Andrej, I suppose there are a variety of ways this could be implemented, as all three derive from CC-SDK.
SDN-R = CC-SDK + Mobility Wireless "artifacts" Tracy From: Andrej Záň <andrej....@pantheon.tech> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 9:21 AM To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com>; Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) <vyano...@cisco.com>; BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org; onap-...@lists.onap.org Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Hello there, I have one question (possibly stupid one, sorry for that). You wrote that SDN-R will be SDN-C + APP-C functionality but for Mobility Wireless. Does that mean, that these functions can't be provided by some combination/cooperation of SDN-C and APP-C themselves? Regards Andrej Záň ________________________________ Od: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>> Odoslané: štvrtok, 3. mája 2018 15:07 Komu: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover); BEGWANI, VIMAL; Stephen Terrill; Alla Goldner; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Kópia: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Predmet: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Vladimir, As of now, the expectation is that all categories of parameters would be supported by the ONAP controller derived from CC-SDK for Mobility Wireless. We have dubbed this controller "SDN-R," as you know, because this particular label has meaning (traction, actually) within both ONAP and ONF. SDN-R = SDN-C + APP-C for Mobility Wireless, in other words. What we do not yet know is what will be configured via Netconf/YANG versus what will be configured via Ansible, but I believe the community will have this question answered fairly early within the Casblanca release timeframe. Tracy From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) <vyano...@cisco.com<mailto:vyano...@cisco.com>> Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 4:09 AM To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>>; BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Subject: RE: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Tracy, Steve and Vimal I have to admit that I am confused as well and need your help. Which categories of parameters will be supported by the SDN-R? Which categories of "the parameters needed for DU & CUs" cannot be supported by the SDN-R (why?) and will be supported by the APP-C? Thanks Vladimir From: onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org> <onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 12:04 AM To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Whatever we elect to call it, "SDN-R" in Casablanca is evolving to include all (or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether considered "SDN-C" or "APP-C." This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP or within a related open source project. Refer to the "ONAP OAM Controller" slides on SDN-R wiki page (https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_SDN-2DR-2BDocuments&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=7TfzZqNtM8rzzpoqgbTKTw&m=Q5JxkgYqaNRcy-dbGrOPxcUcPx4i1VI3cGkYOqVGzy4&s=qCAHXnOCV8awLKHYscHZRvZJhSVb4tTkGsxyJCDbsZs&e=>) that were reviewed with you and with others last month. The seed code is already packaged and will be uploaded to the repository as soon as it becomes available. From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> <onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of BEGWANI, VIMAL Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:30 PM To: Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary ***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT&T *** Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information. Steve, We have a SDN-C sub-project called SND-R, that focuses on radio configuration using NetConf Yang, but it did not cover all the parameters needed for DU & CUs (and UPF) and need support Ansible. We also realized that all mobility network elements should be managed by the same controllers (as we might combine CU-UP, a RAN element, with UPF, a core elements). Hence, we need some of the capabilities from SDN-C and some from App-C. Therefore, we decided this controller persona should be created from CCSDK, taking required modules from SDN-C and App-C (we can give a short presentation either during 5G Use case call or use case subcommittee call). This could be a starting point for generic NF 4-7 Controller. Hope that helps. Regards, Vimal From: onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org> <onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>> On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:13 PM To: Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Hi Alla, All, I had one question for clarification - in the 5G use case work there is the statement "Support full application level configuration (+ansible), allow various mobile network elements to be controlled from the same controller persona created from CC-SDK" Today in the architecture we have the APP-C, VFC and SDNC. I was wondering whether there was clarification on how the statement relates to the existing controllers, and the motivation for the "same" controller". BR, Steve. From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2018 3:46 PM To: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Subject: [Onap-arc] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Hi all, Thanks to all meeting attendants! Here is the summary: 1. We reviewed Edge automation presentation by Ramki and, specifically, what is planned for Casablanca 2. We reviewed EUAG feedback (Vodafone, Verizon, AT&T, Bell, Orange) regarding their priorities for Casablanca. I put those requirements under https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Casablanca+goals<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_Casablanca-2Bgoals&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=YQZaNPLN15xk3BWcVl7k8w&m=hl4PRn1Vs4CTG96TxEwNknll8ciURwQdPqOlGLNcb_I&s=L1ezlr_7xkPOzXMZnvPAbb8xa8--fux6UnroL6GvBtk&e=> . The bottom line is that platform quality seem to be significantly more important that functional enrichment of the platform at this point, still. a. This information, along with E2E use cases proposals will serve as input for TSC decision on the E2E use cases approval (May 10th) Our next meeting will be dedicated to review of E2E use cases before bringing them for TSC approval next week. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:image001.png@01D3E2C0.C22E9FB0] This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement, you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amdocs.com_about_email-2Ddisclaimer&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=YQZaNPLN15xk3BWcVl7k8w&m=hl4PRn1Vs4CTG96TxEwNknll8ciURwQdPqOlGLNcb_I&s=QASGvA4SziCeQgu8FuQ4MDXDrSHUIpeARdTaCbG_br8&e=>
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list onap-discuss@lists.onap.org https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
