We believe that Ops (Operation) is VID persona and most of Ops tasks around Instantiation (first time) and CM should be done via the same platform. If we are to propose a consolidation of all the GUIs around Ops persona, we should also consider ONAP CLAMP (Monitoring �C Close-Loop (CL)).
I tend to agree that we need to have a unified experience for the same persona. Eden From: ROSE, DANIEL V Sent: Sunday, June 04, 2017 6:42 PM To: Dhananjay Pavgi <[email protected]> Cc: Gaurav Gupta (c) <[email protected]>; shentao <[email protected]>; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Hemli, Amichai <[email protected]>; ANAPAN-LAVALLE, HECTOR A <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Question on VID Our gui uses the same datastores with the same users and are reachable from the same portal. Its akin to something like openstack horizon, you dont say that just because sahara is a different tab from nova it is a different gui. Similar in onap you go to one screen for instantiation and one for lcm. But I will say i am not the final authority on this and a different paradigm may be warranted but what we DONT want is a per use case or per vim or per vnfm gui! On Jun 4, 2017, at 7:05 AM, Dhananjay Pavgi <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: Very valid point, Gaurav. ONAP has multiple GUIs and take this as a request to TSC/community members to arrive at role definition for each GUI to ensure that there’s no ambiguity and the same role calling to use more than one GUI. If there’s such overlaps then we should get those sorted. thanks & regards, Dhananjay Pavgi Mobile : +91 98220 22264 <image001.png> <image002.jpg> www.techmahindra.com<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.techmahindra.com_&d=DwMGbw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=2wwdGZ3YcpSivQ2Kio028A&m=e5ggSE0RN3XQQseCnfIpQXKr_uhG_WMd1wOVhyplIYo&s=kdY4OBHbH4jhLDWe6sXbYTE9lDLYVCFrQbKoorRcVmk&e=> Platinum Member. Visit : http://www.onap.org<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.onap.org_&d=DwMGbw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=2wwdGZ3YcpSivQ2Kio028A&m=e5ggSE0RN3XQQseCnfIpQXKr_uhG_WMd1wOVhyplIYo&s=rRBSamOrroccRmYDq21eXHHXjXU961Fe9jHHZjWY168&e=> From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Gaurav Gupta (c) Sent: Saturday, June 03, 2017 9:07 AM To: ROSE, DANIEL V <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; shentao <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; HEMLI, AMICHAI <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; ANAPAN-LAVALLE, HECTOR A <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Question on VID Daniel Rose I assumed that one of the Goal of ONAP is managing the Cloud Infra and Service easy for the Telco Operator . As in traditional/conventional Network infra environment Network Element had their own EMS/NMS System and even if some functions of NE or all of the NE even if virtualized , poses a problem for the operator to look at 2 Screen at least . a- EMS/NMS for NE and Service/KPI/Network Health Monitoring b- Another for monitoring the health of Virtualized environment Do you think - having too many GUI's would causes a lot of overhead unless you are thinking of restricting each GUI to a specific Role . Do correct if I am missing something subtle . with best regards gaurav ________________________________ From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> on behalf of ROSE, DANIEL V <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: 02 June 2017 22:52 To: shentao; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; HEMLI, AMICHAI; ANAPAN-LAVALLE, HECTOR A Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] Question on VID Hector do you know what kind of gui we have and where it is now? Thanks, Daniel Rose ECOMP / ONAP com.att.ecomp 732-420-7308 From: shentao [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, June 02, 2017 5:09 AM To: ROSE, DANIEL V <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; HEMLI, AMICHAI <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: 答复: [onap-discuss] Question on VID Hi, Daniel Thanks for your reply. I’m working to summarize portal requirements and want to confirm if VID is going to provide a portal for service LCM because it seems no description about GUI in VID proposal. If VID provides a portal for service LCM, I agree with you that there is no necessary to build the same part in Usecase UI