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 8 Next »

Project Name (from Project Proposal):

  • Proposed name for the project: External API Framework
  • Proposed name for the repository: externalapi

Project description (from Project Proposal):

  • This project will describe and define the APIs between ONAP and External Systems, including ONAP interfaces targeted on BSS/OSS, peering, B2B, etc.
  • Proposed initial focus may be on the Common APIs between ONAP and BSS/OSS; and Inter-Provider ONAP External APIs.

  • Common APIs between ONAP and BSS/OSS allow Service Providers to utilize the capabilities of ONAP using their existing BSS/OSS environment with minimal customization.

Scope of Work For Casablanca:

  • Deliver points of interoperability between ONAP and External Systems
  • Focus on ONAP External APIs to BSS/OSS (i.e., MEF Legato)
    • Service Catalog
      • Add notification for serviceCatalog API (stretch goal)
        • Description:
          • Allow BSS catalog function to receive service catalog notification as serviceSpec status change or characteristic change (new value in an enum list for example). Could be interesting to track these serviceSpec update to update accordingly productSpec
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Easy
        • Prerequisites: It requires to have a notification from SDC because NBI will not pool AAI
        • Resources:
      • Improve ServiceCatalog API for service characteristics
        • Description:
          • Expose from NBI json (or other format) file describing the serviceSpec characteristic (same type of file we can retrieve on MEF Git Hub to describe an UNISpec for example)
          • Convert YAML in CSAR to ONAP wide consistent JSON schema for Service Characteristic Input parameters and provide across the ServiceCatalog API
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Medium
        • Prerequisites:
        • Resources:
    • Service Ordering
      • Upgrade Service Request Status for serviceOrder API (Systems engineering for documenting Use Case; get service_order, status of order item; identify details of status information) (stretch goal)
        • Description: 

          • Provide summary and detailed status for both Infrastructure requested VNFs and Customer requested VNFs.

          • Requestors that create transaction requests on the ONAP Platform, have a need to effectively manage the requests they create.  The Requestor is the responsible owner for the transaction and thus, need the ability to have visibility into the status of their requests

          • BSS/OSS system will call the API providing one of the following options:
            1.Specific Service Request ID
            2.Many Service Requests based on Selection Criteria such as: Service Request Status and/or Time Frame where appropriate, (e.g., past day completions)

            ONAP will respond with the current status of the workflow for the selected request(s).  The status can include not only a status summary of the requests but also the steps taken, start/stop time of the steps taken, notifications generated, and the remaining steps that need to be taken.  Different workflows will have different numbers of steps, so this API will need to provide a name or identifier for any and all steps

          • Check Request status via GET {{url}}/ecomp/mso/infra/orchestrationRequests/v4/{requestId}

            Check requestStatus: it must be equal to (if percentProgress not equal to 100, we’ll pooling SO till percentProgress = 100):

        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Easy
        • Prerequisites: Could implement in two phases, 1st phase implement status details that are currently available in the Service Orchestration (SO) API, while the 2nd phase would enhance SO and/or the SO API with any additional status information
        • Resources:
      • Add notification for serviceOrder API
        • Description: 
          • Allow BSS (or any other) system to receive order/OrderItem update. BSS (or any other system) will not have to pool. We can allow several distinct notification (Nice to have: let subscriber specify notification contains). Minimum is to provide ServiceOrderStateChangeNotifications etc to HUB subscriber. After if we’re able to get a notification from SO it will be perfect but initial requirement is only at external API northbound
          • Notifications related to ServiceOrder: - ServiceOrderCreationNotification - ServiceOrderAttributeValueChangeNotification - ServiceOrderStateChangeNotification - ServiceOrderInformationRequiredNotification - ServiceOrderRemoveNotification
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Easy
        • Prerequisites: Nothing for basic deliver…SO notifications to have high performance (without SO notification, NBI will pool SO as of today)
        • Resources:
      • Update ServiceOrder to to accommodate Service Chaining. (systems engineering) (implementation stretch goal)
        • Description: 
          • Enhance the Service Order API (TMF 641) to allow BSS/OSS the ability to flag services as part of a “group”.  Enhance the Service Inventory API (TMF 638) to allow BSS/OSS to retrieve Service Inventory by “group”.
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Easy
        • Prerequisites: Service Orchestrator (SO) and its external API, A&AI and its API to SO and its external API
        • Resources:
      • Update ServiceOrder to manage Service modification request UC (basic, delete and create for Casablanca, will need SO to evolve for full modify)
        • Description: 
          • This will allow BSS system to trigger service modification request. By modification we mean: characteristic value change, status change (other ?). Minimum could be to handle modification that can be managed in SO with a Delete Service and then Add service (this is a change up to nbi but remove/add down to nbi). This is not service order modification butt service modification on existing service instance in the inventory (new service order with action change)
          • Possibly related to CC VPN use case, explore other use cases
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Average to High depending on SO capability to handle service modification
        • Prerequisites: could require SO upgrade – Check if some use case can be handle by NBI only (triggering add/remove in SO)
        • Resources:
      • Update ServiceOrder to provide user and system workload information for both Infrastructure requested VNFs and Customer requested VNFs (systems engineering, implementation stretch goal)
        • Description: 
          • Requestors that create transaction requests on the ONAP Platform, have a need to effectively manage the requests they create.  The Requestor is the responsible owner for the transaction and thus, need visibility into the volumes of requests created by a requestor, in order to better balance the workload among their labor resources.

