Thanks Srini.

We are trying to identify where the ownership of Service Composition capability 
should lie during E2E Orchestration.

There are three options to choose from (all of them can be applicable on a case 
by case basis):​
​1. BSS Accountability: E2E Service Orchestration is performed at the BSS layer 
via Service Order Manager (SOM).​
​2. Shared Orchestration Accountability: A new layer, i.e. a composite service 
domain, above Network Domains to perform E2E Service Orchestration.​
​3. Network Domain Accountability: Based on the candidate composite service for 
a product, a Domain takes the role of “Lead Constructor” and perform E2E 
Service Orchestration.​
​
Both Service Creation and Lifecycle Management need to be covered through E2E 
Service Orchestration.​

For your option 1 below, I think we can consider the 3rd Party Operational 
Domain Manager Use case as an example.

Regards,
Atif

From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of 
Srini
Sent: Wednesday, 18 September 2019 2:18 AM
To: [email protected]; Husain, Atif <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] E2E Service Orchestration by ONAP

[External Email] This email was sent from outside the organisation – be 
cautious, particularly with links and attachments.
Hi Atif,

As far as I know there are no principles defined. But,  we did some study on 
how to integrate domain orchestrators such as “Multi K8S Cluster orchestration” 
along with other domain orchestrators and also resource orchestrators.  There 
are two ways go about this.


  1.  A high level service with nested services where nested services handled 
by various domain orchestrators.
  2.  A service with resources where resources are handled by domain 
orchestrators.
  3.  Of course, combination of both.

If you want domain orchestrator to be called from SO/MC, then (2) approach is 
needed in my view.
On (1), I don’t know whether there are any examples.
On (2), there are three examples -  Multi-Cluster (k8s) orchestration (WIP),  
Azure Orchestration and AWS Orchestration (AWS is WIP )
In all three examples of (2),  each VNF (VF) resource is treated as the 
self-contained entity.  Within Azure/AWS/Multi-Cluster orchestration, they take 
care of deploying components of VNF in various locations supported by that 
domain.  For example, Azure has lot of sites, but these are not known to the 
ONAP.  Any VNF placement in Azure sties  is the job of Azure domain 
orchestrator.

In “Multi-Cluster Orchestration” too,  our thinking is similar to Azure and 
AWS, where it acts domain orchestrator and takes care of placement decisions 
for workloads within VNF/VF.  And let the ONAP (SO/OOF) do the placement 
decisions across VNFs (in a service).

I hope it helps and request others to comment.

Thanks
Srini



From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Husain, Atif
Sent: Monday, September 16, 2019 11:03 PM
To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Subject: [onap-discuss] E2E Service Orchestration by ONAP

Hi,

Are there any principles defined for ONAP related to its use for E2E Service 
Orchestration​ across multiple domains?

Regards,
Atif


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#18987): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/18987
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/34173460/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Reply via email to