Hearing the two different Modeling options presented at yesterday’s (7/5) TSC and the summary by Deng at the end, it wasn't clear to me that we all have a common understanding of the question(s) being asked of the TSC. Perhaps it would be useful for us to document what the questions are. Here is my take of the main question that Andy was asking of the TSC:
* Do we agree that ONAP should have its own internal model which it can evolve independently of standards but which interacts with standards on the edges and preserves the structure and semantics of the onboarded descriptor? Andy’s presentation proposed the answer as “yes”. He argued this answer based using certain points that perhaps should also be verified: * Do we agree that ONAP is broader than ETSI? Andy’s presentation says “yes” giving various examples (Allotted Resources, customer facing services, and abstract resolution at runtime to Network Functions that are not VNFs). * Do we agree that we don't want the vendors to have to create ONAP-specific descriptors that conflict with standards? At least from the perspective of Andy’s presentation his answer is “yes”. -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3309): https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/message/3309 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/23175452/21656 Group Owner: [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/unsub [[email protected]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
