You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 110 Next »

Jan 7th, 2021 at 3.30pm UTC 

  • Review our Calendar - Decision to setup CNF Task Force call every Tuesday at 2pm UTC until Daylight saving time will end in March
  • Review (and refine if necessary) this taskforce goals. Other than the on-going work, what is the next big thing we want to tackle as a taskforce?

#1 Define/Implement CNF Release Requirements

#2 Promote what we have developed

#3 Define new use cases considering latest Industry/Vendor/Open Source solutions i.e. XGVela, Anuket

  • Continue discussion between Aarna and SO team to figure out if some of the Aarna work can be re-used by SO
  • Any topic we want to submit for the February DDF event?
    • What will be ONAP priorities to remain in alignment with Industry/Standards?
    • What would be our ONAP 2021 CNF Task Force priorities (after Honolulu) - brainstorming?
    • Video Guilin CNF?
    • CNF Task Force Office Hours

Jan 12th, 2021 at 2pm UTC 

  • Recap what was discussed last week
  • Review CNF Event submission
  • EAUG - is there any CNF requirement in their 2021 wish list?
  • Reconnect with the CNF Sub-tasks (ETSI & CNF modeling/AAI)
  • New CNCF principles - probably to check in February 2021
  • OVP - Badging for the infrastructure - anything we should consider for ONAP this year?
  • Review Satoshi Fujii- Presentation - CNF Control Loop

Jan 19th, 2021 at 2pm UTC 

Jan 26th, 2021 at 2pm UTC 

  • Review CNF Closed Loop proposal (Satoshi Fujii) with PTLs (SO, AAI, DCAE and Policy)
     
    • Consider EMCO as part of the CNF Closed loop
    • Great Feedback provided by AAI/DCAE/Policy/SO Project Team members (listen to the recording (smile))

No CNF meeting on Feb 2nd, 2021 (DDF event)

Feb 9th, 2021 at 2pm UTC

#1 Invite Open-Ness representatives to discuss about EMCO :  Ritu Soodand Todd Malsbary to provide update on the helm charts. Guidance to address few comments.  How to treat EMCOv2 (Multi Cloud K8s plugin). Some options:

  1. Use binary images from external repositories (Similar to databases, Vault and others) where docker images of EMCOv2 is used from Public docker repositories
  2. Treat it as external upstream project, but build and publish the docker images in ONAP registry.
  3. Go with the approach adopted for ODL (where source code is replicated in ONAP repos and constantly synchronize with upstream).
  4. Let the deployment admin deploy EMCOv2 before deploying rest of ONAP.

<Will be re-discussed as soon as Green light received from LFN>

#2 Upcoming ETSI NFV Workshop on April 12 - Thinh Nguyenphu  

Event link not yet available

Fernando Oliveira, Byung-Woo Jun will represent the ONAP Community (ETSI & CNF Task Forces) at this event - Thank you !

#3 Discussion between ETSI NFV team and Direct path team presented by Fernando Oliveira and Byung-Woo Jun

  • Common CNF packaging

Challenge: Find vendors willing to submit their commercial NF to the ONAP Community

Suggestion to use: https://www.open5gcore.org/ and https://free5gc.org/

Reference CNF: https://github.com/electrocucaracha/gw-tester

  • VNF-D needed?
  • Other artifacts needed?

Feb 16th, 2021 at 2pm UTC

  • - Interested in pursuing badging for ONAP CNF workloads in 2021?
    • OVP: Roadmap 2021
      • Q1: Infrastructure, in alignment with Reference Architecture 2 (Anuket)
      • Q2-Q3:
        • #1 Reference Architecture 2 Interoperability (Anuket);
        • #2 Compliance in alignment with ONAP CNF On-boarding/Instantiation capabilities
        • #3 Cloud Native workload
    • Badging will also evolve based on requirements, testing
    • Initial ONAP Community Request(s)
      • Validate if Common CNF packages are in alignment with ETSI including providing information to OVP team about outcomes from our ONAP VNF-D solution; split k8s vs CNF packages, etc.
      • Requirements related to k8S ? Maybe provided based on CNCF
    • Any request from OVP To ONAP Community to support OVP Badging?
      • Any VNFSDK requirement?
      • Any SDC requirement (onboarding)?
    • ONAP should remain "Cloud Agnostic", not tight to any RA2 requirement (Infrastructure perspective)
    • OVP is gathering requirements from the different communities; acting as "Bridge" Lead for CNF activities
    • CNCF: Focus on CNF for Telcos, best practices