          • •BSS/OSS system will call the API providing one of the following options:
            1.Specific Service Request ID
            2.Specific User ID of the Requestor
            3.All Users

            ONAP will respond with what activity is happening, who is doing it, and how old is it.  Profile information can include Service Request Type, Creation/Completion Dates, and User ID of the Requestor.  This information may require a dip into VID
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Average
        • Prerequisites: Could implement in two phases, 1st phase implement request profile information that is currently available in the Service Orchestration (SO) API, while the 2nd phase add additional status information from VID
        • Resources:
    • Service Inventory
      • Add notification for service Inventory API (stretch goal)
        • Description: Allow BSS (or any other) system to receive service state update.
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Medium
        • Prerequisites: It requires to have a notification from AAI because NBI will not pool AAI; may be able to use DMaaP capability to support
        • Resources:
      • Update Service Inventory to accommodate Service Chaining. (systems engineering; implementation as a stretch goal)
        • Description: 
          • Enhance the Service Order API (TMF 641) to allow BSS/OSS the ability to flag services as part of a “group”.  Enhance the Service Inventory API (TMF 638) to allow BSS/OSS to retrieve Service Inventory by “group”.
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Easy
        • Prerequisites: Service Orchestrator (SO) and its external API, A&AI and its API to SO and its external API
        • Resources:
      • Improve ServiceInventory API
        • Description:
          • As of now we retrieve very few information from AAI – Perhaps digging more in the instantiated VNF or VF could allow us to have more information as service state or serviceCharacteristic for example.
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity
        • Prerequisites: Need AAI expertise; Need enhancement to AAI UI to see more topology details across API
        • Resources:
    • Performance Management (specification focus) (stretch goal: implementation)
      • Provide performance data for both Infrastructure VNFs and Customer VNFs
        • Description:
          • Capacity planning engineers must be able to determine the performance and quantities of VNFs running on the network for planning purposes.  Performance Management data is required to develop Site Level Tenant and VNF & VM Forecasts that are the basis for Capacity Planning of the Network Infrastructure.  May also be used in support of customer self service to provide customers with performance information about their specific services and VNFs
          • BSS/OSS system will call the API providing starting and ending dates and times.  This API will be called either on-demand or on a regular timed basis.  ONAP will respond with performance management data from DMaaP and Performance Data Store, may be trended for forecasting process, and include specific metrics & KPIs for all existing VNFs/VMs in service.  May make use of TM Forum Performance Management API (TMF 628).
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity: Easy
        • Prerequisites: Could implement in two phases, 1st phase implement performance information that is currently available in the DMaaP API, while the 2nd phase enhance the DMaaP API with additional performance information.  Requires additional micro-service development for collecting information from DMaaP or data store to store and aggregate the information
        • Resources:
    • License Usage (stretch goal) (specification focus)
    • Integration 
      • Integrate External API/NBI within ONAP MSB
        • Description: May need to consider how External API agent functionality can be decoupled from MSB
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity
        • Prerequisites:
        • Resources:
      • Build End-to-End Use Case
        • Description: Showcase External API from a complete Service Lifecycle perspective. Apply ONAP Use Cases.
        • Relevance:
        • Complexity
        • Prerequisites:
        • Resources:
  • Initial focus specification of ONAP External APIs supporting Inter-Provider (i.e., MEF Interlude)
    • Service Control (specification focus)
    • Service State (operational state) (specification focus)
    • Service Inventory / Details (specification focus)

  • Explore Role-based view of single APIs descriptors for both Legato and Interlude

  • Alignment with MEF Legato, MEF Interlude and TM Forum APIs

  • Definition of Use Cases, Interactions, and Information Model engaging service providers and BSS/OSS vendors

  • API development (in conjunction with specific ONAP component projects)

    • Well defined specifications for the NB APIs (e.g., JSON Swagger). 
    • ONAP implementation of these APIs
  • Architecture for External APIs
    • Identification and involvement of stakeholder ONAP projects
    • Describe key External API foundation functionalities
    • Work with Architecture and MSB projects
  • Document the role and requirements of External APIs in Model Driven ONAP
    • Work with Modeling project and sub-committee to explore a Model Driven approach: a cohesive way to have a shared view of information across ONAP external interfaces that can be used for or be input into a model driven process whereby the cost of delivering platform functionality is drastically reduced and the time to delivery is dramatically decreased.
  • Explore use of Model Driven Tool Chain to automatically generate APIs based on models with Modeling Project

Deliverables:

Main deliverables of this project may include: User Stories; Use Cases and Interactions (e.g., UML); Information Models (e.g., UML); Data Models (e.g., JSON); Interface Profiles and Functional Definition; ONAP Component Mapping and Functional Analysis; Code contribution for External API Agent functionality.

Resources:

Key Project Facts

Project Name:

  • JIRA project name: externalapi
  • JIRA project prefix: externalapi

Repo name: 

  • org.onap.externalapi/nbi


Lifecycle State: incubation
Primary Contact: Andy Mayer, AT&T, am803u@att.com 
Project Lead: Andy Mayer, AT&T, am803u@att.com
mailing list tag [externalapi] 
Committers for Casablanca:

Participants for Casablanca:


  • No labels