Data Model Interest Group (created May 31, 2018)
Owner: Anatoly Katzman

Link to calendar: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-modelingsub/viewevent?repeatid=11002

Time: based on the vote - every Monday, 7:00am PST; 9:00am CST; 10:00am EST; 14:00 UTC; 17:00 Israel; 19:30 India; 22:00 Beijing

Expected duration: 1h

Bridge

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

ONAP Meeting 7 is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting. 


Join from PC, Mac, Linux, iOS or Android: https://zoom.us/j/880773832

Or iPhone one-tap :
    US: +16465588656,,880773832# or +16699006833,,880773832# 
Or Telephone:
    Dial(for higher quality, dial a number based on your current location): 
        US: +1 646 558 8656 or +1 669 900 6833 or +1 855 880 1246 (Toll Free) or +1 877 369 0926 (Toll Free)
    Meeting ID: 880 773 832
    International numbers available: https://zoom.us/u/dIGl7Du4J

<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<


List of participants - if you are interested to attend the meeting, please make sure you are on this list. This is in no way a requirement, we just hope that having such a list would let us know each other better and improve communication between the members.


Related Resources

ONAP R3 Resource DM Discussion

ONAP Modeling Subcommittee Mailing List:  Web page, email address    



Meeting Minutes

3 Comments

  1. Arun Gupta

    My personal view:  I do not understand why ETSI insists on TOSCA syntax in SOL001 if there is no requirement that TOSCA orchestration will be used.  SOL001 could have been expressed in terms similar to ETSI Open Source MANO YANG models, which gives precision and no implication on the method of orchestration.

    https://osm.etsi.org/wikipub/index.php/OSM_Information_Model


    PS: the comment in the OSM white paper "EXPERIENCE WITH NFV  ARCHITECTURE,  INTERFACES, AND  INFORMATION MODELS", May 2018 cuts me to the bone:


    there are many stages which correspond to something that can be described as TOSCA, specifically:

    • Any IM described using OASIS TOSCA as modelling language
    • The IM implicit in those generic templates developed for cloud services or a variant of them
    • The IM implicit in “TOSCA Simple profile for NFV”
    • The IM changes being pushed by SOL005 and not adopted in TOSCA Simple (or a fork of them
    • maintained by SOL005?)
    • Any interpretation of IFA IM directly written in TOSCA
    • Any vendor?specific IM, with proprietary changes and/or extensions, that is perfectly conformant to TOSCA modelling remembering that, in this context, it is legitimate to over exploit object inheritance and to define a “Vendor X Virtual Machine” type, “Vendor X Connection Point” type, “Vendor X VNF” type, etc., which is a path which may prevent effective interoperability at IM level.

    The challenge is that this confusion might well lead to a loss of interoperability, a statement can be made which claims conformance giving the misleading impression of interoperability. Thus, all the cases above could legitimately claim compliance to something tagged “TOSCA” even if there are different and incompatible IMs implicitly assumed. This is also true when looking at implementing an IM; simply stating conformance to “TOSCA” is insufficient to specify a target DM for an IM.

  2. Brendan Kehoe

    This is UTC 3PM now isn't it? Title time is wrong?

    1. Keong Lim

      unfortunately, with daylight savings changes, there is always something wrong with the time in the title. Please login and check the calendar instead.