem statement using slides above. esp. Option 1 and 2 in slide xx.
John K also showed diagrams for options about message from Policy to SDN-R.
Ahila showed design used in Slicing use case.
Need to add details and get recording (which went to cloud).

5/31: See updated slides. Good discussion for A1-based flow which meets following guidelines:

• Leverage existing work
• Common approach for SON usecase and Slicing usecase
• Separate flows for O1 and A1 based action after Policy PEF. Separation based on policy in PEF, and difference can be based on content of message based on intelligence in microservice
• Buy-in from Slicing use-case, Policy team, Non-RT RIC/A1.  (Thanks to Ahila, Liam, John, Vishal for good collaboration!).

6/21. Presented Use Case in Architecture Committee. Consensus is to make changes in Policy PEF to have
two sets of Control Loop message format & Control Loop policy - one for O1-based action and one for A1-based action. 
Changes can be limited to support the PCI (O1-based) and ANR (A1-based) flow for SON use case.
Policy team to determine exactly how changes are implemented and how Automation Composition is used.

3/30 

Vishal presented slides below. We had a good discussion. Option 2 gives a little more flexibility for future use. John said they are willing to help with the A1 termination.
Netconf option instead of Websocket to RAN-Sim controller will need some integration work in RAN-Sim controller. Vishal will work with Niranjana on that.
Also sent a request to present in the ONAP/OSC Harmonization call today 3/30.

4/19 

Discussed change in terminology to avoid confusion. We are not implementing Near-RT RIC and xApp using OSC near-rt-ric.

Decision to change terminology to better capture the nature of the RAN-Sim enhancement.

Plan is to implement

• A1-Termination
• RAN App. (The App function is an abstraction which works with RAN-Sim, and does not implement E2 like an xApp on near-rt-ric )

5/3

RAN App will have code to take an A1 message with (poor) HO KPI for a cell relation, and take action to blacklist that cell relation.

5/31 Slides update for A1 support topic also shows that RAN App can have direct netconf to CU/DU Honeycomb device.
In this case, it looks like O1 netconf, but it is used as convenience for simulation which is ok.

We understand that RAN App is only an abstraction of xApp (which will have E2 interface to CU/DU which is not netconf).

6/21 - Plan is to focus on using websocket from RAN App to RAN Sim Controller. 
Using netconf from RAN App to Honeycomb NF directly has issues about support for netopeer in the RAN App Java environment.

6/28  -
Websocket being implemented in RAN App and RAN Sim Controller. New code blocks/functions needed in RAN Sim Controller. 
Created