Feb 23rd, 2021 at 2pm UTC

  •  Thinh Nguyenphu  - Share an alternative Common CNF Packaging - postponed to March 9th - work on CNF packaging is running a bit behind schedule.
    • Nokia is exploring on "CNFD", similar to the existing "VNFD" and "PNFD". A CNFD may be treated similarly to a PNFD, which is sort of a black-box, and handed over to another entity like K8S to orchestrate. 
    • Marian Darula commented - introducing a CNFD in addition to a VNFD creates a challenge for xNF vendors. Why not re-use the VNFD? Thinh Nguyenphu - CNFD orchestration is based on Helm charts and not TOSCA, hence a VNFD is not very useful for CNF orchestration. 
    • Nokia aims to separate resource orchestration (in the Helm chart) from application orchestration (in the CNFD).
    • Marian Darula - There is urgency in finalizing the packaging - vendors need to deliver CNFs.
  • ESTI Workshop updates -  Thinh Nguyenphu  - New dates: April 21st and 22nd, 2021 - Registration link to be shared as soon as available
  • EMCO
  • Update from Victor Morales :  CNF Reference (Core Network) 

March 2nd, 2021 at 2pm UTC

  • CNF Reference deep-dive
    • Walkthrough of the Core Network reference CNF (https://github.com/gw-tester) by Victor Morales
      • The project was recently moved to  new Github organization.
      • Supports DANM, Multus or NSM
      • Question: What kind of K8S deployment is assumed? IS it KUD/KRD? Answer: No. There is no assumption of specific K8S deployment.
      • Question: What kind of K8S cluster is assumed? Is it just a single node? Answer: No assumption on number of nodes. 
      • Question: Is there support for a cluster running on OpenStack? Answer: Currently packaged in Vagrant. May work on OpenStack, but may require some extra work.
      • Question: Are there any parameters that can be configured (Day2)? Is there any telemetry provided by the CNF? A: Not yet, but it could be added.
      • Question: Which components could be scaled out using a replica set? Answer: eNodeB may be a candidate for that.
      • Question: Can the CNF be used without a multiplexing CNI plugin (Using Calico or Flannel for example) Answer: In theory it might be possible with some minor modifications, but it was never tested.
      • Next Step: Fernando Oliveira will work on better understanding parameterization and will work on creating an ETSI based package and VNFD.
  • Clock Changes: in US on March 14th, 2021; in Europe on March 28th, 2021; No change in India/China - Shall we change our CNF Task Force schedule as previously discussed?
    • One hour before TSC - AI - Ranny to send a mail to the workgroup and get confirmation.

March 9th, 2021 at 2pm UTC

  • ONAP/OVP - Inputs from/to ONAP/OVP Community in addition to what was discussed on 2/16. What are the other functionalities, test coverage are available with OVP today? What other communities (in addition to Anuket, CNCF, ONAP) collaborate with OVP?
    • Update from Olivier Smith - Change of chair in the OVP program. OVP 2.0 is being rebranded as "Anuket Assured". First badge will be released this summer, aligned with Anuket RA2. Working with the CNCF on cloud-native behavior for network functions. That will take some time to mature. OVP 2.0 is not writing  requirements. It is coordinating the tests and requirements between the various communities. Expectations from ONAP is to  have well-defined CNF modeling and a set of tests for verification. Validation tests in ONAP may exist in VVP or VNFSDK. No preference from the "Anuket Assured" side.
    • Update from user-67d6f - During Frankfurt, The "CNF Conformance" tool from the CNCF was integrated into VNFSDK. Based on the CNF modeling approach chosen by ONAP, VNFSDK may need to be updated. This was part of the CNTP effort. REQ335- REQ338 . https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Guilin+Release+Requirements
    • user-67d6f may continue serving as the main ONAP contact point, representing the VNFSDK.
    • VVP contact point -  steven stark
    • What kind of validation should ONAP require for CNFs? Packaging and on-boarding only?
      • On-boarding=SDC. SDC can now ingest and distribute Helm charts. In future releases it will also be validated. In Honolulu there is work to support ETSI packaging (SOL004).
    • Do we want to cover more (E.g. the application layer functionality of the CNF)?
      • We should probably not go into the application layer. This means we will follow the same approach we used for VNFs.
    • There will probably be different badges for different levels of conformance.
  • ETSI Event - April 21st - https://www.etsi.org/events/upcoming-events/1892-nfvevolution

