Based on timeplan of modeling subcommittee, high level requirements need to be finished by M0/M1,
Below High Level Requirements have been agreed by modeling subcommitee with code commitment promise to Dublin release, modeling subcommittee request related to projects to approve those related submission.
Modeling Domain | Modeling Requirement | Modeling Requirement Description | Impacted Projects | Use Case Relevance | Modeling Spec Commitment | Code Commitment | Provider Priority | Mapping to M1 requirement | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Resource DM | ETSI NFV SOL001 v2.5.1 | VNFD - the ONAP internal data model should be able to reflect ETSI SOL001 VNFDs provided for onboarding | SDC, VFC | CCVPN, vCPE | |||||
| Resource DM | ETSI NFV SOL001 v2.5.1 | PNFD - the ONAP internal data model (AID)should be able to reflect ETSI SOL001 PNFDs provided for onboarding. (committed goal) '''''''''''''''' Could an Onboarded PNFD also be internally mapped to the second ONAP internal model (nfv tosca types) ? Could two internal descriptors coexist in the same internal SDC package ? (stretch goal) | SDC | Ericsson |
There are other 4 categories of high level requirement,
- 1) Will be implemented documented only and included in the release 4Dublin release, but no implementation promised.
- 2) Documentation after implemented, or implemented but not in the release
- 3) Lower Priority
- 4) Experimental
The first category is that those requirement will be implemented and commited by the impacted projects in this be documented only in Dublin release
the second category will document the current implementation in those projects.
...
Owners of each requirement needs to coordinate the modeling spec commitment and code commitment with PTLs of impacted project.
1) Will be
...
documented only and included in the Dublin release
...
Modeling Domain | Modeling Requirement | Modeling Requirement Description | Impacted Projects | Use Case Relevance | Modeling Spec Commitment | Code Commitment | Provider Priority | Mapping to M1 requirement | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resource and Service DM | TOSCA 1.2 | ONAP onboarding data model (TOSCA) and internal data model should be based on OASIS TOSCA 1.2 core syntax and normative types | SDC, SO, VFC | ?? |
Resource
ETSI NFV SOL001 v2.5.1
VNFD
SDC, VFC
CCVPN
ETSI NFV
SOL001
v2.5.1
PNFD - the ONAP internal data model (AID)should be able to reflect ETSI SOL001 PNFDs provided for onboarding.
(committed goal)
''''''''''''''''
Could an Onboarded PNFD also be internally mapped to the second ONAP internal model (nfv tosca types) ?
Could two internal descriptors coexist in the same internal SDC package ?
(stretch goal)
SDC
| Resource IM | ETSI NFV IFA011 v2.5.1 | Update the VNFD IM to align with IFA011 v2.5.1 | SDC, VFC | N/A related to DM SOL001 progress | |||||
| Resource IM | PNFD | Create onboarding PNFD IM | SDC, SO, VFC | N/A | |||||
| Resource IM | VNFD | SDC, VFC | VoLTE |
impact R4 DM? | |||||||||
| Service DM | ETSI NFV SOL001 v2.5.1 | NSD - the ONAP internal data model should be able to reflect ETSI SOL001 NSD provided for onboarding | SDC, SO, VFC | CCVPN | |||||
| Service |
| IM | ETSI NFV IFA014 v2.5.1 | Nested Service | SDC, SO, VFC | CCVPN | TBA | High | guochuyi |
2) Documentation after implemented, or implemented but not in the release
...
Below tables are not downgrade, but casablanca won't make it
3) Lower Priority:
Modeling Domain | Modeling Requirement | Modeling Requirement Description | Impacted Projects | Use Case Relevance | Modeling Spec Commitment | Code Commitment | Provider Priority | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Service | ||||||||
Common | Policy | create policy IM, reflect current policy project implementation | Policy | N/A | ||||
| VES | create VES IM | DCAE | N/A | |||||
Infrastructure | ||||||||
4) Experimental:
Modeling Domain | Modeling Requirement | Modeling Requirement Description | Impacted Projects | Use Case Relevance | Modeling Spec Commitment | Code Commitment | Provider Priority | Owner |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Common | License | create license IM | ||||||
| Root | create super classes for current models | SDC, AAI |
...
Some concepts may be complex enough, if we wait for the release / project requirement, we will be too late to properly develop the concept.
the committee agreed
1) Thinh Nguyenphu (Unlicensed) will lead 1st task force working on #1,#2 recommendations:
Recommend#1: member companies prepare and submit these additional extension to ETSI NFV IFA and SOL WG toward v2.6.1 or later. (agreed) Recommend#2: ONAP adopts SOL001 Type extension method, per clause 5.6 (agreed)
2) Former user (Deleted) victor gao will lead 2nd task working on $4 recommendation:
Recommend #4: SDC supports SOL001 v2.5.1 type definitions (VNFD, PNFD, NSD) (agreed)
3) Thinh Nguyenphu (Unlicensed) will report NSD comparision with service csar in 2 weeks,
All 3 work will be reported to Anatoly weekly DM conference call, Anatoly will ask final approval from Modeling subcommittee
Following are a few development areas to consider.
...
- PNF
- Allotted (Contribution Posted)
- Network Function (perhaps related to rooting descriptors and instances below)
- Network Slicing
- Pnf
...
- Network Service
- Service Instance (Runtime)
- CFS reconcile (BBS Use Case)
...
- Multi-VIM/Clouid
- Cloud Region
...
- VES (Some Material Posted)
- License
- Rooting Descriptors and Instances
- Policy
...