Hello Modelers, I have received comments from Andy and Andrei after the meeting about our consensuses slide, as below, according to their proposal, 3 changes are listed below: 1) Clarify On-Boarding and the Internal ONAP models are distinct 2) remove "align with R3 IM" 3) removing the statement "(backward compatible with onboarding model)
According to our recorded session https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2018+2H+Modeling+sub-committee+meeting+agenda+and+minutes I re-listen to the recorded session 20180717, I did ask any objection to the final consensus in the end. only Michela raised the comments to remove 3rd bullet. I did explain the reason, and didn't hear any objection from Michela any more. In this case, my judge would be from our session 3) is not yet a 100% consensuses assuming Michela not reponse in time, but 1) and 2) are 2 new proposals to change the existing consensus So I am asking the modeling subcommittee here whether you agree to add 1) and remove 2) If there is no any objection before TSC call, I will revise them as this proposal. Thanks a lot DENG Hui From: Andrei Kojukhov [mailto:andrei.kojuk...@amdocs.com] Sent: Thursday, July 19, 2018 4:10 AM To: MAYER, ANDREW J <am8...@att.com<mailto:am8...@att.com>>; denghui (L) <denghu...@huawei.com<mailto:denghu...@huawei.com>>; Lingli Deng <denglin...@chinamobile.com<mailto:denglin...@chinamobile.com>> Cc: 'eric.deb...@orange.com' <eric.deb...@orange.com<mailto:eric.deb...@orange.com>>; Mark Gibson <mar...@amdocs.com<mailto:mar...@amdocs.com>>; 'Mehmet Toy' <mehmet....@verizon.com<mailto:mehmet....@verizon.com>>; 'Alex Vul' <alex....@intel.com<mailto:alex....@intel.com>>; 'Davis, Nigel' <nda...@ciena.com<mailto:nda...@ciena.com>>; 'Ranganathan, Raghu' <rra...@ciena.com<mailto:rra...@ciena.com>>; 'Priya TG' <priy...@netcracker.com<mailto:priy...@netcracker.com>>; WECHSLER, CHESLA C <cw1...@att.com<mailto:cw1...@att.com>>; KATZMAN, ANATOLY <ak4...@intl.att.com<mailto:ak4...@intl.att.com>>; LANDO, MICHAEL <ml6...@intl.att.com<mailto:ml6...@intl.att.com>>; HALLAHAN, RYAN <rh1...@att.com<mailto:rh1...@att.com>>; Lingli Deng <denglin...@chinamobile.com<mailto:denglin...@chinamobile.com>> Subject: RE: Minutes from Today's Meeting Andy, Denghui, Lingli I tend to agree with Andy. What I captured from a meeting screen is quickly adding sentences to a reporting slide by a chair because of lack of time. There is obviously a room for making mistakes and inaccurate wording. BR Andrei From: MAYER, ANDREW J <am8...@att.com<mailto:am8...@att.com>> Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 10:30 PM To: denghui (L) <denghu...@huawei.com<mailto:denghu...@huawei.com>>; Lingli Deng <denglin...@chinamobile.com<mailto:denglin...@chinamobile.com>> Cc: 'eric.deb...@orange.com' <eric.deb...@orange.com<mailto:eric.deb...@orange.com>>; Andrei Kojukhov <andrei.kojuk...@amdocs.com<mailto:andrei.kojuk...@amdocs.com>>; Mark Gibson <mar...@amdocs.com<mailto:mar...@amdocs.com>>; 'Mehmet Toy' <mehmet....@verizon.com<mailto:mehmet....@verizon.com>>; 'Alex Vul' <alex....@intel.com<mailto:alex....@intel.com>>; 'Davis, Nigel' <nda...@ciena.com<mailto:nda...@ciena.com>>; 'Ranganathan, Raghu' <rra...@ciena.com<mailto:rra...@ciena.com>>; 'Priya TG' <priy...@netcracker.com<mailto:priy...@netcracker.com>>; WECHSLER, CHESLA C <cw1...@att.com<mailto:cw1...@att.com>>; KATZMAN, ANATOLY <ak4...@intl.att.com<mailto:ak4...@intl.att.com>>; LANDO, MICHAEL <ml6...@intl.att.com<mailto:ml6...@intl.att.com>>; HALLAHAN, RYAN <rh1...@att.com<mailto:rh1...@att.com>>; Lingli Deng <denglin...@chinamobile.com<mailto:denglin...@chinamobile.com>> Subject: RE: Minutes from Today's Meeting Denghui, We appreciate that you captured some of the major points that were agreed to during the Modeling Sub-committee call. We do have a few questions that need clarification on the TSC readout: * How was the agreement captured that the VNF Descriptor model for On-Boarding and the Internal ONAP models are distinct? We reached consensus on this point multiple times during the Modeling Sub-committee call, but it is not listed. Please reflect this important point. * During the call there did not seem to be clear consensus with the statement "align with R3 IM". Based on the recording we all agreed that we need keep the Information Modeling and Data Modeling aligned during the collaborative work on the internal data model for R4 and beyond. However, since it was not a clear agreement, please remove "align with R3 IM" * Please consider removing the statement "(backward compatible with onboarding model)". Based on the recording, it wasn't clear during the call that we had community consensus on this particular statement. Best Regards, Andy Andy Mayer, Ph.D. | PMTS, D2.0 Integration | AT&T Labs | Phone: +1 (732) 420-9945 | am8...@att.com<mailto:am8...@att.com> From: denghui (L) Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2018 11:16 AM To: 'onap-disc...@lists.onap.org' <onap-disc...@lists.onap.org>; 'ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org' <ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org> Subject: [modeling] Meeting minutes, slides and video recorded available for modeling subcommittee call yesterday Hello all Please kindly help to review yesterday meeting minutes, slides, and video recorded as below link: https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/2018+2H+Modeling+sub-committee+meeting+agenda+and+minutes thanks a lot for your checking Best regards DENG Hui -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#3441): https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/message/3441 Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/23709804/21656 Group Owner: onap-tsc+ow...@lists.onap.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/ONAP-TSC/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
