Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

 6am PST | 6am EST | 10:00 UTC | 11:00 CET | 12:00 EET | 15:30 IST | 18:00 CST | 19:00 JST |

Web Conference: 


(please feel free to correct and update your names (wink) Thank you very much!!!) 

Info to: 


  • going forward

Discussion items

00:00chair topic 
no update 



Next meetings

2020-03-03: Martin Skorupski

2020-03-10: Martin Skorupski

2020-03-17: Martin Skorupski

2020-03-24: Martin Skorupski

00:00Firmware RPCs

Thorsten Heinze
@Eduardo Yusta

  • abort of download 
  • activate firmware
    • activating stand-by is same as deactivating active

Notification required

  • alarm vs attribute-value-chance (trend: status attributes with AVC)
  • RPC return value vs notification (trend: notification)
  • Status values are needed in any case, for cases where notifications are lost
  • Thorsten to send a proposal for further discussions

GlobalClass vs LocalClass

Agenda for tomorrow

  • MediatorComponents

End of the meeting

Discussions to be continued:

00:05FC VLAN Creation

RPC for FD:VLAN-FC creation

  • yang RPC- FC creation
    • input 
      • FD:uuid → to address the FD
      • vlanId → the "real" interesting parameter
    • output
      • FC:uuid

now the FC:uuid is known to all application.

The FC has no FCports at this point in time.

  • yang RCP - target: creation for FCPorts
    • input
      • FC:uuid
      • port role?!?!
      • associations to LTP(VLAN)

Continue the discussion on 2020-10-21

YANG provided by email and openBackhaul (link)

new: RPC at the end - please check!!! (wink)

new: "port-and-protocol-based-vlan-is-avail" 

renamed:  "llc-address" to  "llc-address-list"


  • updates made on the error messages

00:00Firmware@Eduardo Yusta

Eduardo explained his proposal about how to describe firmware ( and addressed a couple of questions to the vendors.

Continuing the discussion about firmware. NEC provided input and it was consolidated in the proposal.

How to activate a software package: leaf or RPC?

Discussions still needed, RPC is preferred, need to see how to model and how to integrate in our processes (Papyrus, UML2YANG etc.)

Alex Stancu to provide example from O-RAN FH model about how it is done in o-ran-software-management; then we can assess how we can adapt it to our needs.

SIAE is checking if RPC is feasible; Nokia will also do some checking.     → maybe RPCs will be useful in other situations as well, we need to see

Do we need also a Download RPC? Probably. But this could be considered outside of the package model, does not really influence the inventory part.

Is ImageName (string) and ImageVersion (string) combination enough for uniquely identify a software image?

ImageSize proposed to be eliminated. No objections.

ImageClass - need tot see what happens if the case vendors do not support it; same for ImageIdentifier

ImageComparison proposed to be eliminated. No objections.

Need further discussions.


Package Activation:

  • attribute vs RPC
    • RPC seams to be the way forward
      • impact on UML/UML2YANG/YANG
      • similar discussion for FC(VLAN) creation via RPC
      • UML/YANG modeling guideline uses term "operations" (not PRC)
      • investigation ongoing Package Activation will gain by the VLAN-FC creation

Parameter (status report and further discussion)

  • Package
  • Image
    • regarding "imageIdentifier" - proposal to be discarded - however feedback from vendor will drive final decision

Package and Image class should inherit from GlobalClass - same as for Profile


UML for Firmware

Firmware model as on conditional package for Controlconstruct


Action items