Page History

...

• Agenda bashing
  • reminder for filling R9 high level requirements: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/ONAP+R9+Modeling+High+Level+Requirements
• Model Proposals
  
  • ETSI support for CNF model
    • R9 DM proposal: https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=93011772
      • aligned with SOL001 v4.2.1, package format is still under discussion
      • will ask for approval after SOL001 v4.2.1 is stable
    • a proposal of updating the information model documentation is planned in R9
    • latest updates:
      • Thinh has presented the alternative package solution in the CNF taskforce call, could be discussed in future calls
      • CNF requirements collaboration pending discussions as well, could be discussed in this week's CNF taskforce call
    • plan to have a conclusion next Monday, and then share to modeling team
      • current gap is that whether NFVO needs to understand the helm chart, and whether ASD can be totally non-overlap with helm chart
  • CNF runtime model
    • Proposal:
      • for Istanbul: add some necessary information as an enhancement of vf-module, to allow components to query k8s objects
      • for Jarkata: define a cnf-module, to store information like compute (pod), storage, etc.
      • the two sub-proposals can co-exist
    • Update:
      • 
      • the idea is to capture the basic information from k8s
      • the proposal has been presented to the A&AI team, and no major concerns
    • Questions:
      • if A&AI team can support modification of existing models (in case in later release, ETSI alignment team/ETSI standard identified changes needed for the runtime model), Lukasz will help check with A&AI PTL
        • William's respond is the update is possible, but A&AI team would like to avoid data migrations; their suggestions is to define the model as generic as possible to prevent massive changes in the future
        • Jacqueline's feeling is that adding attributes in A&AI is simpler than changing the existing model
      • align with ETSI alignment team
    • Conclusion:
      • will ask for poll on the data model
      • will continue how to document the information model next week
  • 5G service / CPS model
  • PNF instance model
    • reverse engineering
      
      • feedback to A&AI team:
        • some relationship lack description, and the existing description may not be meaningful enough
      • current status: AAI Schema Reverse-Engineering to Papyrus
  • Topology model
    • Proposal: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Abstract+Topology+Model
      • Martin will update the models with the IM sketch
    • Model Sketch: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Proposed+Topology+IM+Sketch
      
      • inspired by TAPI model to add "link", "connection" classes
      • looking at ORAN use cases and see if the models can fulfill the requirements
      • TAPI presentation may be found here: otcc2019.KS.002_TAPI_Concepts_Topology_Connectivity.pptx
    • Andy has helped to create a high level requirement for the topology model
      • expecting ORAN to provide relavent use cases
      • Martin and Andy are aware of the different views of topology model presented last week by Cagatay
      • mainly triggered by ORAN WG10, also related to WG1's slicing use case, etc.
      • how to model different layers, physical, logical topology, etc.? current methodology is using UML/papyrus to capture the models
    • Latest updates:
      • Andy has presented the updated the diagram to (names are better align aligned with the TAPI names)
      • plan to have a presentation to the ORAN team
• Modeling Documentation
  
  • gendoc template discussion:
    • whether the description only applies for a navigatable end of an association
    • add relationship documentation to the UML guideline: 

      Jira
      server ONAP JIRA serverId 425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb key ONAPMODEL-28

    • UML principle wiki page:
      • Principle and Guideline for Information Model Proposal Using Papyrus (Draft)
      • review the updates to the Gendoc requirements part
        • Michela suggest whether it's possible to add information of associations into the class definitions
          • Xu will investigate it offline
      • Using Papyrus for Modeling updates