Agenda:
- Agenda bashing - 5 minutes
- Model Proposals
- ETSI CNF support - ? minutes
- CNF runtime model - 10 minutes
- PNF instance model - ? minutes
- CPS model - 0 minutes
- Topology model - ? minutes
- Modeling Documentation - 0 minutes
Material:
- Model proposals:
- Modeling requirements:
- Related information:
- Clean/Approved models:
- Model Specification:
Minutes:
- Agenda bashing
- 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
- Updates:
- SOL001 is delayed and expected to be stable at the end of July
- CNF runtime model
- IM: Simplified K8S Resource Model - IM
- comments regarding the DM are received last Tuesday
- Should be there a container (object) between “tenant” and “k8s-resource”, instead of tenant directly connects to k8s-resource now?
- Based on the URI, it seems like the relationship among “tenant”, “cloud-region” and “k8s-resource” should be “cloud-region”->”tenant”->”k8s-resource”, should the direct relationship between “cloud-region” and “k8s-resource” be modified accordingly?
- Lukasz shows the updated models
- Xu will update the IM accordingly
- Jacqueline also comments on the wiki page, about the description/definition of k8s-resource
- will continue discussion on the wiki / in the following calls
- 5G service / CPS model
- PNF instance model
- reverse engineering
- migrating to new version
- 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
- Latest updates:
- Tony provides some comments on the model sketch:
- simplify the "service" models
- relationship between the topology model and ONAP IM / root model
- currently working on high level concepts, discussing whether we need to have certain objects in the ONAP IM, and maybe part of the topology model
- e.g., Connectivity, EndPoint
- from developer's perspective, suggest to avoid too many hops to access the models/info
- intent part needs further discussion, and suggest to focus on aspects first
- Model discussed during the meeting (for the abstract models)
- Modeling Documentation
- gendoc template discussion:
- whether the description only applies for a navigatable end of an association
- add relationship documentation to the UML guideline:
ONAPMODEL-28
-
Getting issue details...
STATUS
- UML principle wiki page:
{"serverDuration": 220, "requestCorrelationId": "cb7db0c9c113cae4"}