#onap-meeting: vf2f 2018-02-07

Meeting started by kennypaul at 13:45:30 UTC (full logs).

Meeting summary

    1. Stephen Terrill, ERicsson (SteveT, 14:01:52)
    2. Zhaoxing Meng, ZTE (Zhaoxing_Meng, 14:02:25)
    3. Chris Donley Huawei (cdonley, 14:02:52)

  2. MSB Tutorial (SteveT, 14:06:36)
    1. Huabing Zhao presented the MSB tutorial (SteveT, 14:06:51)
    2. Huabing also offered that the tutorial can be given to projects upon request. (SteveT, 14:08:25)
    3. MSB is offering a RPC call, so if there is no exception it should be understood that the message is recieved by the reciever (SteveT, 14:22:36)
    4. just a comment for Huabing Zhao... this is the scenario.. the receiver received a message, but the return confirmation communciation is lost. In this case, the sender did not get a successful response. Then, the sender may try to send the same message again even though the receiver received the messge. I guess MSB inherits the HTTP/HTTPS messaging reliability issue. I will contact Huabing off-line. (kennypaul, 14:33:53)

  3. Modeling subcommittee (SteveT, 14:36:17)
    1. There are several sub topics here. (SteveT, 14:37:24)
    2. The first subtopic is Service IM (SteveT, 14:38:15)
    3. next sub-topic is resource IM (SteveT, 14:45:06)
    4. PNFD is not defined yet, but it is consiered as a resource IM. (SteveT, 14:45:24)
    5. there were questions about the relationship between the service and the service component. The response was the service was more related to the customer facing service (SteveT, 14:49:42)
    6. Not all artifacts are yet captured in the VNF descriptor (SteveT, 14:50:18)
    7. the resource model is defined in a uniform way (irrespective of whether it is managed by VF-C or APP-C) (SteveT, 14:53:10)
    8. There was a request to discuss the modelling with the projects at a project level as well. (SteveT, 14:56:46)
    9. There was a question whether a service that is an infrastructure servce can be used as a service comonent in another service. The answer was that it was thought that substition could use. And it also said a service can be nested to be part of another service. (SteveT, 15:01:15)
    10. Next sub-topic was data model aspects (SteveT, 15:02:20)
    11. All datamodel information is available in the modelling sub-committee wikis (SteveT, 15:05:43)
    12. Discussion about aligning with standards or go for a comosite resource approach as described in the wiki. (SteveT, 15:12:32)
    13. next subtopic is parser centralization (SteveT, 15:13:51)
    14. there is a weekly call for the parser tiger team. they are preparing the user stories and requirements. Will look at API access of this parser as a service, exception handling interactation, can a placeholder be created in modelling project to on-board various parsers and abstract them with an API. PoC activities. (SteveT, 15:15:30)
    15. the PoC is to see if there if the centralized parser makes sense. (SteveT, 15:17:05)
    16. - question was do the PTLs that are using teh SDC parser today agree they need another library that is remoted. Response. The response was that the OPNF Parser is a good standard parser. (SteveT, 15:19:21)
    17. it was indicated that the OPNFV parser supuports yaml 1.1, with yaml 1.2 in developement (SteveT, 15:20:01)
    18. when considering java libraries, consider both python as well as java (SteveT, 15:22:26)
    19. correction - that was when considering common libraries, consider both python and java (SteveT, 15:23:31)
    20. for video https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Modeling+tools (kennypaul, 15:25:38)
    21. next subtopic was a papryus tutorial, but suggested to look at the provided link (SteveT, 15:25:51)
    22. There was a request for contact for all components. (SteveT, 15:26:08)

  4. Usecase Subcommittee Review (SteveT, 15:33:53)
    1. presented by Alla (SteveT, 15:33:58)
    2. PNF is configured with SDNC as its a L1-L3 PNF (SteveT, 15:49:50)
    3. PNF support for changemanagement has not discussed change management and scaling. Not expected to be in Beijing. (SteveT, 15:58:16)
    4. It was noted that there is no SDC Epic for pnf support, SO neither (SteveT, 16:03:46)


Meeting ended at 16:07:33 UTC (full logs).

Action items

  1. (none)


People present (lines said)

  1. SteveT (32)
  2. kennypaul (5)
  3. collabot` (5)
  4. Zhaoxing_Meng (1)
  5. cdonley (1)
  6. BinY_ (0)
  7. phrobb (0)


Generated by MeetBot 0.1.4.