ONAP R4 Resource IM Call 2019-1-14

Owned by Xu Yang
Last updated: Jan 14, 2019
2 min read

General Information:

Agenda:

  • Backlog

  • PNFD update

  • Policy Draft

  • Result of DM discussion regarding alignment with SOL001 task, impact to IM in Dublin

Material:

Minutes:

  • Backlog:

  • PNFD update:

    • update the figure, need to update the content (swVersionList) according to 2019-1-7's minutes @Former user (Deleted)

    • plan to have "final" review next week and call for approval (the process: Approved ONAP Model Governance)

  • Policy Draft:

    • scope: the current scope of policy model is ECA type policy, declaritive or intent based policy is FFS; for the whole ONAP, covering both resource and service domain

    • mark attributes not in use as "Future"

    • refinement of the model hasn't been fully post to the wiki (available in papyrus)

    • plan to model "events" as a super class of "VES events" , "policy events", etc.

    • comment:

      • enumerations should not be put in the class diagram

      • how to model the action "sending an event"? Kevin will check with the policy team, the possible way is sending a message (probably an event)

      • the relationship between the policy model with different implementations (imperitive, intent, etc.): to be discussed

      • guarding policy (permissions) could be added

    • @Kevin Scaggs would contact with @Michela Bevilacqua , policy team and interested people to have a dedicated discussion on the plan for the Dublin release

      • go back to IM call afterwards

      • could check with use case teams (e.g., 5G FM)

  • Impact to IM resulting from DM SOL001 alignment discussion:

    • discussed in last week's F2F meeting

    • key findings:

      • ONAP extensions do not have a consistent way

    • recommendation:

      • propose to update IFA011 to align with ONAP, need to decide which extensions are suitable to be proposed to ETSI, which are not (unique need for ONAP)

      • suggest to prepare for the joint meeting of multi-SDOs

    • next step:

      • review the current comparison with IFA011 (Comparison of Current R3 Clean Version with IFA011 v2.5.1), red/orange are differences between ONAP model and IFA011 spec

      • clarify which are needed to go back to ETSI, which are needed for update of the ONAP R3 model @Former user (Deleted)

      • suggest to provide rationale for proposal to ETSI

      • ETSI has a F2F in mid-February, suggest member companies to submit proposals and let ETSI give feedback for April's meeting

      • @guochuyi  has additional proposals against IFA011 v2.5.1, she plans to have a presentation next week