Weekly Meetings: OOF-SON Meetings
Use Case Key Information
Topic | Description | Wiki |
---|---|---|
Prior Project Base Wiki | ||
Requirements Jira | ||
Architecture S/C info | ||
BUSINESS DRIVER
Executive Summary
SON (Self-Organizing Networks) functionality is an essential part of existing 4G mobility networks, and will be even more critical for 5G. SON enables automation to improve network performance and efficiency, improve user experience, and reduce operational expenses and complexity. The objective of the OOF-SON (new name for OOF-PCI) use case is to develop an ONAP-based SON platform using the ONAP Optimization Framework (OOF). We have taken a phased approach since SON is complex, and SON for 5G is still evolving. We started with the Physical Cell Identity (PCI) optimization SON use case in Casablanca, then added some centralized Automated Neighbor Relations (ANR) aspects in Dublin. For Frankfurt, we will address gaps such as PCI assignment during new cell addition, alignment with RAN inventory, etc., In addition, we aim to have enhancements such as: additional optimization functionality (e.g. include the use of AI/ML), use of control loop co-ordination in Policy, and alignment with industry trends for open interfaces and open models for the RAN interactions.
Business Impact
SON is an essential feature in mobility networks, and relevant to every operator. Any ONAP-based network deployment for 5G will benefit from an ONAP-based SON solution, which provides a disaggregation of SON functions into modules aligned with the ONAP architecture. Operators and vendors will both benefit from the ability of vendors to bring best-in-class solutions to each module, while leveraging the benefits of a community-supported open platform. This will enable faster development of innovative solutions. The approach taken could very well be evolved to address SON use cases whose scope extends beyond just the RAN.
Business Markets
SON for 5G is relevant to all 5G operators and markets.
Funding/Financial Impacts
SON functions reduce Opex since the automated self-organizing functions are an efficient approach to continuously optimize network configurations to improve performance and respond to network conditions.
Organization Mgmt, Sales Strategies
There are no additional organizational management or sales strategies for this beyond whatever is required for ONAP deployment to support 5G.
Development Status
PROJECT | PTL | User Story / Epic | Requirement |
A&AI | No Impact | ||
AAF | No Impact | ||
APPC | No Impact | ||
CLAMP | Control Loop Deployment | ||
CC-SDK | Incorporate new Yang model | ||
C&PS (New project) | Dependency. Require database solution (CRUD API, update from VES CMNotify) which is aligned to ORAN-aligned Yang model | ||
DCAE | Modification of SON MS. Modify interface with ConfigDB/C&PS database. Test VES collector ingest of FM/PM/CM data from RAN-Sim | ||
DMaaP | Test/Dependency | ||
External API | No Impact | ||
MODELING | No Impact | ||
Multi-VIM / Cloud | No Impact | ||
OOF | Modify interface with ConfigDB/C&PS database | ||
POLICY | Control Loop Co-ordination. Possible dedicated instance for SON. | ||
PORTAL | No Impact | ||
RAN-SIM (Test Integration Demo) | Modify to use new Yang model Modify to use new CMNotify VES format | ||
SDN-C | Modify SDN-R code to work with new Yang model Modify interface with ConfigDB/C&PS database | ||
SDC | No Impact | ||
SO | No Impact | ||
VID | No Impact | ||
VNFRQTS | No Impact | ||
VNF-SDK | No Impact | ||
CDS | No impact. Explore interaction? |
List of PTLs:Approved Projects
*Each Requirement should be tracked by its own User Story in JIRA
Links to previous Releases
The OOF and PCI use case started in Casablanca release. Please see the following links:
Base page for OOF-PCI use case: 5G - OOF (ONAP Optimization Framework) and PCI (Physical Cell ID) Optimization
Use Case template for Dublin release with Hi-level requirements: OOF-PCI Use Case - Dublin Release - ONAP based SON for PCI and ANR
Use Case page for Rel 6 (Frankfurt) and Rel 5 (El Alto): OOF (SON) in R5 El Alto, OOF (SON) in R6 Frankfurt
Use Case Diagram
Use cases define how different users interact with a system under design. Each use case represents an action that may be performed by a user (defined in UML as an Actor with a user persona).
Use Case Functional Definitions
Section | Description |
---|---|
Use Case Title | 5G SON |
Actors (and System Components) | The list of Actors and System Components that participate in the Use Case |
Description | Short overview of the Use Case |
Points of Contact | Authors and maintainers of the Use Case. Use Case Lead, Key Use Case members and code contributors. |
Preconditions | A list of conditions that are assumed to be true before the Use Case is invoked Includes description of Information Consumed |
Triggers / Begins when | Describes the trigger for beginning the Use Case |
Steps / Flows (success) | Describes the sequence of steps and interactions that occur during the Use Case (may include: description, data exchanges, functionality, state changes) Interaction diagrams may be included or referenced |
Post-conditions | The expected results of the execution of the Use Case Includes description of Information Produced |
Alternate / Exception Paths | Description of any exceptions or special process that could occur during Use Case |
Related Use Cases | List of the Use Cases referenced by this Use Case |
Assumptions | Describes any assumptions that are made for this use case |
Tools / References / Artifacts | List of any tools or reference material associated with this Use Case as well as any JIRA trace-ability. List of any associated diagrams or modelling artifacts associated with the Use Case |
Testing
Current Status
Testing Blockers
- High visibility bugs
- Other issues for testing that should be seen at a summary level
- Where possible, always include JIRA links
End to End flow to be Tested
**This should be a summary level Sequence diagram done in Gliffy**
Test Cases and Status
# | Test Case | Status |
---|---|---|
1 | There should be a test case for each item in the sequence diagram | NOT YET TESTED |
2 | create additional requirements as needed for each discreet step | COMPLETE |
3 | Test cases should cover entire Use Case | PARTIALLY COMPLETE |
4 | Test Cases should include enough detail for testing team to implement the test | FAILED |