Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 18 Next »

Table of Contents

Use Case Overview & Description

CLAMP (Control Loop Automation Management Platform) functionalities, recently moved to Policy project , want to provide a Control Loop Lifecycle management architecture. A control Loop is a key concept for Automation and assurance Use Cases and remain a top priority for ONAP as an automation platform. This requirement wants to improve Control Loop LCM architecture focusing on an abstract CL management logic,  isolating CL logic vs ONAP component logic, providing a common CL Design time catalogue with a  generic CL definition, and elaborate API to integrate with other design systems as well as 3PP component integration. PoCs have been progressed in ONAP Rel G and H in this area, CL LCM redesign has reached a relevant viable set of features and it is ready to be moved in Rel I to mainstream as part of the Policy framework.

Use Case Key Information

TOPICDESCRIPTIONWIKI PAGE
Requirements ProposalThis is a link to the requirements proposal made on the Requirements Sub-committeeIstanbul release - functional requirements proposed list#ControlLoopinTOSCALCM
Architecture S/C infoInformation on the Architecture sub-committee presentation
Prior Project "Base" WikiLink to the "base" wiki for the Use Case, or work from a prior release.
Requirements Jira (REQ-###) TicketLink to the REQ Jira ticket for this use case

REQ-716 - Getting issue details... STATUS

Key Use Case Leads & Contacts

USE CASE LEADZu Qiang Liam Fallon Michela Bevilacqua

USE KEY CONTACTS:


Meetings Register & RecordingsLink to Use Case Team meetings.

BUSINESS DRIVER

Executive Summary CLAMP (Control Loop Automation Management Platform) functionalities, recently moved to Policy project , want to provide a Control Loop Lifecycle management architecture. A control Loop is a key concept for Automation and assurance Use Cases and remain a top priority for ONAP as an automation platform. This requirement wants to improve Control Loop LCM architecture focusing on an abstract CL management logic,  isolating CL logic vs ONAP component logic, providing a common CL Design time catalogue with a  generic CL definition, and elaborate API to integrate with other design systems as well as 3PP component integration. PoCs have been progressed in ONAP Rel G and H in this area, CL LCM redesign has reached a relevant viable set of features and it is ready to be moved in Rel I to mainstream as part of the Policy framework.

Business Impact - Deployment and orchestration of automation and control loop use cases across CNFs,  VNFs and PNFs in a model driven way simplifies the network management. Enables operators and service providers to manage the Life Cycle of a Network Service. Assuring continuity of operation of services is crucial for production and carrier grade environments. The actualization or upgrades of software and in consequence required changes in the service model is a natural part of service instance life cycle. Without the support of ONAP service update with schema change, service life cycle management by ONAP can be very difficult which can impact the quality and continuity of services.

Business Markets - All operators and service providers that are using ONAP for automation and assurance.

Funding/Financial Impacts - CL LCM wants to reduce operational expense  and its abstraction will provide an added value with multiple  integration points.

Organization Mgmt, Sales Strategies - (It is suggested that you use the following wording): There is no additional organizational management or sales strategies for this use case outside of a service providers "normal" ONAP deployment and its attendant organizational resources from a service provider. (This would typically describe the "WHO", but because use cases are all deployed with ONAP itself, these two areas come with the actual ONAP deployment and uses the organizational management and sales strategies of a particular service provider's ONAP deployment)

Development Status

Epic Ticket

key summary assignee arch review tsc priority scope status t-shirt size m1 approval m2 approval m3 approval m4 approval rc0 approval status
Loading...
Refresh

Project REQ Tickets

key summary assignee reporter integration test plan status integration test status integration test time to complete status
Loading...
Refresh

Story Tickets

key summary type created updated assignee reporter priority status resolution subtasks fixversions
Loading...
Refresh

Function Description

TESTING

Roadmap

Reference

  • No labels