1. Kohn release - RAN Simulator updates



Kohn release reqs


Here are links to the main SON Use case REQ for Kohn release ..  

CCSDK REQ  to cover A1 support in SDNR and also RAN-Sim work (which does not have a JIRA home)  

It is clear that the SON-Handler MS has to send a modified message for the ANR A1-based message. That will have some minor code impact to SON-Handler.
We need to discuss what is feasible. 

Currently, Policy has two control loops for the SON use case which are both forwarded from Policy to SDNR. As of Jakarta, both were O1-based actions in SDNR. 
In Kohn, one of them will change to an A1-based action. It might even be possible to use exactly the same control loop message (DMaaP) format 
and have no impact in Policy. But this is an opportunity to see what change might make sense.
We need to discuss with Policy team what kind of change makes sense given the various new work re control loops. 

5/31 - Discussed A1 flow. See A1 section

6/21 - Presented SON Use Kohn in Architecture Sub-Committee. Got Approval. See JIRA and slides below

ONAPARC-745 - Getting issue details... STATUS  

6/28: Created INT-2127 - Getting issue details... STATUS to capture work needed for RAN-Sim enhancements. Cross-coupling with OSC work for A1 Termination.

A1 support in SDN-R and Policy

3/30 Good discussion on including A1-based action. Vishal Varvate is interested in contributing. He will work with John Keeney .
We discussed following plan:

  1. Implement A1 instance in SDN-R. Leverage past work in A1, including work for Slicing use case, and OSC.
  2. A1-policy trigger will be based on Control Loop msg sent from SON-Handler MS via Policy over DMaaP.
  3. RAN-Sim needs enhancement to have xApp abstraction to receive A1 message and update CU/DU state and send VES msg. If A1 policy
    message is about ANR/HO state, it can trigger xApp to make change to CU property. This chain replaces a direct O1 action for current ANR action.
  4. RAN-Sim update can leverage work for Slicing. The target for RAN-SIm work is to align with OSC and also plan to move to netopeer due to Honeycomb being archived.
    Possible approach is to add a netopeer-based server for near-rt-roc and xApp abstraction. Implementation of E2 to CU/DU can be abstracted. Details TBD.

4/19 Vishal needs info on A1 policy schema for ANR use case. Discussed details. Shankar to follow up.

4/26: Discussed control loop message formats for PCI and ANR and ANR policy schema. They are using same Policy name but different Control-Loop name and

different Action. See sample messages in file. Changes to ANR message format and control loop policy has impact on SON-Handler MS and Policy.

5/3 Discussed message format for A1-based action. DMaaP message for ANR based needs to change to send payload aligned with A1 policy.

Requirement on SON Handler MS

DCAEGEN2-3148 - Getting issue details... STATUS  

5/16: Discussed the problem statement using slides above. esp. Option 1 and 2 in slide xx.
John K also showed diagrams for options about message from Policy to SDN-R.
Ahila showed design used in Slicing use case.
Need to add details and get recording (which went to cloud).

5/31: See updated slides. Good discussion for A1-based flow which meets following guidelines:

  • Leverage existing work
  • Common approach for SON usecase and Slicing usecase
  • Separate flows for O1 and A1 based action after Policy PEF. Separation based on policy in PEF, and difference can be based on content of message based on intelligence in microservice
  • Buy-in from Slicing use-case, Policy team, Non-RT RIC/A1.  (Thanks to Ahila, Liam, John, Vishal for good collaboration!).

6/21. Presented Use Case in Architecture Committee. Consensus is to make changes in Policy PEF to have
two sets of Control Loop message format & Control Loop policy - one for O1-based action and one for A1-based action. 
Changes can be limited to support the PCI (O1-based) and ANR (A1-based) flow for SON use case.
Policy team to determine exactly how changes are implemented and how Automation Composition is used.


3/8 Further discussion on including netopeer in RAN-Sim. See slides 2-6 in ppt attached here.


Vishal presented slides below. We had a good discussion. Option 2 gives a little more flexibility for future use. John said they are willing to help with the A1 termination.
Netconf option instead of Websocket to RAN-Sim controller will need some integration work in RAN-Sim controller. Vishal will work with Niranjana on that.
Also sent a request to present in the ONAP/OSC Harmonization call today 3/30.


Discussed change in terminology to avoid confusion. We are not implementing Near-RT RIC and xApp using OSC near-rt-ric.

Decision to change terminology to better capture the nature of the RAN-Sim enhancement.

Plan is to implement

  • A1-Termination
  • RAN App. (The App function is an abstraction which works with RAN-Sim, and does not implement E2 like an xApp on near-rt-ric )


RAN App will have code to take an A1 message with (poor) HO KPI for a cell relation, and take action to blacklist that cell relation.

5/31 Slides update for A1 support topic also shows that RAN App can have direct netconf to CU/DU Honeycomb device.
In this case, it looks like O1 netconf, but it is used as convenience for simulation which is ok.

We understand that RAN App is only an abstraction of xApp (which will have E2 interface to CU/DU which is not netconf).

6/21 - Plan is to focus on using websocket from RAN App to RAN Sim Controller. 
Using netconf from RAN App to Honeycomb NF directly has issues about support for netopeer in the RAN App Java environment.

6/28  -
Websocket being implemented in RAN App and RAN Sim Controller. New code blocks/functions needed in RAN Sim Controller. 
Created INT-2127 - Getting issue details... STATUS to capture the RAN-Sim work for Kohn release. It has 3 sub-tasks for A1-Termination, RAN App, and RAN-Sim Controller.