Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary
Hi Jianguo, I would fully agree with you, if we implemented use cases in their full form, as in Amsterdam Release. Once we break the use cases into a separate requirements and bring them for discussion, this may not work well. But, I guess, we need to take this discussion back to the Usecase subcommittee, as we should have a consensus before bringing it further. In order to make a constructive discussion, if possible, please look on one of the requirements, already prepared for endorsement, and bring the points of what is missing there. I will send the next meeting agenda by a separate email. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:image001.png@01D35A1F.E30DBA10] From: Zengjianguo (OSS Design) [mailto:zengjian...@huawei.com] Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 12:09 PM To: Alla Goldner Cc: sw3...@att.com; onap-...@lists.onap.org; vb1...@att.com; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org; yuan@zte.com.cn Subject: 答复: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Alla I agreed to Yuan’s point, it’s too hard to make decision without clear requirements/description for UseCase. My understanding for the clear UseCase requirement is, assume ONAP as a black box, then need to define: the input/output and outside components, and what action/function for ONAP in beijing release. The more members, the more difficult to reach any decision, so it will be helpful, if UseCase subcommittee can define a more clear description for the UseCase. It’s too challenge for TSC or project to make plan based on a wish-list that may cross more than 1 releases. Best regards 发件人: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 代表 Alla Goldner 发送时间: 2017年11月9日 20:47 收件人: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> 抄送: sw3...@att.com<mailto:sw3...@att.com>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>; onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> 主题: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Yuan, We can definitely consider this, though I believe that the specific information you require below belongs to the next level of details. Perhaps even more points will be raised when we present it. And, as I said, this is “endorsement” not “approval”, and definitely needs future work/refining by a different projects. The question I was asked about is whether one or another requirement is indeed considered for Beijing, and this is why it is important to start bringing those requirements for the TSC. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:image001.png@01D35A1F.E30DBA10] From: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> [mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 12:09 PM To: Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>> Cc: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>; sw3...@att.com<mailto:sw3...@att.com>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> Subject: 答复: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Alla, Thank for your reply, it's clear to me. I does not object we bring the requirements to TSC for approval but from my view, the requirements need next level of detials before it goes to component design. The requirements looks too generic for different project teams reaching consensus on what they should design. My proposal is use case subcommittee should add some examples into usecase which would help developers understand related requirement. Like we add which PNF we should model and manage, what kind of API the PNF support for management, CLI, SNMP or restful? It does not mean the PNF requirement is specific to this PNF, it works to help people understand what problem they are facing. Maybe we can let TSC make the decision where the refining work would be took place. Regards, Yuan Yue 袁越 yuanyue 资深战略规划师 Senior Strategy Planner 技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System Product [cid:image002.gif@01D35A1F.E30DBA10] [cid:image003.gif@01D35A1F.E30DBA10] 南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼 1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R&D Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012 T: +025 88013478 M: +86 13851446442 E: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> www.zte.com.cn<http://www.zte.com.cn/> 原始邮件 发件人： mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 收件人：袁越10008526; 抄送人： mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>>; mailto:sw3...@att.com>>; mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org&g
Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary
What Yuan is asking are software requirements, which is why we are creating a software architect coordinator role. I do agree that is a missing link with the project and needs to coordinate with the use case and target architecture subcommittees. Mazin On Nov 9, 2017, at 7:47 AM, Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>> wrote: Hi Yuan, We can definitely consider this, though I believe that the specific information you require below belongs to the next level of details. Perhaps even more points will be raised when we present it. And, as I said, this is “endorsement” not “approval”, and definitely needs future work/refining by a different projects. The question I was asked about is whether one or another requirement is indeed considered for Beijing, and this is why it is important to start bringing those requirements for the TSC. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology From: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> [mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 12:09 PM To: Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>> Cc: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>; sw3...@att.com<mailto:sw3...@att.com>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> Subject: 答复: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Alla, Thank for your reply, it's clear to me. I does not object we bring the requirements to TSC for approval but from my view, the requirements need next level of detials before it goes to component design. The requirements looks too generic for different project teams reaching consensus on what they should design. My proposal is use case subcommittee should add some examples into usecase which would help developers understand related requirement. Like we add which PNF we should model and manage, what kind of API the PNF support for management, CLI, SNMP or restful? It does not mean the PNF requirement is specific to this PNF, it works to help people understand what problem they are facing. Maybe we can let TSC make the decision where the refining work would be took place. Regards, Yuan Yue 袁越 yuanyue 资深战略规划师 Senior Strategy Planner 技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System Product 南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼 1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R&D Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012 T: +025 88013478 M: +86 13851446442 E: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> www.zte.com.cn<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.zte.com.cn_&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=IKSC5mg8GeOiSar1dax3GQ&m=hY0-SzOj1BxN_DfFh9jv4COWUBA3-ExpOBPkIfp4DaI&s=z9Qnnh8CLmyxRpGR59aVx7lUfVpWUepKxc3wydXCjwM&e=> 原始邮件 发件人： mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 收件人：袁越10008526; 抄送人： mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>>; mailto:sw3...