Modeling Subcommittee 2022-02-14

Meeting time: 13:00 UTC,  21:00 Beijing Time, 08:00 US Eastern

Zoom Meeting Link:  https://zoom.us/j/97595070639?pwd=ajFTZGdlTmRVNjU5MSt1YVpycmlrdz09

International numbers available: https://zoom.us/zoomconference?m=mi-ad1sMLWlXByAKLio5vDnd9JYqUR_a



Time

Agenda Item

Requested by

Notes / Links

Time

Agenda Item

Requested by

Notes / Links

START RECORDING: 



Agenda Bashing

@Xu Yang

@guochuyi

Co-Chair, including Email Polls for ASD Model, ETSI workshop, AAI model review and VES specification transfer  50mins

ETSI CNF support  5mins

ASD model  0mins

Reverse engineering 0mins

Topology model  0mins

Modeling Documentation 0mins



Co-chair

ONAPMODEL-3: General issues of Modeling subcommitteeOpen

@Xu Yang

@guochuyi

1) Email Polls: 2022 Modeling Subcommittee Decisions

 Email Polls for ASD Model: 

 IM: Application Service Descriptor (ASD) onboarding IM

 Package:  Application Service Descriptor (ASD) Onboarding Packaging Format

Email Poll Results: Yes from Ericsson and Nokia, No from Huawei

Ericsson:To approve considering the email polls results. IM and DM are separated requirements with PoC. The poll has no relationship with PoC. Present couple times and long time. Do futher update on DM after IM approval, 

Nokia: Agree with Ericsson, to move forward. The process show it should be approved and encourage to bring new requirements for the alignment with ETSI

Huawei: Wait for ETSI 's comments, it is not ready to approve, this has major impact on ETSI model and the papyrus and document work, may need to do again, not present at subcommittee level before, it is for PoC model, why modeling subcommittee should approve it? Align with ETSI is from the technical aspect, this is highly related with ETSI , consider a merged way to solve. Consider there has technical comments and obvious No, the approval should 

Decision: Approved ONAP Model Governance - Developer Wiki - Confluence

The Modeling subcommittee poll result shows 2 yes and 1 no.

Huawei is still hold its objection on the meeting, and emphasis on the approval process is different with the approval of poll. There is no consensus to approve the process. There is nothing in current governance page about polling and how to approved it, based on current discussion , there is no consensus to approve the poll.


 Nokia asking the Chair to record the result and state the wiki pages are CLEAN state. Chairs do not make decision, The polling made the decision. The end of the poll show it is approved. 

Ericsson supports Nokia's point. Suggest to follow the link:Approved ONAP Model Governance - Developer Wiki - Confluence. The end of the poll show it is approved.

Chair and co-chair think it should to report to TSC for final decision.



2)  Modeling current activity status

Provide the dash board of current status and how to involve:

See: Modeling Current Activity Status

Please keep updated

Please capture modeling requirements for R10 here: ONAP R10 Modeling High Level Requirements

Proposed Jakarta Release Schedule: Release Planning: Jakarta

Note: In JIRA, ONAPMODEL is the "project" we are using to capture Modeling Subcommittee release requirements.


3) Jira Issue Cleaning

All the issues before Jakarta Release have been closed.



4) DDF 



5) AAI model 

Review AAI’s REST Spec/Schema AAI REST API Documentation - Jakarta on CNF and CCVPN Intent-based Cloud Leased Line and Closed-loop efforts.



6)VES model from TSC

TSC's suggestion: Modeling subcommittee will take over the VES specifications under the directory https://gerrit.onap.org/r/admin/repos/vnfrqts/requirements,branches, which is supported by 3GPP, TSC will add the current committers from the Modeling project to this repository, and Modeling subcommittee will review and merge related changes.



7) ETSI workshop 

Time:

Link:

Agenda:

Email discussion about this part due to time limitation.



ETSI CNF support

ONAPMODEL-1: Resource IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-34: Resource DM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-2: Service IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

@Xu Yang

@guochuyi

R9 DM proposal: https://lf-onap.atlassian.net/wiki/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=16463007





ASD model

ONAPMODEL-1: Resource IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-34: Resource DM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-2: Service IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen



1)Plan for the PoC: Application Package Onboarding to SDC

2)IM: Application Service Descriptor (ASD) onboarding IM

3)DM: Application Service Descriptor (ASD) Resource Data Model

4)ASD in NSD: NSD requirements for ASD deployment

5)Packaging proposal: Application Service Descriptor (ASD) Onboarding Packaging Format



Reverse engineering

ONAPMODEL-1: Resource IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-34: Resource DM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-2: Service IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen



AAI Reverse-engineering -- K8S resource



Topology model 

ONAPMODEL-1: Resource IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-34: Resource DM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-2: Service IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen



Abstract Topology Model

https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Proposed+Topology+IM+Sketch 



Modeling Documentation

ONAPMODEL-1: Resource IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-34: Resource DM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen

ONAPMODEL-2: Service IM of Modeling SubcommitteeOpen







ACTION ITEMS:

  • A LS is needed to ETSI for ASD model