Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

ONAP External APIs expose the capabilities of ONAP.  They allow ONAP to be viewed as a “black box” by providing an abstracted view of the ONAP capabilities. 
They support that an external consumer of ONAP capabilities can be authenticated and authorized.  They can also be used for connecting to systems where ONAP uses the capabilities of other systems.
Note 1: External API does not include all the B2B capabilities of exposure (e.g. partner management)
Note 2: The case where trusted providers of a service (e.g. operator owned transport, or cloud infrastructure) do not need to pass through External API.
For example, External APIs between ONAP and BSS/OSS allow Service Providers to utilize the capabilities of ONAP while using their existing BSS/OSS environment minimizing customization

It is envisioned that from a Service Provider to Partner Provider interaction context (i.e. MEF Interlude), the ONAP External API will support the following types of interacts:
•Service Provider controls aspects of the Service within the Partner domain (on behalf of the Customer) by requesting changes to dynamic parameters as permitted by service policies.
•Service Provider queries state of the Service.
•Service Provider requests change to administrative state or permitted attributes of a Service.
•Service Provider request creation of connectivity between two Service Interfaces as permitted by established business arrangement.
•Service Provider request instantiation of functional service components as permitted by established business arrangement.
•Service Provider queries the Partner for detailed information related to Services provided by the Partner to the Service Provider.
•Service Provider receives Service specific event notifications (e.g., Service Problem Alerts) from the Partner.
•Service Provider receives Service specific performance information from the Partner.
•Service Provider request Service related test initiation and receive test results from the Partner.

The content of this template is expected to be fill out for M1 Release Planning Milestone.


Overview

Project NameExtAPI
Target Release NameBeijing, Casablanca, Dublin
Project Lifecycle StateIncubation; Refer to ONAP Charter, section 3.3 Project Lifecycle for further information
Participating Company AT&T, CenturyLink, China Mobile, China Telecom, Orange, PCCW Global, Turk Telekom, Verizon, Amdocs, Ciena, Huawei, Intel, Netcracker, ZTE, MEF

Scope

What is this release trying to address?

    • 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
          • 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: Easy
          • Prerequisites: Need SDC improvements
          • Resources:
      • Service Ordering
        • Add Service Request Status for serviceOrder API
          • 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
          • 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.
          • 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
          • 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
          • 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 serviceInventory API
          • Description: Allow BSS (or any other) system to receive service state update.
          • Relevance:
          • Complexity: Easy
          • Prerequisites: It requires to have a notification from AAI because NBI will not pool AAI
          • Resources:
        • Update Service Inventory to accommodate Service Chaining.
          • 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:
      • Service Topology (stretch goal) (specification focus)
      • 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

    • UML Models (Eclipse Papyrus) (with Modeling sub-committee) and API definition (JSON Swagger) for

      • License Usage

      • Service Modeling and Service Topology

      • Service Inventory

      • Service State Management

      • Service Quality Management

    • Define API Styles to be applied to External APIs (along with Micro-service Bus (MSB) and Modeling Project)

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

      • Well defined specifications for the NB APIs (e.g., JSON Swagger / OpenAPI). 
      • ONAP implementation of these APIs
    • Architecture for External APIs
      • Identification and involvement of stakeholder ONAP projects
      • Describe key External API foundation functionalites
      • 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

Use Cases

Describe the use case this release is targeted for (better if reference to customer use case).

The TSC identified the following Use cases for Release A:

TSC Use Case

VNFs identified in TSC Use case

(obselete)Use Case: VoLTE (vIMS + vEPC)N/A
Use Case: Residential Broadband vCPE (Approved)

vBNG, vG_MUX, vG,  vAAA, vDHCP, vDNS

Use Case: vFW/vDNS (Approved)

vFW, vPacketGenerator, vDataSink, vDNS, vLoadBalancer,

all VPP based.

Use Case: VoLTE(approved)

vSBC, vPCSCF, vSPGW, vPCRF, VI/SCSCF, vTAS, VHSS, vMME

The External API developed by this project are applicable to the Services identified in the TSC E2E use cases.  

Minimum Viable Product

  • Documentation of 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.

Functionalities

List the functionalities that this release is committing to deliver by providing a link to JIRA Epics and Stories. In the JIRA Priority field, specify the priority (either High, Medium, Low). The priority will be used in case de-scoping is required. Don't assign High priority to all functionalities.