@att.com>>; mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>>; mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 日 期 ：2017年11月08日 16:24 主 题 ：RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Yuan, Thanks a lot for your questions. I provide my answers below embedded into your text. Please let me know if you have any follow-up questions. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology From: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> [mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn] Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 4:59 AM To: Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>> Cc: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>; sw3...@att.com<mailto:sw3...@att.com>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> Subject: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - the meeting'ssummary Hi Alla and all, Two points for clarification: 1. Please correct me if I misunderstand your conclusion on 5G requirements part. The text on this item looks like all 5G requirerments except Conflict resolution will be part of Beijing release. But during the discussion I heard many times the requirements are long term not fixed to Beijing release. My understanding is we do have these requirements like 5G network slicing include vNFs and PNFs, but it is really hard to decide how far each project can go in Beijing Release based on the description of the requirements this days. May I propose that usecase subcommittee accept these requirement as phased output. The implementaion plan for different requirements in future releases, Beijing or some others, would be decided after comprehensi
Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary
Hi Yuan, We can definitely consider this, though I believe that the specific information you require below belongs to the next level of details. Perhaps even more points will be raised when we present it. And, as I said, this is “endorsement” not “approval”, and definitely needs future work/refining by a different projects. The question I was asked about is whether one or another requirement is indeed considered for Beijing, and this is why it is important to start bringing those requirements for the TSC. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:image001.png@01D35969.9F0465A0] From: yuan@zte.com.cn [mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn] Sent: Thursday, November 09, 2017 12:09 PM To: Alla Goldner Cc: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org; sw3...@att.com; onap-...@lists.onap.org; vb1...@att.com; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org Subject: 答复: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Alla, Thank for your reply, it's clear to me. I does not object we bring the requirements to TSC for approval but from my view, the requirements need next level of detials before it goes to component design. The requirements looks too generic for different project teams reaching consensus on what they should design. My proposal is use case subcommittee should add some examples into usecase which would help developers understand related requirement. Like we add which PNF we should model and manage, what kind of API the PNF support for management, CLI, SNMP or restful? It does not mean the PNF requirement is specific to this PNF, it works to help people understand what problem they are facing. Maybe we can let TSC make the decision where the refining work would be took place. Regards, Yuan Yue 袁越 yuanyue 资深战略规划师 Senior Strategy Planner 技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System Product [cid:image002.gif@01D35969.9F0465A0] [cid:image003.gif@01D35969.9F0465A0] 南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼 1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R&D Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012 T: +025 88013478 M: +86 13851446442 E: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> www.zte.com.cn<http://www.zte.com.cn/> 原始邮件 发件人： mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>>; 收件人：袁越10008526; 抄送人： mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>>; mailto:sw3...@att.com>>; mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>>; mailto:vb1...@att.com>>; mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>>; 日 期 ：2017年11月08日 16:24 主 题 ：RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - themeeting'ssummary Hi Yuan, Thanks a lot for your questions. I provide my answers below embedded into your text. Please let me know if you have any follow-up questions. Best regards, Alla Goldner Open Network Division Amdocs Technology [cid:image001.png@01D35969.9F0465A0] From: yuan@zte.com.cn<mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn> [mailto:yuan@zte.com.cn] Sent: Wednesday, November 08, 2017 4:59 AM To: Alla Goldner mailto:alla.gold...@amdocs.com>> Cc: onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-usecase...@lists.onap.org>; sw3...@att.com<mailto:sw3...@att.com>; onap-...@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-...@lists.onap.org>; vb1...@att.com<mailto:vb1...@att.com>; onap-tsc@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-tsc@lists.onap.org> Subject: RE: Re: [onap-tsc] Usecase subcommittee meeting Nov 6 - the meeting'ssummary Hi Alla and all, Two points for clarification: 1. Please correct me if I misunderstand your conclusion on 5G requirements part. The text on this item looks like all 5G requirerments except Conflict resolution will be part of Beijing release. But during the discussion I heard many times the requirements are long term not fixed to Beijing release. My understanding is we do have these requirements like 5G network slicing include vNFs and PNFs, but it is really hard to decide how far each project can go in Beijing Release based on the description of the requirements this days. May I propose that usecase subcommittee accept these requirement as phased output. The implementaion plan for different requirements in future releases, Beijing or some others, would be decided after comprehensive discussing with PTLs. Personally I think developing teams would ask for more detail info about the requirement items. AG> Usecase subcommittee doesn’t decide on including specific requirements into one or another Release, fully agree with you. Use case subcommittee receives the use cases, and responsible to extract functional and non-functional requirements, mostly on “what” and not “how”, while “how” would be defined by the projects themselves. For all the requirements, we define whether they are defined with sufficient level of details for bringing to TSC discussion. In some cases, some additional discussions with architecture/modelling subcommittees are require
