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
| Recordings |
|---|
| Time | Agenda Item | Requested by | Notes / Links |
|---|---|---|---|
START RECORDING: | |||
| Agenda Bashing | 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 - Getting issue details... STATUS | 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 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-34 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-2 - Getting issue details... STATUS | R9 DM proposal: https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=93011772 | ||
ASD model ONAPMODEL-1 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-34 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-2 - Getting issue details... STATUS | 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 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-34 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-2 - Getting issue details... STATUS | AAI Reverse-engineering -- K8S resource | ||
Topology model ONAPMODEL-1 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-34 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-2 - Getting issue details... STATUS | https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Proposed+Topology+IM+Sketch | ||
Modeling Documentation ONAPMODEL-1 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-34 - Getting issue details... STATUS ONAPMODEL-2 - Getting issue details... STATUS | |||
ACTION ITEMS:
- A LS is needed to ETSI for ASD model