Please add/remove yourself. Thanks!
See also
Goals
- share information between
- O-RAN-SC Non-RT-RIC
- O-RAN-SC OAM
- O-RAN-SC SMO
- ONAP CCSDK/SDNC/SDN-R
- LFN
Recording
Discussion items
Time | Item | Who | Notes |
---|
00:00 | Admin | | Next meetings: 2021-06-02: John Keeney 2021-06-09: Martin Skorupski 2021-06-16: John Keeney 2021-06-23: Martin Skorupski |
00:05 | O-RAN-SC | O-RAN-SC PTLs | Status reports: - Non-RT-RIC: John Keeney
- SIM: Alex Stancu
- bug in sysrepo (see previous meeting)
- new NTSim version 1.3.3 fixed that issue
- issue can be closed in sysrepo for v2
- OAM: Martin Skorupski
- deployment/integration topics - IPv6 → DNS (E-Release)
- O-DU: HariomGupta(HCL)
- edit-config under review
- int osc lab - version of SMO
Target non-rt-ric / oam - smo - solution in OSC in June (asap) - for Honolulu bug fixes - we may go via policy docker hub
ToC - first discussion about E-Release - goes to RSAC |
00:20 | O-RAN f2f | | - OAM involved in O-RAN related topics
- Modeling processes (strong help by Ben)
- Tooling proposal
- FM coordination (AlarmDictionary)
- PM coordination
- SMO features, architecture
- IM/DM status
- (Network)-Topology - experience with TAPI
- RASC and SMO Architecture discussion
for O-RAN members only ;( (https://oranalliance.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/OAH/pages/1788641297/Virtual+F2F+Meetings+June+1+-+June+14+2021) |
00:30 | |
| |
|
| Kamel Idir | Non-RT-RIC deployed with kubernetes - how to access the control-panel?
- version cherry
- access the gateway function
- details via email
- documentation for D-Release
|
END
|
|
|
|
00:?? | Use Case | | OSC Proposed e2e integration use case: O-RU FH connection recovery- REF/Background:
- Martin Skorupski provided intro
- Alarm when fronthaul connection dies (O-DU - O-RU) (VES to SMO)
- John Keeney If there is a failure both O-DU & O-RU will try reconnect anyway - without this loop? Martin Skorupski Yes.
- @? How does SMO connect to O-RU?
- Martin Skorupski This is a mix of different deployment options (hierarchical vs hybrid, O1 vs M-Plane). Main issue is agreeing models & terminology.
- John Keeney Seems this use case is not real-world useful, especially since recovery will happen automatically anyway, & mix of standards ...
- Martin Skorupski John Keeney Using this use case as longer term motivator for SMO/NONRTRIC/rApp development - independent of usecase
- Topology ??:
- May need a topology service for this use case - John Keeney Will use a simple file/hardcoded for initial versions of this use case.
- Pawel Pawlak Andy Mayer Topology in A&AI, CPS ? John Keeney No - not initially. Plan to keep it simple for this release.
<bridge dropped recording stopped at this point. Most participants reconnected once bridge started again> - Topology ??: (contd)
- John Keeney Lots of options for how this should be done properly in ONAP.
- Swaminathan Seetharaman ONAP usecases already have some plans for this e.g. slicing, oof, etc
- Andy Mayer A model should be agreed in ONAP. Lots of previous discussions in ONAP - e.g. what goes in A&AI and CPS ... but that was a while ago.
- Martin Skorupski SDNR has some topology model too - not standards based.
- @Sven John Keeney Martin Skorupski Lots of issues with different topology models ... and most existing hierarchical models break down in a 5G/CloudRan environment
- Lots of work ... Andy Mayer Martin Skorupski Can create a JIRA in ONAP MODCOM ...
- ... but will keep it simple here for this use case.
- @? Will other O1 usecases be effected? Martin Skorupski i No. O1 functions continue as before.
- Martin Skorupski Please add feedback if any
|
Action items