  • Initial focus on ONAP External APIs to BSS/OSS (i.e., MEF Legato)
    • Service Catalog
    • Service Ordering (including Service Instantiation)
    • Service Inventory 
    • Service Topology (stretch goal) (specification focus)
    • License Usage (stretch goal) (specification focus)
  • Initial focus specification of ONAP External APIs supporting Inter-Provider (i.e., MEF Interlude)
    • Service Control 
    • Service State (operational state) 
    • Service Inventory / Details


Epics

Key Summary T Created Updated Due Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution
Loading...
Refresh

Stories

Key Summary T Created Updated Due Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution
Loading...
Refresh


Longer term roadmap

Provide a clear and unambiguous ONAP service abstraction so that the BSS/OSS can exchange service requirements and service capabilities in a common and consistent fashion.
Provide a way to rapidly integrate new Services and Service Components into ONAP so that they can quickly introduce capabilities for their customers and within their infrastructure.
Enable management the entire lifecycle of Services within ONAP in a common way so that they can ensure orchestration, manageability and control of each Service in an easily integrateable and low cost way.
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.

It is envisioned that from a Service Provider to BSS/OSS interaction context (i.e. MEF Legato), the ONAP External API will support the following types of interacts:

  • BSS/OSS retrieves Service Models
  • BSS/OSS requests service feasibility determination.
  • BSS/OSS requests reservations of capabilities related to a potential Service.
  • BSS/OSS requests activation of Service.
  • BSS/OSS receives Service activation tracking status updates.
  • BSS/OSS retrieves Service Inventory
  • BSS/OSS receives usage events due to a Customer initiating dynamic activity on their Service (e.g., increase in bandwidth).
  • BSS/OSS receives a summary of Service quality and usage information.
  • BSS/OSS receives Service state and fault event information
  • BSS/OSS receives Service Activation Testing results.
  • BSS/OSS receive capability information about the Service layer.
  • BSS/OSS manages Licenses
  • BSS/OSS receives License Usage information

It is envisioned that from a Service Provider to Partner Provider interaction context (i.e. MEF Interlude), the ONAP External API will support the following types of interacts:

  • Service Provider controls aspects of the Service within the Partner domain (on behalf of the Customer) by requesting changes to dynamic parameters as permitted by service policies.
  • Service Provider queries state of the Service.
  • Service Provider requests change to administrative state or permitted attributes of a Service.
  • Service Provider request creation of connectivity between two Service Interfaces as permitted by established business arrangement.
  • Service Provider request instantiation of functional service components as permitted by established business arrangement.
  • Service Provider queries the Partner for detailed information related to Services provided by the Partner to the Service Provider.
  • Service Provider receives Service specific event notifications (e.g., Service Problem Alerts) from the Partner.
  • Service Provider receives Service specific performance information from the Partner.
  • Service Provider request Service related test initiation and receive test results from the Partner.

Release Deliverables

Deliverable NameDeliverable Description
DocumentationDocumentation of 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
External APIJSON Swagger / OpenAPI for the External Interface
External API Agent SoftwareCode contribution for External API Agent functionality

Sub-Components

List all sub-components part of this release.
Activities related to sub-component must be in sync with the overall release.

Sub-components are repositories are consolidate in a single centralized place. Edit the Release Components name for your project in the centralized page.

  1. External API Agent:
    1. Core Agent Functionality
    2. Service Catalog API
    3. Service Ordering API
    4. Service Inventory API

ONAP Dependencies

List the other ONAP projects your depends on.

Dependent on APIs from SDC, SO, and AAI

Architecture

High level architecture diagram

At that stage within the Release, the team is expected to provide more Architecture details describing how the functional modules are interacting.

Block and sequence diagrams showing relation within the project as well as relation with external components are expected.

Anyone reading this section should have a good understanding of all the interacting modules.


Platform Maturity

Refering to CII Badging Security Program and Platform Maturity Requirements, fill out the table below by indicating the actual level , the targeted level for the current release and the evidences on how you plan to achieve the targeted level.

Area

Actual Level

Targeted Level for current Release

How, Evidences

Comments

Performance00
  • 0 -- none
  • 1 – baseline performance criteria identified and measured
  • 2 & 3 – performance improvement plans created & implemented
Stability00
  • 0 – none
  • 1 – 72 hours component level soak w/random transactions
  • 2 – 72 hours platform level soak w/random transactions
  • 3 – 6 months track record of reduced defect rate
Resiliency00
  • 0 – none
  • 1 – manual failure and recovery (< 30 minutes)
  • 2 – automated detection and recovery (single site)
  • 3 – automated detection and recovery (geo redundancy)
Security01
  • 0 – none
  • 1 – CII Passing badge + 50% Test Coverage
  • 2 – CII Silver badge; internal communication encrypted; role-based access control and authorization for all calls
  • 3 – CII Gold
Scalability00
  • 0 – no ability to scale
  • 1 – single site horizontal scaling
  • 2 – geographic scaling
  • 3 – scaling across multiple ONAP instances
Manageability00
  • 1 – single logging system across components; instantiation in < 1 hour
  • 2 – ability to upgrade a single component; tracing across components; externalized configuration management
Usability00
  • 1 – user guide; deployment documentation; API documentation
  • 2 – UI consistency; usability testing; tutorial documentation

API Incoming Dependencies

List the API this release is expecting from other releases.
Prior to Release Planning review, Team Leads must agreed on the date by which the API will be fully defined. The API Delivery date must not be later than the release API Freeze date.

