Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[Vladimir Yanover (vyanover)]

Thanks, Tracy
Is there any (application level) reason why some RAN parameters cannot be 
configured, say, via NETCONF/YANG?
Is it because of the nature of these parameters?
Thanks
Vladimir

From: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 4:26 PM
To: Andrej Záň <andrej@pantheon.tech>; Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) 
<vyano...@cisco.com>; BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

Andrej,

I suppose there are a variety of ways this could be implemented, as all three 
derive from CC-SDK.

SDN-R = CC-SDK + Mobility Wireless "artifacts"

Tracy

From: Andrej Záň <andrej@pantheon.tech<mailto:andrej@pantheon.tech>>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 9:21 AM
To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>>; Vladimir 
Yanover (vyanover) <vyano...@cisco.com<mailto:vyano...@cisco.com>>; BEGWANI, 
VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary


Hello there,



I have one question (possibly stupid one, sorry for that).

You wrote that SDN-R will be SDN-C + APP-C functionality but for Mobility 
Wireless. Does that mean, that these functions can't be provided by some 
combination/cooperation of SDN-C and APP-C themselves?


Regards

Andrej Záň


Od: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>>
Odoslané: štvrtok, 3. mája 2018 15:07
Komu: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover); BEGWANI, VIMAL; Stephen Terrill; Alla 
Goldner; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>
Kópia: 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>
Predmet: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary


Vladimir,



As of now, the expectation is that all categories of parameters would be 
supported by the ONAP controller derived from CC-SDK for Mobility Wireless.



We have dubbed this controller "SDN-R," as you know, because this particular 
label has meaning (traction, actually) within both ONAP and ONF.



SDN-R = SDN-C + APP-C for Mobility Wireless, in other words.



What we do not yet know is what will be configured via Netconf/YANG versus what 
will be configured via Ansible, but I believe the community will have this 
question answered fairly early within the Casblanca release timeframe.



Tracy



From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) 
<vyano...@cisco.com<mailto:vyano...@cisco.com>>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 4:09 AM
To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>>; BEGWANI, VIMAL 
<vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: RE: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary



Tracy, Steve and Vimal

I have to admit that I am confused as well and need your help.

Which categories of parameters will be supported by the SDN-R?

Which categories of "the parameters needed for DU & CUs" cannot be supported by 
the SDN-R (why?) and will be supported by the APP-C?

Thanks

Vladimir





From: 
onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 12:04 AM
To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[Stephen Terrill]

Hi,

Currently we have the SDN-C and APP-C and VFC in the architecture.  There has 
been proposals in the directional architecture to bring this down to SDN-C and 
A Generic NF controller.  In this proposal it was focussed on increasing the 
alignment and replacing controllers, not putting an additional one.

Adding another controller "SDN-R" in addition seems to move in the other 
direction by increasing the overlap in the architecture - or do I 
mis-understand?  I would like to understand the motivation, and what cannot be 
done with the APPC and SDNC that are already in the architecture.

I am unsure which repo you are considering to upload to as I am not convinced 
this is in the scope of the SDNC project.

BR,

Steve


From: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L [mailto:tv8...@att.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 11:04 PM
To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

Whatever we elect to call it, "SDN-R" in Casablanca is evolving to include all 
(or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether 
considered "SDN-C" or "APP-C."  This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces 
as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP 
or within a related open source project.

Refer to the "ONAP OAM Controller" slides on SDN-R wiki page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents) that were reviewed with you 
and with others last month.

The seed code is already packaged and will be uploaded to the repository as 
soon as it becomes available.


From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of BEGWANI, VIMAL
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:30 PM
To: Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT ***
Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.
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<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto: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<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: 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 A

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L]

Andrej,

I suppose there are a variety of ways this could be implemented, as all three 
derive from CC-SDK.

SDN-R = CC-SDK + Mobility Wireless "artifacts"

Tracy

From: Andrej Záň <andrej@pantheon.tech>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 9:21 AM
To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com>; Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) 
<vyano...@cisco.com>; BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary


Hello there,



I have one question (possibly stupid one, sorry for that).

You wrote that SDN-R will be SDN-C + APP-C functionality but for Mobility 
Wireless. Does that mean, that these functions can't be provided by some 
combination/cooperation of SDN-C and APP-C themselves?


Regards

Andrej Záň


Od: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>>
Odoslané: štvrtok, 3. mája 2018 15:07
Komu: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover); BEGWANI, VIMAL; Stephen Terrill; Alla 
Goldner; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>
Kópia: 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>
Predmet: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary


Vladimir,



As of now, the expectation is that all categories of parameters would be 
supported by the ONAP controller derived from CC-SDK for Mobility Wireless.



We have dubbed this controller "SDN-R," as you know, because this particular 
label has meaning (traction, actually) within both ONAP and ONF.



SDN-R = SDN-C + APP-C for Mobility Wireless, in other words.