March 18th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

  • Satoshi Fujii - proposal update from Fujitsu: k8s network design and config draft rev2.pptx
    • Proposal deals with the challenge of migrating workloads between K8S clusters
    • The approach is separating network design and CNI configuration
    • According to the proposal the user will create virtual networks and ONAP will generate the CNI configuration and inject it into the Helm charts at deployment time.
    • The proposal leverages EMCO (from OpenNESS). There were questions of the exact functionality provided by ONAP.
    • AI for Satoshi Fujii - prepare a follow-up presentation about the use of EMCO and the value it brings.
  • Update from Thinh Nguyenphuon ETSI event
    • There are only 15 minutes for the entire presentation
    • There is a need to submit an abstract by 3/22
  • user-67d6f - ONAP CNF compliance badging
    • VTP enhancements to support CNFs
    • VTP needs to get the requirements for CNF packaging from ONAP
    • user-67d6f - Are there ETSI SOL004 specifications? Fernando Oliveira - This is work in progress in Honolulu
    • VTP test development is planned for the Istanbul release. Need to have the requirements table ready by the start of the release. Fernando Oliveira volunteered to work on that.
    • Catherine Lefevre - Some of the VNF requirements might be applicable for CNFs
    • The VNF requirements are at VNF TOSCA Requirements . Catherine Lefevre suggested Taskforce members take a look and provide feedback.

March 25th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

  • Thinh Nguyenphu  - Share an alternative Common CNF Packaging - We will wait for Thinh Nguyenphu to indicate his readiness to present
  • Quick review of VNF TOSCA Requirements and VNF HEAT Requirements  indicate that they are very VNF and OpenStack specific
    • We need to look at the ONAP CNF artifact specifications (Helm charts, etc.), and try to derive the requirements. 
    • Marian Darula - AFAIK the draft for CNF artifacts has been presented by Fernando Oliveira , but not approved and accepted.
    • Olivier Smith - There is no intention to rush the ONAP project to provide requirements if they are not ready yet.

April 1st, 2021 at 1pm UTC

April 8th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

  • Lukasz Rajewski and Seshu Kumar Mudiganti will share the plans for Istanbul. May be in WIP state.  REQ-627 - Getting issue details... STATUS  - no updates yet.
    • No architectural changes expected. 
    • Marian Darula - Are Helm charts alone sufficient for modeling CNFs, or is there a need for external modeling. Lukasz Rajewski - Multi cluster is still a challenge.
    • Byung-Woo Jun & Marian Darula  - There is a need for an additional descriptor. The ETSI approach of a TOSCA descriptor on top of Helm could be a good approach. Lukasz Rajewski  - The multi-cluster network connectivity is an example of a modeling aspect that needs to be handled outside the Helm charts. The Nokia proposal may hold the solution for this issue.

  • From user-67d6f : I have created the place holder for supporting the CNF badging from ONAP perspective here https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Anuket+Assured+-+ONAP+CNF+Compliance+Badge 
    In order to plan the same for next release, would like to get filled following items asap from CNF Task Force and Modelling team. Could you please help to identify the owners for the below items. Thank you

1. CNF Model Element Structure

This is related to our discussion on reaching consensus on packaging - it is still work in progress.

2. CNF badging requirements 

We would like to get a better understanding of what the requirements should look like.

3. Sample CNF (ex: vFW) already supported in ONAP

Only existing CNF is the vFW, but it is not optimal as a "CNF reference". Other "Reference CNF" proposed by Samsung is not yet on-boarded to ONAP. Catherine Lefevre - the 5G-Super-Blueprint is working on on-boarding Magma (https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/display/LN/LFN+Demo%3A+5G+Super+Blueprint)