project. Btw, as I understand appc provides NB APIs, but not gui. Does service lifecycle gui not exist in VID gui? Best regards, Shentao 发件人: ROSE, DANIEL V [mailto:[email protected]] 发送时间: 2017年5月31日 4:14 收件人: shentao; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; HEMLI, AMICHAI 抄送: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 主题: RE: [onap-discuss] Question on VID On the one hand, VID already has a portal integration. To answer your questions in a more broad way I don’t think we want to go about creating GUIs for each specific use case (but I guess if the community does they can reply and keep me honest) and that is what I got as the output from a read of your project proposal. The idea in my opinion is to add capabilities to the platform. When you look at it that way I see 3 gui areas Service Design, Service Instantiation and Service Lifecycle. Service design is already covered by sdc and that project. Service Instantiation is covered by VID and service lifecycle is covered by appc gui, which may or may not be open sourced right now I am not sure but I am sure we would be ok with doing so if its not. Then if the release 1 use cases need enhancements t that we should implement them generically and any vnf can use it. I certainly don’t want to build the same thing for vcpe and volte! Either way I don’t know what exactly your project is looking to do. Can you clarify your project proposal a bit so vi d can better work together with you? Thanks, Daniel Rose ECOMP / ONAP com.att.ecomp 732-420-7308 From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of shentao Sent: Tuesday, May 30, 2017 3:52 PM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; HEMLI, AMICHAI <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [onap-discuss] Question on VID Hi, Michael and Helmi I’m working for UseCase UI project and found that there is a relationship between UseCase UI and VID project. I’ve looked through the VID proposal and have some questions about VID project. Could you help me to confirm questions about VID project. Thank you very much. 1. Is VID project planning to provide a portal component which will integrate into Portal Platform? 2. If VID project provides a portal component, what detail functions will be provided? UseCase UI project will support managements of service & VNF lifecycle, I don’t know whether VID has a duplicate scope because there is service & VNF description in VID scope. 3. In UseCase UI proposal, seed code is linking to VID’s repo (https://gerrit.onap.org/r/#/admin/projects/vid<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__gerrit.onap.org_r_-23_admin_projects_vid&d=DwMFbw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=2wwdGZ3YcpSivQ2Kio028A&m=s_pnutB5B1kDdiy98MfuTyx1YYlN1nrqG9i5z1LqUdA&s=tek-4tg2eYSYZLZvjfjE7XVCYwz7CRpJTeTU5YsvVrw&e=>). Does it mean that VID repo is currently including seed code of UseCase UI (vCPE or VoLTE)? This involves question2 that I don’t know why UseCase UI’s seed code is in VID’s repo. Best regards, Tao Shen --------------------------------------------- 沈涛 中国移动通信有限公司研究院网络技术研究所 中国北京市西城区宣武门西大街32号（100053） Shen Tao China Mobile Research Institute No.32 Xuanwumen west street,Xicheng District, Beijing 100053, China Tel: +86 15801696688-34070 Mobile: +86 13521591389 Email: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> --------------------------------------------- ============================================================================================================================ Disclaimer: This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may review the policy at http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.techmahindra.com_Disclaimer.html&d=DwMGbw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=2wwdGZ3YcpSivQ2Kio028A&m=e5ggSE0RN3XQQseCnfIpQXKr_uhG_WMd1wOVhyplIYo&s=CVFYJLKTigztEkkT1FLIxXEd_P04B9ZJoZPptK4SVfQ&e=> externally http://tim.techmahindra.com/tim/disclaimer.html<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__tim.techmahindra.com_tim_disclaimer.html&d=DwMGbw&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=2wwdGZ3YcpSivQ2Kio028A&m=e5ggSE0RN3XQQseCnfIpQXKr_uhG_WMd1wOVhyplIYo&s=yKF2q1GAomTf36FS0ZyJY6XAP7Bb85PVBgUjj5OlKxo&e=> internally within TechMahindra. ============================================================================================================================
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
