/
ONAP R6 Resource IM Call 2020-6-29

ONAP R6 Resource IM Call 2020-6-29

Owned by Xu Yang
Last updated: Jun 30, 2020
2 min read

General Information:

  • Date and Time: 2020, June 29th, 9pm~10pm Beijing Time, 9am~10am US Eastern

  • Meeting Room: https://zoom.us/j/97595070639

  • Meeting Recording: 

  • Meeting Chat Log: 

Agenda:

  • Agenda bashing - 5 minutes

  • Model Proposals - 50 minutes

    • allotted resource - 20 minutes

    • ETSI alignment - 20 minutes ?

    • 5G RAN service - 0 minutes

    • CNF - 0 minutes

    • Geolocation - 10 minutes ?

    • PNF instance model - 0 minutes

  • Modeling Documentation & Glossary - 5 minutes

  • Modeling Process discussion - 0 minutes

Material:

Minutes:

  • Agenda bashing

    • vacation plan:

      • Jacqueline: July 6th~19th

      • others: no plan or not decided

  • Model Proposals

    • CPS model driven PoC (from Jacqueline)

      • background: many models, ONAP may not need to understand them, but needs to access them

      • PoC:

        • create/read operations using YANG fragments

        • parse models from YANG fragments

        • runtime behavior based on YANG fragments

      • proposal:

        • to have xNF instance/schema models, to enable YANG parsing, model mapping, etc.

        • preliminary plan:

          • in root model: 

      • next step:

        • Jacqueline will create a wiki page and upload the slides and related material for people to have further thoughts and comments

    • geolocation model

      • quick report on DDF presentation and progress

      • latest SOL001 spec would include geolocation attribute

      • next step:

        • propose details of the "place" class

    • plan for ETSI alignment

      • intended scope of ETSI alignment: enhancement of current VNF and NS models

      • Fred is analyzing the differences between v2.7.1/v2.8.1 and v.2.5.1, will present later

      • Thinh will help contact spec rapporteurs to provide more information

    • plan for CNF model

      • for CNF model, would prefer to wait for more progress in ETSI spec (IFA011, etc.)

      • R7 approach (as suggested by arc team) could be different from ETSI, may be helpful if define some models related to the actual solution

      • collaboration/feedback to ETSI is welcomed

  • Modeling Documentation