April 15th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

  • All: 5G-Super-Blueprint - which CNF features we should utilize in this use case - impact on future requirements
    • How to integrate with the Magma Orchestrator/controller
    • Can ONAP treat the Magma Orchestrator as a CNF? We are assuming it is.
    • The LTE version of Magma uses VNFs. The newly released 5G-SA version may be more CNF oriented.
    • We need more information from the Magma side. Next ONAP-Enterprise call is planned for April 28th.
  • Lukasz Rajewski presented the Honolulu CNF capabilities ( REQ-458 - Getting issue details... STATUS ) - PLACEHOLDER - Lukasz Rajewski will upload the slides.
    • CDS Day 1/2 operations
    • K8S Plugin Day2
    • Zu Qiang (Ericsson) - Q: How is CNF package distributed? A: Same as VNF. Q: How is configuration done - how is CDS triggered? Is it through SDNC? A:No. SO triggers the CDS directly. CDS and SDNC are both part of CCSDK.
  • Lukasz Rajewski and Seshu Kumar Mudiganti will share the plans for Istanbul. May be in WIP state.  REQ-627 - Getting issue details... STATUS
    • SDC Changes - Helm validation. Alignment with ETSI CNF Package (when ready)
    • A&AI - Bring information about the deployed resources from K8S and make them appear in A&AI. Requires discussion with the modeling subcommittee. Lukasz Rajewski will work with Andy Mayer on modeling changes for Istanbul.
    • SO - Distribute Helm package using CNFs-adapter. CNF-adapter health check.
    • K8S plugin - Switch to Helm 3.5
    • New Use case - Possibly Free5GC, based on some work done by Orange.
    • General comment - Plan is not finalized because there are still no confirmed resources for some of the planned functionality.
    • Catherine Lefevre  - recommends review of the Istanbul plan by the A&AI and SDC PTLs.

April 22nd, 2021 at 1pm UTC

  • Invite CNF vendors to provide feedback on the CNF onboarding based on their experience with their CNFs.
    • Kamel Idir - volunteered to provide feedback based on his experience
      • Tried both types of packages - ETSI and ONAP
      • Experience is with the Frankfurt release (Heat template wrapper)
      • ONAP VNFD - Under TOSCA There is a namespace. If a vendor uses its own namespace it does not work out of the box. Expect to have a way to change the namespace supported by ONAP. There was a requirement for SDC to support changing the namespace. Workaround - Change the CNF package provided by the vendor to match the ONAP namespace.
      • While designing a service using SDC, ran into an issue with the interfaces as defined by the vendors - use different types than the ones supported by ONAP.
      • Christophe Closset - There were changes made in Honolulu - https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/100895762/SDCMultiModelSupport.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1618834987000&api=v2&download=true
      • Kamel Idir -  Is there support for SOL007 design? Christophe Closset - It might be included in the recent changes (Honolulu). There is a way to indicate whether you are using ONAP or ETSI package.In the future it might be possible to translate between the two formats.
      • SDC has a limitation on size of images in the Helm charts. SDC has a 8MB limitation. Kamel Idir indicates it is not sufficient for the CNFs he on-boarded. Workaround - Onboard images to Docker image registry and reference them. Some vendors provide embedded images which will require modification. Christophe Closset - The solution might not be having SDC handle the images. It is not designed to serve as image storage. Kamel Idir- Manipulating the package provided by a vendor to extract the images might jeopardize package integrity. Zu Qiang (Ericsson) - Extracting the images during on-boarding may not impact the integrity. Integrity validation happens before the extraction of the images. Flow is (1) Validate - signature validation (2) Extract (3) Distribute (no signature validation at this stage).

April 29nd, 2021 at 1pm UTC

    • Additional information can be found on the "ONAP for Enterprise" Task Force Wiki (specially on 4/28)
    • Seshu Kumar Mudiganti - Magma may be treated as a 'resource orchestrator', and SO can have an adapter to control it like other resource controllers.Magma does not have LCM capabilities. Magma LCM requires some more research.
    • Catherine Lefevre- SO should remain generic. We need to be consistent from an Architecture's perspective i.e. what's the scope of SO vs SDNC-C? When do we take the decision to create an adapter in SO and when SDNC is used?
    • Deploying the Access GW requires running shell commands as root. This may be improved and better automated with ONAP.
    • Opportunity for ONAP: Automate scaling of Magma GW; automate the "magma services" deploymentice
  • Request from yan yan (CVC Committee) - Anuket Assured Re-Launch Release Plan to provide a go/no-go on their requirements / testing input to the badge launch.
  • CVC received the following feedback about ONAP CNF compliance - Is it correct?
    • H Release – ONAP CNF compliance requirements will be delivered by modeling subcommittee
    • I Release – ONAP CNF compliance tests implementation will be delivered by VTP (under VNFSDK)
  • Seshu Kumar Mudiganti  - Updates or requests from the XGVela project
    • Considering integration with 5G core slicing use case in ONAP.
    • Observability - Looking at VES and Prometheus.
    • In the process of finalizing the use case. More details to come soon.
    • XGVela does no plan to introduce new requirements to ONAP, at least not for Istanbul.
    • XGVela - CNF based
    • Requirements are driven by Anuket community

