Dear All, Cisco is supportive of the proposals made by Ericsson and Nokia on performance measurement (PM) collection. Let's however differentiate between PM collection and SON. While SON needs PM as input, it's not enough. In addition, SON needs access to configuration management (CM) which I suppose will be provided by the SDN-R (SDN-C). If/when ONAP provides SON function with access to PM and CM, it will be enough for SON function to work.
On a separate note, some people express opinion that not only access to PM and CM should be available, but also SON function should be disaggregated in independently replaceable pieces (some call it Analytics/Policy). This disaggregation is the point of concern for Cisco. I understand that some companies want it to happen; the question is whether it's feasible. I think it's not, for most or maybe all of practically useful SON functionalities. This has been discussed several times in the 5G group and can be discussed again if needed. Another point of concern is applicability of the Optimization framework as it stands now to (application level) network optimization. This framework also requires a sort of disaggregation when the optimization logics (sort of closed loop) is separated from the application specific part collecting and processing the PMs. I believe it's not working for SON. This point can be discussed as well. Thanks Vladimir From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Hillis, Marge (Nokia - US) Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 6:53 AM To: Oskar Malm <[email protected]>; Alla Goldner <[email protected]>; [email protected]; onap-tsc <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC All Nokia did present a high level proposal for how Real Time PM would be delivered to ONAP along with a high level project impact that this proposal would generate on April 19. This was done in support of the optimization sub use case for 5G. We indicated in the deck that the full use case might not be achievable in Casablanca but we did recommend that the high volume event be implemented. The slides from that presentation were published on April 20 and are found at this url https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Use+case+proposal%3A+5G-+RAN+deployment%2C+Slicing%2C+SON. The proposal presented aligned well with the VNF requirements for the delivery of high volume data to ONAP. Nokia is prepared to support enhancements to ONAP that are required to receive and publish these high volume events. Nokia will present the next level of detail for this proposal within the next two weeks. Best Regards Marge Hillis From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Oskar Malm Sent: Monday, May 14, 2018 5:49 AM To: Alla Goldner <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; onap-tsc <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC Hi all, About the 5G UC Items proposed for Casablanca captured in the following presentation: https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/33063881/5GucCasablancaSummary-050918.pptx?version=1&modificationDate=1526064064000&api=v2 On page 6 'Performance Analysis & Optimization': * Ericsson has proposed a solution for the Bulk PM Collection use case which is not fully captured by the current description. This proposal has been presented to the 5G UC workgroup as well as the DCAE project. * Overview of proposed solution (see slides 12-20): https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/10784151/5G%20RAN%20Deployment%20-%20Casablanca%20-%20Ericsson%2004192018v2.pdf?api=v2 * Tentative DCAE planning for Casablanca which includes items supporting the proposal: https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=25441571&src=contextnavpagetreemode * There is agreement to work on UC for near-RT streaming of performance data. But currently there is no agreed technical solution, and additional solutions may still be proposed. Therefore it would be helpful to clarify deadlines for the following: * When is the latest date to propose a technical solution for near-RT streaming (primarily to address need from 5G UC) if targeting the R3 release? * When is the latest date to agree on technical solution(s) for near-RT streaming if targeting the R3 release? BR, Oskar Malm From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner Sent: den 12 maj 2018 18:08 To: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; onap-tsc <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC Thanks, Vladimir, 5G task force: the following requests were received: 1. SON support 2. Network slicing support 3. Controllers architecture I attach them to this email. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:[email protected]] From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Saturday, May 12, 2018 6:17 PM To: Alla Goldner <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; onap-tsc <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC Hi, Alla, Thanks for sending this. To my deep regret, there is a problem. Cisco several times expressed opposition to having SON in this release. The reason is that the architecture for SON was never properly analyzed. Therefore I request removal of the following items 1. SON - problem formulation 2. SON - problem solving 3. Slice optimization problem formulation 4. Slice optimization problem solving For all four, the concern is about splitting of the SON procedure(s) into two independent pieces. For #3 and #4, in addition to that, there is no consistent definition yet (in 3GPP) of slice level performance measurements. With no performance measurements, what kind of optimization can be arranged? Thanks Vladimir From: Alla Goldner <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 11:34 AM To: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; onap-tsc <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC Hi Vladimir, The implementation proposals for 5G use cases in Casablanca was also discussed during several Usecase subcommittee meetings and presentation is uploaded for yesterday's TSC meting https://wiki.onap.org/pages/editpage.action?pageId=28381537 I also attach it. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:[email protected]] From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 11:24 AM To: Alla Goldner <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; onap-tsc <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: RE: [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC Alla, Can you please clarify what exactly you received from 5G group? Unless I am missing something, there was no 5G call to finally decide which use cases are going to the use case subcommittee. There were several proposals presented, most of them good, but even for those I have difficulty to understand which of them (and which versions) have been ever endorsed by the 5G group. Thanks Vladimir From: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> On Behalf Of Alla Goldner Sent: Friday, May 11, 2018 7:58 AM To: [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; onap-tsc <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> Subject: [onap-tsc] e2e use cases for approval by the TSC Hi all, As we didn't have any time left for use case discussion and approval during yesterday's TSC meeting and likely will not have till the launch of Beijing due to urgent Beijing related discussions, the meeting decision was that we will host e2e use case approval discussions during Usecase subcommittee meetings on Monday, 4 pm CET. 1. All use case authors - please make sure you distributed your presentations for approval. So far, we've received 5G group, Edge Automation and auto Scaling out 2. Kenny, as agreed, please make sure all PTLs aware the discussion will take place during Use case subcommittee meeting Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:[email protected]] 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 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 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
_______________________________________________ ONAP-TSC mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
