Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

Use Case Overview & Description

CLAMP (Control Loop Automation Management Platform) functionalities, recently moved to Policy project , want to provide a Control Loop Lifecycle management architecture. A control Loop is a key concept for Automation and assurance Use Cases and remain a top priority for ONAP as an automation platform. This requirement wants to improve Control Loop LCM architecture focusing on an abstract CL management logic,  isolating CL logic vs ONAP component logic, providing a common CL Design time catalogue with a  generic CL definition, and elaborate API to integrate with other design systems as well as 3PP component integration. PoCs have been progressed in ONAP Rel G and H in this area, CL LCM redesign has reached a relevant viable set of features and it is ready to be moved in Rel I to mainstream as part of the Policy framework.

Use Case Key Information

TOPICDESCRIPTIONWIKI PAGE
Requirements ProposalThis is a link to the requirements proposal made on the Requirements Sub-committeeIstanbul release - functional requirements proposed list#ControlLoopinTOSCALCM
Architecture S/C infoInformation on the Architecture sub-committee presentation
Prior Project "Base" WikiLink to the "base" wiki for the Use Case, or work from a prior release.
Requirements Jira (REQ-###) TicketLink to the REQ Jira ticket for this use case

Jira
serverONAP JIRA
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
keyREQ-716

Key Use Case Leads & Contacts

USE CASE LEADZu Qiang (Ericsson) Liam Fallon Michela Bevilacqua

USE KEY CONTACTS:


Meetings Register & RecordingsLink to Use Case Team meetings.


BUSINESS DRIVER

Executive Summary CLAMP (Control Loop Automation Management Platform) functionalities, recently moved to Policy project , want to provide a Control Loop Lifecycle management architecture. A control Loop is a key concept for Automation and assurance Use Cases and remain a top priority for ONAP as an automation platform. This requirement wants to improve Control Loop LCM architecture focusing on an abstract CL management logic,  isolating CL logic vs ONAP component logic, providing a common CL Design time catalogue with a  generic CL definition, and elaborate API to integrate with other design systems as well as 3PP component integration. PoCs have been progressed in ONAP Rel G and H in this area, CL LCM redesign has reached a relevant viable set of features and it is ready to be moved in Rel I to mainstream as part of the Policy framework.

Business Impact - Deployment and orchestration of automation and control loop use cases across CNFs,  VNFs and PNFs in a model driven way simplifies the network management. Enables operators and service providers to manage the Life Cycle of a Network Service. Assuring continuity of operation of services is crucial for production and carrier grade environments. The actualization or upgrades of software and in consequence required changes in the service model is a natural part of service instance life cycle. Without the support of ONAP service update with schema change, service life cycle management by ONAP can be very difficult which can impact the quality and continuity of services.

Business Markets - All operators and service providers that are using ONAP for automation and assurance.

Funding/Financial Impacts - CL LCM wants to reduce operational expense  and its abstraction will provide an added value with multiple  integration points.

Organization Mgmt, Sales Strategies - (It is suggested that you use the following wording): There is no additional organizational management or sales strategies for this use case outside of a service providers "normal" ONAP deployment and its attendant organizational resources from a service provider. (This would typically describe the "WHO", but because use cases are all deployed with ONAP itself, these two areas come with the actual ONAP deployment and uses the organizational management and sales strategies of a particular service provider's ONAP deployment)

Development Status

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Multi-VIM /

Cloud

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

Weitao Gao (Old) →

user-67d6f  (New)

...

List of PTLs:Approved Projects

*Each Requirement should be tracked by its own User Story in JIRA 

USE CASE DIAGRAM

Use cases define how different users interact with a system under design.  Each use case represents an action that may be performed by a user (defined in UML as an Actor with a user persona).

Use Case Diagram Example.pngImage Removed

Use Case Functional Definitions

...

Use Case Title

...

Title of the Use Case

...

Actors (and System Components)

...

The list of Actors and System Components that participate in the Use Case

...

Description

...

Short overview of the Use Case

...

Points of Contact

...

Authors and maintainers of the Use Case.

Use Case Lead, Key Use Case members and code contributors.

...

Preconditions

...

A list of conditions that are assumed to be true before the Use Case is invoked

Includes description of Information Consumed

...

Triggers / Begins when

...

Describes the trigger for beginning the Use Case

...

Steps / Flows (success)

...

Describes the sequence of steps and interactions that occur during the Use Case (may include: description, data exchanges, functionality, state changes)

Interaction diagrams may be included or referenced

...

Post-conditions

...

The expected results of the execution of the Use Case

Includes description of Information Produced

...

Alternate / Exception Paths

...

Description of any exceptions or special process that could occur during Use Case

...

Related Use Cases

...

List of the Use Cases referenced by this Use Case

...

Assumptions

...

Describes any assumptions that are made for this use case

...

Tools / References / Artifacts

...

List of any tools or reference material associated with this Use Case as well as any JIRA trace-ability.

List of any associated diagrams or modelling artifacts associated with the Use Case

Rel I Project REQ Tickets

Jira
serverONAP Jira
columnIdsissuekey,summary,assignee,reporter,status
columnskey,summary,assignee,reporter,status
maximumIssues1000
jqlQuerykey = REQ-716 or ("Epic Link" = REQ-716 and project = REQ)
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb

Story Tickets

Jira
serverONAP JIRA
columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution,subtasks,fixversions
maximumIssues100
jqlQuery"Epic Link" = REQ-716 and project != "REQ"
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb

Rel J Project REQ Tickets

Jira
serverONAP Jira
columnIdsissuekey,summary,assignee,reporter,customfield_10701,customfield_10702,customfield_10703,status
columnskey,summary,assignee,reporter,Integration Test Plan Status,Integration Test Status,Integration Test Time to Complete,status
maximumIssues1000
jqlQuerykey = REQ-994 or ("Epic Link" = REQ-994 and project = REQ )
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb

Backlog Tickets for Rel J

Jira
serverONAP Jira
columnIdsissuekey,summary,issuetype,created,updated,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution,subtasks
columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution,subtasks
maximumIssues100
jqlQuery"Epic Link" = POLICY-3777 or "Epic Link" = POLICY-2952
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb

Function Description

TESTING

Roadmap

Image Added


Reference

TESTING

Current Status

  1. Testing Blockers

  2. High visibility bugs
  3. Other issues for testing that should be seen at a summary level
  4. Where possible, always include JIRA links

End to End flow to be Tested

**This should be a summary level Sequence diagram done in Gliffy** 

Gliffy Diagram
macroIdc633e195-a625-4afd-a014-dfd1eb1a365a
nameUse Case Flow
pagePin1

Test Cases and Status

...

NOT YET TESTED

...

COMPLETE

...