May 6th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

  • SECCOM Container Logging specs - also applicable to CNF and therefore can it be used for CNF badging? (presented by Amy Zwarico)
    • This is an update to the VNF security requirements
    • Based on industry standards
    • Applicable to CNFs and ONAP containers alike
    • The requirements cover: Event types, log data, log management 
    • Follow-up with OVP PH2 /CNCF (https://github.com/cncf/cnf-wg/tree/main/cbpps), Anuket Communities to include some of these requirements as part of CNF Badging
  • Agreed that May 13th CNF Call will be canceled

May 20th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

May 27th, 2021 at 1pm UTC

Action Items (In Progress)

  • (Andy Mayer , Hui Deng ) Follow up regarding Modeling team about CVC request - Re: Request from CVC 
  • (ALL): Provide feedback regarding Thin's proposal presented on May 6th, 2021
  • Byung-Woo Jun: Bring the discussions to the ONAP Architecture Subcommittee about SO/SDNC role etc (see notes from 4/29)
  • (Modeling/Requirements): Need to determine what ETSI CNF package solution we want to move forward (Fernando Oliveira, Byung-Woo Jun vs Thinh Nguyenphu)
  • (Olivier): Check with CNCF if any cross-meeting with ONAP could be scheduled 
  • (All): Collect feedback about our current CNF onboarding capabilities from 3rd party vendors
  • Kamel Idir - Will repeat onboarding with Honolulu (once he has the lab resources) and will report back

Action Items (Closed in 2021)

  • (Thinh Nguyenphu) / Marian Darula / Byung-Woo Jun : Nokia and Ericsson share an alternative (Common CNF Packaging) to what was proposed by Fernando Oliveira , Byung-Woo Jun
  • (All) Try to identify where we are on the CNCF Trail Journey - Needs clarification to comment, need to dig into the details of the actual ask.
  • (All): Build an ONAP proposition value to collaborate with XGVela Community
  • (Timo): Ask the Nokia team to present preview material on 1/26
  • (Catherine): Contact Policy/DCAE/AAI/SO PTLs to attend January 26th CNF Task Force call to review Satoshi FujiiCNF Closed Loop proposal
  • (Catherine): Send Calendar invite - every Tuesday @2pm UTC
  • (Catherine): Reconnect with the CNF sub-Task force: Modeling/AAI (Andy Mayer) and ETSI (Byung-Woo Jun and Fernando Oliveira ) to understand their 2021 goals on January 19th 
  • (Kenny): Follow up with EUAG in order to determine if any particular CNF reqs (or 2021 ONAP requirements including an update to the ONAP TSC)
  • (Seshu/Lukasz): Invite EMCO representatives
  • (Olivier): Organise a call with Trevor Lovettand any interested CNF team members to determine how ONAP could contribute to the OVP 2021 activities
  • (Ranny): Post the topic for the event
  • (Catherine) Check with Olivier Smithif we can postpone OVP/ONAP discussion to another week so CNF PDN Gateway discussions can be scheduled on  March 2nd, 2021
  • (Victor Morales/ Ranny Haiby): Setup additional follow-ups about CNF PDN Gateway
  • (Timo/Catherine): Promote 2021 goals from OVP program and collect any particular requirement through ONAP Requirement and TSC meetings
  • (Kenny): Contact EUAG about any CNF badging requirement (OVP)
  • (Seshu): Check if user-67d6f , Lei Huang , Yan Yang can join March 9th, 2021 to discuss about OVP/ONAP & VNFSDK
  • (Thinh): Share the ETSI event link when it will be available
  • (Seshu): Questions for XGVela

It would be great to highlight more clearly the purpose of XGVela as a platform to build CNFs and get feedback from 3rd party vendors, who are today already creating CNFS for carriers, to assess the value proposition

After the CNF is created via XGVela – can we then deploy the CNF on any Cloud environment without using XGVela at run-time?

If we need XGVela then have we performed an analysis to demonstrate the value proposition vs K8S and its ecosystem?

Build a slide to highlight how XGVela (i.e. create  CNF) is complementary to ONAP (onboard CNF/orchestrate CNF, etc.) and how it will fit to the CNCF Landscape

  • No labels