Hi Jessie, For the agreement, please look at https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Design+Time+Model+Clean+Version. The differences with IFA011 are shown in orange. As for “vnfProductName”, the agreement is to have the same name as IFA011 for the time being.
Best regards, Xu 发件人: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] 代表 jessie jewitt 发送时间: 2018年2月28日 23:45 收件人: [email protected] 主题: [onap-discuss] [modeling] Comparison of R2 proposed IM classes and IFA011 Hi- I'm trying to understand how the IM model proposed for R2 compares to IFA011. When I look on this wiki: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Resource+IM+Discussion+Based+on+IFA011 it looks like the IFA011 model was reviewed and decisions were made. For example, in the VNFD, one decision was to rename vnfProductName to Name. It is marked as "AGREED". However, when I look at the R2 class VNFD, the attribute is still called "vnfProductName". Should I be ignoring the decisions made on the wiki above? Is there another place that shows the differences between the R2 classes and IFA011. Thanks for your help, Jessie
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
