Steve, We have a SDN-C sub-project called SND-R, that focuses on radio configuration using NetConf Yang, but it did not cover all the parameters needed for DU & CUs (and UPF) and need support Ansible. We also realized that all mobility network elements should be managed by the same controllers (as we might combine CU-UP, a RAN element, with UPF, a core elements). Hence, we need some of the capabilities from SDN-C and some from App-C. Therefore, we decided this controller persona should be created from CCSDK, taking required modules from SDN-C and App-C (we can give a short presentation either during 5G Use case call or use case subcommittee call). This could be a starting point for generic NF 4-7 Controller.
Hope that helps. Regards, Vimal From: onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org <onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org> On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:13 PM To: Alla Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org; onap-...@lists.onap.org Subject: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Hi Alla, All, I had one question for clarification - in the 5G use case work there is the statement "Support full application level configuration (+ansible), allow various mobile network elements to be controlled from the same controller persona created from CC-SDK" Today in the architecture we have the APP-C, VFC and SDNC. I was wondering whether there was clarification on how the statement relates to the existing controllers, and the motivation for the "same" controller". BR, Steve. From: onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-arc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2018 3:46 PM To: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org> Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org> Subject: [Onap-arc] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary Hi all, Thanks to all meeting attendants! Here is the summary: 1. We reviewed Edge automation presentation by Ramki and, specifically, what is planned for Casablanca 2. We reviewed EUAG feedback (Vodafone, Verizon, AT&T, Bell, Orange) regarding their priorities for Casablanca. I put those requirements under https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Casablanca+goals<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_Casablanca-2Bgoals&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=YQZaNPLN15xk3BWcVl7k8w&m=hl4PRn1Vs4CTG96TxEwNknll8ciURwQdPqOlGLNcb_I&s=L1ezlr_7xkPOzXMZnvPAbb8xa8--fux6UnroL6GvBtk&e=> . The bottom line is that platform quality seem to be significantly more important that functional enrichment of the platform at this point, still. a. This information, along with E2E use cases proposals will serve as input for TSC decision on the E2E use cases approval (May 10th) Our next meeting will be dedicated to review of E2E use cases before bringing them for TSC approval next week. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:image001.png@01D3E232.DF90D750] 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<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.amdocs.com_about_email-2Ddisclaimer&d=DwMFAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=YQZaNPLN15xk3BWcVl7k8w&m=hl4PRn1Vs4CTG96TxEwNknll8ciURwQdPqOlGLNcb_I&s=QASGvA4SziCeQgu8FuQ4MDXDrSHUIpeARdTaCbG_br8&e=>
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list onap-discuss@lists.onap.org https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