Prior to the delivery date, it is a good practice to organize an API review with the API consumers.

API NameAPI DescriptionAPI Definition DateAPI Delivery dateAPI Definition link (i.e.swagger)
SDC: Catalog APIExposes Service CatalogTBDTBDhttps://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDC+API
SO: Service Instantiation APIRequests for Service InstantiationTBDTBD
AAI: Service Inventory APIQuery for Service InventoryTBDTBD

API Outgoing Dependencies

API this release is delivering to other releases.

API NameAPI DescriptionAPI Definition DateAPI Delivery dateAPI Definition link (i.e.swagger)
ExtAPI: Service CatalogExternal Service Catalog APITBDTBDTBD
ExtAPI: Service OrderingExternal Service Ordering APITBDTBDTBD
ExtAPI: Service InventoryExternal Service Inventory APITBDTBDTBD

Third Party Products Dependencies

Third Party Products mean products that are mandatory to provide services for your components. Development of new functionality in third party product may or not be expected.
List the Third Party Products (OpenStack, ODL, RabbitMQ, ElasticSearch,Crystal Reports, ...).

NameDescriptionVersion
SpringbootJava Platform FrameworkTBD
MariaDBMySQL open fork

In case there are specific dependencies  (Centos 7 vs Ubuntu 16. Etc.) list them as well.

Testing and Integration Plans

Provide a description of the testing activities (unit test, functional test, automation,...) that will be performed by the team within the scope of this release.

Describe the plan to integrate and test the release deliverables within the overall ONAP system.
Confirm that resources have been allocated to perform such activities.

Potential Test Cases for External API include:

  • BSS/OSS retrieves Service Models
  • BSS/OSS orders a new Service.
  • BSS/OSS subscribes to Service order tracking status notifications.
  • BSS/OSS retrieves Service Inventory


Gaps

This section is used to document a limitation on a functionality or platform support. We are currently aware of this limitation and it will be delivered in a future Release.
List identified release gaps (if any), and its impact.

Gaps identifiedImpact
TBDTBD

Known Defects and Issues

Provide a link toward the list of all known project bugs.

Key Summary T Created Updated Due Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution
Loading...
Refresh

Risks

List the risks identified for this release along with the plan to prevent the risk to occur (mitigation) and the plan of action in the case the risk would materialized (contingency).

Risk identifiedMitigation PlanContingency Plan
TBDTBDTBD

Resources

Fill out the Resources Committed to the Release centralized page.

Release Milestone

The milestones are defined at the Release Level and all the supporting project agreed to comply with these dates.

Team Internal Milestone

This section is optional and may be used to document internal milestones within a project team or multiple project teams. For instance, in the case the team has made agreement with other team to deliver some artifacts on a certain date that are not in the release milestone, it is erecommended to provide these agreements and dates in this section.

It is not expected to have a detailed project plan.

DateProjectDeliverable
TBDTBDTBD

Documentation, Training

  • Highlight the team contributions to the specific document related to he project (Config guide, installation guide...).
  • Highlight the team contributions to the overall Release Documentation and training asset
  • High level list of documentation, training and tutorials necessary to understand the release capabilities, configuration and operation.
  • Documentation includes items such as:
    • Installation instructions
    • Configuration instructions
    • Developer guide
    • End User guide
    • Admin guide
    • ...

Note

The Documentation project will provide the Documentation Tool Chain to edit, configure, store and publish all Documentation asset.


Other Information

Vendor Neutral

If this project is coming from an existing proprietary codebase, ensure that all proprietary trademarks, logos, product names, etc. have been removed. All ONAP deliverables must comply with this rule and be agnostic of any proprietary symbols.

Free and Open Source Software

FOSS activities are critical to the delivery of the whole ONAP initiative. The information may not be fully available at Release Planning, however to avoid late refactoring, it is critical to accomplish this task as early as possible.
List all third party Free and Open Source Software used within the release and provide License type (BSD, MIT, Apache, GNU GPL,... ).
In the case non Apache License are found inform immediately the TSC and the Release Manager and document your reasoning on why you believe we can use a non Apache version 2 license.

Each project must edit its project table available at Project FOSS.


Charter Compliance

The project team comply with the ONAP Charter.