The issue is reusability you need to review all the definitions you are trying to create and I identify the component that are already available.
Based on my review I see duplications in the node type so my answer is this need to be reviewed again. In addition I am still not clear if this was presented to the modeling subcommittee and did it get approved by them? BR, [Michael Lando] AT&T Network Application Development · NetCom Tel Aviv | Tampa | Atlanta | New Jersey |Chicago ··········································································· Office: +972 (3) 5451487 Mobile: +972 (54) 7833603 e-mail: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> From: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 03:55 To: [email protected]; Lando,Michael <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: 答复: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] [modeling] Minutes of SDC review of high level requirement Hello all, Thanks Yang XU for clarifying about the state of Wan Connection. To Michael, if we leverage the relationship types and capability types which are already existed and remove the new ones which might be duplicate and just leave the node types and data type introduced in wiki page (https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Design-Time+Data+Model%3A+WAN+Service),<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_Design-2DTime-2BData-2BModel-253A-2BWAN-2BService-29-2C&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=FYvXSElfSmWIXOeZxWIxQysejuz9-TXmaL6uftBh8MY&m=K8FkF7f3Qm2IxaQ2WlIm2W9BPRXvKKKUUoYEmw0CUsg&s=pfIvFnD4SjoGtFtOulHN3UYSsOfLYbqrAlOC2zp7Qwc&e=> is it good enough for SDC to support Wan Connection in release 3? Best Regards! 黄卓垚 huangzhuoyao 职位 position 承载网管开发部/有线研究院/有线产品经营部 Strategy & IT-IT Dept. [cid:[email protected]] [cid:[email protected]] 深圳市南山区科技南路55号中兴通讯研发大楼33楼 33/F, R&D Building, ZTE Corporation Hi-tech Road South, Hi-tech Industrial Park Nanshan District, Shenzhen, P..R.China, 518057 T: +86 755 xxxxxxxx F: +86 755 xxxxxxxx M: +86 xxxxxxxxxxx E: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> www.zte.com.cn<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.zte.com.cn_&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=FYvXSElfSmWIXOeZxWIxQysejuz9-TXmaL6uftBh8MY&m=K8FkF7f3Qm2IxaQ2WlIm2W9BPRXvKKKUUoYEmw0CUsg&s=CGEZTdwpHrL1NPbO3ElGqjzQXJokLKZALRIayTto50k&e=> 原始邮件 发件人：yangxu(H) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 收件人：denghui (L) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 日 期 ：2018年07月18日 23:52 主 题 ：Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] [modeling] Minutes of SDC review of high level requirement Hi Hui and all, Regarding the last bullet, AFAIK, the WAN connection has been agreed in release 2 and moved from service IM clean page to resource IM clean page according to participants' suggestion that the WAN connection should be considered as resource. Best regards, Xu 发件人：denghui (L) 收件人：[email protected],[email protected]<mailto:[email protected],[email protected]>, 时间：2018-07-18 22:33:37 主 题：[onap-discuss] [modeling] Minutes of SDC review of high level requirement Hello all Please find the recorded meeting session here: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2018+2H+Modeling+sub-committee+meeting+agenda+and+minutes<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_2018-2B2H-2BModeling-2Bsub-2Dcommittee-2Bmeeting-2Bagenda-2Band-2Bminutes&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=FYvXSElfSmWIXOeZxWIxQysejuz9-TXmaL6uftBh8MY&m=K8FkF7f3Qm2IxaQ2WlIm2W9BPRXvKKKUUoYEmw0CUsg&s=NmSzgEv4tx5x2Ja1cjw3Bccr2pMVgnTOMcP5D_IUKBo&e=> the meeting minutes are list below: 1) 20180719 9am, the last review from SDC before TSC meeting, will try to invite PTLs from SDC/SO/A&AI, the meeting bridge will be sent out tomorrow. 2) Service descriptor/resource composite/PNF/PNF instance/network Service/SD-WAN/Element group/Multicloud need to be reviewed tomorrow 3) the committee will ask the approval for Implementation and documentation part, not for low priority and experiemental 4) WAN connection need modeling subcommittee review and approval Thanks a lot DENG Hui -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#11337): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/11337 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/23785028/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
