Child pages
  • 2019-01-10 OIMT Meeting Notes

Versions Compared


  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: Migrated to Confluence 5.3


10 January 2019



  • Administrative
    • March 18-22 Sydney Meeting
      • Registration
      • Agenda planning
    • v1.5 & v2.0 work items
  • Core IM extension for specific technology

Discussion Items

IM-DMarch Sydney meeting
 V1.5 and V2.0 
  • Work items
  • v1.4.1 Papyrus version migration to "2018-09" progressing well (Nigel and Martin),
    • Martin's tool (Martin Tool) is fixing the association problem for Mars well. The tool also found the bugs of Mars association (e.g., broken association end, orientation of the association), diagrams problem regarding where they should appear in the model explorer.
    • Nigel is validating the tool so that it will identify all the bugs.
    • Other models, before moving to 2018-09, need to check the association multiplicity.
 Core ExtensionThorsten Heinze
  • Core IM extension for specific technology
    • Problem: in deciding which model to apply in SB to mgmt the network, Eth, BGP, ..., OpenConfig seems cover all and was chosen, but it really not provide the right model, it is driven by use case, not sufficient for operators, eg. physical aspect of ports
    • Thorsten made proposal
    • Guideline for developing tech-specific model, not abstract, easy language; cal level of maturity levels (verified by ONF, reviewed by operator, multiple operators/vendor, continue support),
    • F2F meeting follow up action: mapping between Core iM and OpenConfig
    • Extend/augment the LP for specific technology
    • Support the idea of taking the core model as the base to augment with technology-specific property
    • Wireless Transport: AT&T and Telefonica
    • Interface (LTP/LP), VLAN (FC)
IM-EMarch meeting 
  • Agenda planning
    • Key topics for the meeting (description work items are in oimt2018.KL.001.14_oimt-work-items.xlsx)
      • #8 Equipment enhancements (TAPI equipment modeling)
      • #35 LTP port (TAPI integration)
      • #36 Compute model (CPU storage)
      • #9 IP switching, #53 IP Segment routing (to support 5G, complement SG15 work)
      • #26 Intent/Constraint, #55 TOSCA Profile
      • #37 Spec re-work, #44 Refactor LTP Spec to be Comp-Sys Spec, #56 Simplied Spec model, #58 Specification Pattern for new comer, including Thorsten's (Core model extension) work request (TAPI critical)
      • #41 Identity model investigation
      • #39 Event driven solution investigation, #43 Operation pattern for general task, #57 Job Task process model, #55 TOSCA Profile
      • #54 Cloud Native (Kubernetes, Istio, Containers)
      • TAPI needs (Karthik Sethuraman: provides additional item, if any)
        • How to use the topology pacs in TAPI
        • Distinction between Connectivity model (service) vs Topology model (resource)
        • Catalog driven API related to ONAP (TMF), This is related to #55 TOSCA profile
        • ONAP usage of TAPI
        • Revisit the TAPI virtual network (What is the difference between VN Service End Point vs Service Interface Point)
        • Multilayer transitional link scenario (need this before 2.2)
        • Routing constraint (need this for 2.2), related to #26
  • Agreed to have the agenda plan stabilized one month before the meeting (i.e., Feb. 18)

Action Items