What we do not yet know is what will be configured via Netconf/YANG versus what 
will be configured via Ansible, but I believe the community will have this 
question answered fairly early within the Casblanca release timeframe.



Tracy



From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) 
<vyano...@cisco.com<mailto:vyano...@cisco.com>>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 4:09 AM
To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com<mailto:tv8...@att.com>>; BEGWANI, VIMAL 
<vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: RE: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary



Tracy, Steve and Vimal

I have to admit that I am confused as well and need your help.

Which categories of parameters will be supported by the SDN-R?

Which categories of "the parameters needed for DU & CUs" cannot be supported by 
the SDN-R (why?) and will be supported by the APP-C?

Thanks

Vladimir





From: 
onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 12:04 AM
To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary



Whatever we elect to call it, "SDN-R" in Casablanca is evolving to include all 
(or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether 
considered "SDN-C" or "APP-C."  This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces 
as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP 
or within a related open source project.



Refer to the "ONAP OAM Controller" slides on SDN-R wiki page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_SDN-2DR-2BDocuments=DwMFAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[Andrej Záň]

Hello there,


I have one question (possibly stupid one, sorry for that).

You wrote that SDN-R will be SDN-C + APP-C functionality but for Mobility 
Wireless. Does that mean, that these functions can't be provided by some 
combination/cooperation of SDN-C and APP-C themselves?


Regards

Andrej Záň


Od: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com>
Odoslané: štvrtok, 3. mája 2018 15:07
Komu: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover); BEGWANI, VIMAL; Stephen Terrill; Alla 
Goldner; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
Kópia: onap-...@lists.onap.org; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org; 
onap-...@lists.onap.org
Predmet: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary


Vladimir,



As of now, the expectation is that all categories of parameters would be 
supported by the ONAP controller derived from CC-SDK for Mobility Wireless.



We have dubbed this controller “SDN-R,” as you know, because this particular 
label has meaning (traction, actually) within both ONAP and ONF.



SDN-R = SDN-C + APP-C for Mobility Wireless, in other words.



What we do not yet know is what will be configured via Netconf/YANG versus what 
will be configured via Ansible, but I believe the community will have this 
question answered fairly early within the Casblanca release timeframe.



Tracy



From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) <vyano...@cisco.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 4:09 AM
To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com>; BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; 
Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary



Tracy, Steve and Vimal

I have to admit that I am confused as well and need your help.

Which categories of parameters will be supported by the SDN-R?

Which categories of “the parameters needed for DU & CUs” cannot be supported by 
the SDN-R (why?) and will be supported by the APP-C?

Thanks

Vladimir





From: 
onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 12:04 AM
To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary



Whatever we elect to call it, “SDN-R” in Casablanca is evolving to include all 
(or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether 
considered “SDN-C” or “APP-C.”  This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces 
as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP 
or within a related open source project.



Refer to the “ONAP OAM Controller” slides on SDN-R wiki page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_SDN-2DR-2BDocuments=DwMFAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=7TfzZqNtM8rzzpoqgbTKTw=Q5JxkgYqaNRcy-dbGrOPxcUcPx4i1VI3cGkYOqVGzy4=qCAHXnOCV8awLKHYscHZRvZJhSVb4tTkGsxyJCDbsZs=>)
 that were reviewed with you and with others last month.



The seed code is already packaged and will be uploaded to the repository as 
soon as it becomes available.





From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of BEGWANI, VIMAL
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:30 PM
To: Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary



***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT ***
Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.

Steve,

  We have a SDN-C sub-project called SND-R, that focuses on r

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L]

Vladimir,

As of now, the expectation is that all categories of parameters would be 
supported by the ONAP controller derived from CC-SDK for Mobility Wireless.

We have dubbed this controller "SDN-R," as you know, because this particular 
label has meaning (traction, actually) within both ONAP and ONF.

SDN-R = SDN-C + APP-C for Mobility Wireless, in other words.

What we do not yet know is what will be configured via Netconf/YANG versus what 
will be configured via Ansible, but I believe the community will have this 
question answered fairly early within the Casblanca release timeframe.

Tracy

From: Vladimir Yanover (vyanover) <vyano...@cisco.com>
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2018 4:09 AM
To: VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L <tv8...@att.com>; BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; 
Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

Tracy, Steve and Vimal
I have to admit that I am confused as well and need your help.
Which categories of parameters will be supported by the SDN-R?
Which categories of "the parameters needed for DU & CUs" cannot be supported by 
the SDN-R (why?) and will be supported by the APP-C?
Thanks
Vladimir


From: 
onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 12:04 AM
To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [Onap-usecasesub] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

Whatever we elect to call it, "SDN-R" in Casablanca is evolving to include all 
(or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether 
considered "SDN-C" or "APP-C."  This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces 
as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP 
or within a related open source project.

