2019-09-04 [ExtAPI] Meeting notes

Owned by Adrian OSullivan
Last updated: Sept 04, 2019
1 min read

Date

Sep 4, 2019 at 10:00AM EDT

Meeting Link: https://zoom.us/j/957965398

Discussed

  • Recording: zoom_0.mp4

    • Chat Log: none

  • Project Update - El Alto ExtAPI status

  • MEF Update @Karthik Sethuraman (Deactivated) . Karthik, did not get a chance to present but he gave quick update in chat, hope to allow Karthik time on next meeting to give update. 

    "here is my update: 3 items of note related to MEF Legato Service API: IPS (Interface Profile Specification) - the information model part - CfC#1 deadline end of next week , Interface Implementation Specification IIS (Interface Implementation Specification) - - the API part - work started on the generic APIs as well as SD-WAN - generic APIs are based on ONAP External API as starting point. 

    3rd item - MEF LSO committee is discussing the best ways to document the API and the contents of such documentation, which tools to use for such developing, reviewing and delivering such documentation"

  • Discussion @Adrian OSullivan Examine TM Forum specs TMF 641 v18.5,  added servicType.  SO/AAI uses serviceType to group services, should we allow serviceType to be passed on Service Order in Frankfurt?

  • Discussion @Adrian OSullivan, @Ludovic Robert @Karthik Sethuraman (Deactivated)around JSON schema is Service v ServiceCharacteristics for mapping with TOSCA Inputs from SDC

Frankfurt Release Requirements gathering page created, please add your requirements here Frankfurt Release API Requirements Gathering Page



Next week:

  • MEF Update @Karthik Sethuraman (Deactivated)

  • Continue to discuss potential use of CDS by NBI (TMF 640)and support for macro mode Service Orders (TMF 641) @Yuriy Malakov

  • Continue Discuss CFS Mapping to RFS resolver @Rene ROBERT

  • Third Party Domain Manger Interactions @Nishi Mathur @Atif Husain @Divyang Patel

  • Service Qualification API Flows @Mohammad

  • Examine TM Forum specs such as TMF 641 v18.5 (e.g., added service type) Should we group services to service type?

Last week: