Hi Jason, As agreed by the group, we'll produce Papyrus files as the final spec. A meeting has been arranged to discuss about Papyrus and try to reach consensus on the models. If you are interested, please join the call.
Zoom id: 9117271979 Time: 8:00 am us eastern time, 9:00 pm Beijing time, Thursday (Feb 1) Best regards, Xu 发件人：domineering skycloud 收件人：[email protected], 时间：2018-01-30 23:20:21 主 题：[onap-discuss] Any consensus on the two IMs proposed Hi guys, Regarding ONAP modeling, I’ve noticed that there are two documents to propose the IM specifications(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Modeling+sub-committee+Contributions), namely, one from Huawei (ONAP VNFD IM - based on IFA011 v231.docx) and another (ONAP Class Model 2017-01-02 V3.docx) from AT&T. So I am wondering which one we should follow to develop and whether we reach a consensus in terms of which IM specification we should choose, Huawei’s or ATT’s? Thanks. Jason
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
