My view of the current state of progress on the tear down (temporary deployment) scenarios is this:
There are three sub-scenarios: * The main (single-client) "temporary deployment/tear down" scenario * The multi-client usage of a deployed resource scenario. * The composite deployment (e.g. orchestration automation plan) scenario. The second and third of these scenarios could be considered completely separate scenarios, but if we are ever to support them then we would want the first (teardown) scenario to work with them. Therefore it is important to understand how we would achieve the latter two to inform the decisions of the first one. (This is nothing new - I just wanted to take a step back to make sure we're all on the same page & have got the context right.) So I think the blocking issues for the first scenario are: * We need a better understanding of the composite deployment scenario to understand how it affects and is affected by the other two. (To this end I will convert my scenario flow from last week's meeting into a diagram - but I won't be able to get that done before the meeting today, so it'll have to wait to next week.) * We need to decide on the mechanism for registering use of/interest in a deployed resource (auto result), considering its interaction with the teardown scenario. There are complex interrelationships between these three scenarios. I think the next step is to gain greater clarification on the composite deployment scenario. I'll create my diagram, but others' input on what this scenario is to achieve is needed. Once we've done that I'm not sure what the next step would be. Martin Unless stated otherwise above: IBM United Kingdom Limited - Registered in England and Wales with number 741598. Registered office: PO Box 41, North Harbour, Portsmouth, Hampshire PO6 3AU