Refer to the "ONAP OAM Controller" slides on SDN-R wiki page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_SDN-2DR-2BDocuments=DwMFAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=7TfzZqNtM8rzzpoqgbTKTw=Q5JxkgYqaNRcy-dbGrOPxcUcPx4i1VI3cGkYOqVGzy4=qCAHXnOCV8awLKHYscHZRvZJhSVb4tTkGsxyJCDbsZs=>)
 that were reviewed with you and with others last month.

The seed code is already packaged and will be uploaded to the repository as 
soon as it becomes available.


From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of BEGWANI, VIMAL
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:30 PM
To: Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT ***
Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.
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,
Vim

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[Vladimir Yanover (vyanover)]

Tracy, Steve and Vimal
I have to admit that I am confused as well and need your help.
Which categories of parameters will be supported by the SDN-R?
Which categories of "the parameters needed for DU & CUs" cannot be supported by 
the SDN-R (why?) and will be supported by the APP-C?
Thanks
Vladimir


From: onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org> On Behalf Of VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L
Sent: Thursday, May 3, 2018 12:04 AM
To: BEGWANI, VIMAL <vb1...@att.com>; Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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] [onap-discuss] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

Whatever we elect to call it, "SDN-R" in Casablanca is evolving to include all 
(or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether 
considered "SDN-C" or "APP-C."  This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces 
as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP 
or within a related open source project.

Refer to the "ONAP OAM Controller" slides on SDN-R wiki page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents) that were reviewed with you 
and with others last month.

The seed code is already packaged and will be uploaded to the repository as 
soon as it becomes available.


From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
<onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org>>
 On Behalf Of BEGWANI, VIMAL
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:30 PM
To: Stephen Terrill 
<stephen.terr...@ericsson.com<mailto:stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>>; Alla 
Goldner <alla.gold...@amdocs.com<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT ***
Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.
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<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto: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<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: 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

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[VAN BRAKLE, TRACY L]

Whatever we elect to call it, "SDN-R" in Casablanca is evolving to include all 
(or most) logic + features/functionality derived from CC-SDK, whether 
considered "SDN-C" or "APP-C."  This will include Ansible and Chef interfaces 
as well as the additional parameters that may be defined/documented within ONAP 
or within a related open source project.

Refer to the "ONAP OAM Controller" slides on SDN-R wiki page 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/SDN-R+Documents) that were reviewed with you 
and with others last month.

The seed code is already packaged and will be uploaded to the repository as 
soon as it becomes available.


From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org <onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org> 
On Behalf Of BEGWANI, VIMAL
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:30 PM
To: Stephen Terrill <stephen.terr...@ericsson.com>; 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-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 
30/4/2018 - the summary

***Security Advisory: This Message Originated Outside of AT ***
Reference http://cso.att.com/EmailSecurity/IDSP.html for more information.
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<mailto:onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org>
 
<onap-usecasesub-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto: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<mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 
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: 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, 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=DwMFAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=YQZaNPLN15xk3BWcVl7k8w=hl4PRn1Vs4CTG96TxEwNknll8ciURwQdPqOlGLNcb_I=L1ezlr_7xkPOzXMZnvPAbb8xa8--fux6UnroL6GvBtk=>
 . 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@01D3E233.83408710]

This message and the

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[Stephen Terrill]

Hi Vimal,

Thanks for the reply.  Can you please elaborate on the motivation that 1. It 
has to be one controller and 2. Why the SDN-C and APP-C is insufficient.

While I appreciate the value of creating controller persona's from CCSDK, I see 
a headacke in bringing these persona variants into the ONAP architecture in 
terms of explaining what they do, why we have overlap, testing in the 
integration project.

As you state, SDNR is a subproject of SDN-C.  SDN-C is not scoped for RAN 
configuration.  APPC is scoped with dealing with VNFs.

BR,

Steve.

From: BEGWANI, VIMAL [mailto:vb1...@att.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 10:30 PM
To: Stephen Terrill ; Alla Goldner 
; 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

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
 
>
 On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:13 PM
To: Alla Goldner >; 
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] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2018 3:46 PM
To: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-discuss@lists.onap.org; 
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, Bell, Orange) regarding 
their priorities for Casablanca. I put those requirements under 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Casablanca+goals
 . 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@01D3E267.EB813A20]

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
___
onap-discuss 

Re: [onap-discuss] [Onap-usecasesub] Usecase subcommittee meeting of 30/4/2018 - the summary

[BEGWANI, VIMAL]

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 
 On Behalf Of Stephen Terrill
Sent: Wednesday, May 02, 2018 4:13 PM
To: Alla Goldner ; 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] On Behalf Of Alla Goldner
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2018 3:46 PM
To: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org
Cc: onap-...@lists.onap.org; 
onap-discuss@lists.onap.org; 
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, Bell, Orange) regarding 
their priorities for Casablanca. I put those requirements under 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Casablanca+goals
 . 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
___
onap-discuss mailing list
onap-discuss@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss