The TIP OpenRAN ROMA Subgroup is pleased to announce the new Requirements on Interfaces and Data Modeling document, which provides the technical requirements of the Management Interfaces (MI) mandatory to be exposed by the ROMA framework towards OpenRAN Network functions, including Management Domain Element.
This document complements the existing ROMA Technical Requirements Document 2.0, both documents available via Confluence here*.
* ROMA participation required to access.
Brief update on streaming (ND)
There has been an action item: ND Review draft streaming document material (part of TR-512.8).
Nigel noted that he has made some progress. A few modification have been made. The collected material is suitable for drafting.
ND & KL Plan the delivery date for the TR and hence for the TIP/MUST tutorial work.
Action items discussed
Actions in black,action responses in blueandmeeting notesfrom in green andmeeting notes from in red
Control Task
This was not covered onand will be added to the agenda for
Nigel DavisDefinitions of task using Component-System principles (explaining the distinction) and show clear boundaries. Say what a task is and what not. Define recursion. Emphasize reuse.Place orchestration on a figure.
Component-System pattern as described in TR-512.A.4 (v1.5)
Various other considerations...
Use specialized term "ControlTask" to avoid terminology confusion
ControlTask: A definition of activity of a functional Component {hence it is opaque} that provides management-control capability.
By "activity" I mean externally visible behavior. Transfer function perhaps gives a better feel.
I am considering the Task as the definition here, but we may want to have an instance of running task and hence make it a thing with a definition.
Use "Transfer Functions"
Agreed that the following is sufficient for now
ControlTask: A functional Component that provides management-control capability where that capability is defined in terms of transfer functions.
As it is a Component, as described in TR-512.A.2, it:
has inputs and outputs
can be adjusted with policy and controls
In the case of the control task, these are all externally visible and provided via inputs.
has internal workflow
is described in terms of subordinate components
is... etc.
ControlTask capability (collection of transfer functions) is defined from the outside and hence its description does not vary due to internal hidden control
Other components expose capability that is defined from the inside.
To further clarify the component based definition for ControlTask...
It may take a set of inputs, process them, provide a set of outputs then complete/terminate.
The outputs may all be at the completion of the task or some may be at intermediate points
The outputs may directly update system state or may be streamed for use by other components
The inputs may all be available at the start of the task or they may be available at various points
The task will be initiated by the occurrence of some condition (trigger)
The inputs may be from monitored state or monitored stream
The task may pause to wait for an input, abandon if it does not have an input, skip the input etc.
It may run
as a single activity that terminates once complete
continuously with internal loops until requested to terminate via some state input
It may express its capability in terms of apparent control task flows that explain, in abstract, how the outputs are generated from the inputs
This is the definition of the transfer functions.
A structure of apparent encapsulated ControlTasks with some stated flow
A flow may have loops etc.
An apparent ControlTask may have its capability expressed
It may express its capability in terms of a transfer function or some other structure that is not of a task form
It may be realized by subordinate control task flows
A structure of real control tasks with stated flow
Flow is determined by trigger conditions that are caused by outputs from other tasks
Split is multiple tasks watching for the same trigger condition
Join of two requires two specific condition outputs (one from each) to cause the trigger condition
Alternative depends upon an output value
It may be realized by code (algorithms etc.)
There will be no deeper view of realization
There may be an expression of capability in terms of apparent encapsulated tasks with some stated flow
Multiple instances of a specific type of ControlTask may run at the same time
A ControlTask instance will be running in some specific instance of flow and will be related to instances in the same instance of flow (needs more work here)
Discussion STOPPED HERE
DISCUSSION CONTINUED
Nigel DavisHow the orchestrator interprets complex tasks with intermediate outputs with loops etc.
As above, the ControlTask is defined in terms of apparent ControlTasks
Clearly a ControlTask is designed and is potentially designed for both the provider ControlConstruct and client ControlConstruct (Orchestrator)
The Orchestrator may already be capable of dealing with the task in a hard coded way
Nigel DavisExample of a complex task description in terms of an abstract workflow with intermediate output and loops etc.
Nigel DavisWork a definition set for the "Task" space accounting for the fractal nature and the Component-System pattern aspect. Deal with "triggers" (events etc.), constraints etc.
See above
Nigel DavisSet out some meaningful examples an interaction of "Tasks" to achieve some relevant outcome (e.g., service creation, restoration...). Note that the action "Nigel DavisTo study the boundaries of Job/Task, ControlConstruct, PC, CASC (algorithmic). Consider path computation as an example.Action item from2020 OIMT Virtual Face to Face - Week of April 13" should be covered by this action.
See above
Note that the ControlTask:
may be run as a PC or within a PC with other Tasks where that PCmay be implemented with software running on one or more equipments as per model
may be initiated by a ControlConstruct or CASC which which is implemented as software running on one or more equipments
Nigel DavisProvide a mapping from "Task" terminology to other terminology sets (e.g., Use Case, Workflow...)
The following is partly extracted from earlier in the minutes...
ControlTask
A functional Component that provides management-control capability where that capability is defined in terms ofaTransfer Functions.
The whole defined transfer function is available and active
Note that the ControlTask defines a specific purposeful transfer functionality where the underlying componentry may be far more capable.
Perhaps need to adjust to one of the following (to emphasize that this is NOT the underlying/implementation component
"AnAbstractFunctional Component..." (recognizing that all functional components are abstract)
"AnApparentFunctional Component..."
Achieves outcomes/goals etc.
<other notes from above to be added>
Covers all success and failure behaviors
Architected behavior...
Related Terms
Task
Job
Runnable Task (Kestra)
Activity
Use Case
Function
Action
TransferFunction (perhaps this should be specialized to ControlTaskTransferFunction?)
A statement of the capability of the ControlTask in necessary detail to enable a client to fully understand the externally visible characteristics of the ControlTask (i.e., how the outputs are generated from the inputs, or from any other relevant internal behavior)
It maybe expressedin terms ofanapparentControlTaskFlowthat explain, in abstract, how the outputs are generated from the inputs
This is the definition of the transfer functions.
It may express its capability in terms of a logic function, arithmetic function or some other structure that is not in a ControlTaskFlow form
Related Terms
??
ControlTaskFlow
A structure of interconnected apparent/abstract ControlTasks where the structure expresses all possible flows (including cycles/loops) from exposed inputs to exposed outputs (which are the inputs and outputs of the ControlTask the ControlTaskFlow defines)
Each apparent ControlTask will have a defined Transfer Function
Related Terms
Workflow
Flow (Kestra)
Use Case sequence
Process
Procedure
Action Steps
Component
Uses the term Workflow
From earlier in the minutes:
It may be realized by subordinate control task flows
A structure of real control tasks with stated flow
Flow is determined by trigger conditions that are caused by outputs from other tasks
Split is multiple tasks watching for the same trigger condition
Join of two requires two specific condition outputs (one from each) to cause the trigger condition
Alternative depends upon an output value
Capability:The (description of the) opportunity for a thing (e.g., Component) to carry out activities
ControlTask capability (stated as a transfer function) is defined from the outside and hence its description does not vary due to internal hidden control
Other components expose capability that is defined from the inside.
DISCUSSION: Due to lack of time, just briefly highlight the newblue Spec text below. Will go through that in
OIMT meeting cancelled
DISCUSSION continued: Agreed on the following action item.
Nigel Davis To take the Control Task notes from the OIMT 2022-06-16 minutes into documentation form. Some should go to TR-512.8 and some to OAM.
Spec model review and agreement
Nigel DavisTake the spec model, prune out the stuff that are not relevant to simple layer hierarchy, look at how to apply the general principles (slide 32) notation to the stack of layers & rules, write it in the context of the original spec structure. Note that the action "Nigel Davis To prune out the unneeded stuff from the current Spec document so that to show the Yang "when" and "must" of the Occurrence pattern. Action item from2021 Sep 07-10 : OIMT Virtual Face-to-Face" is covered by this action.
Proposal: Additional TR on simplified use of spec that takes the spec model, prunes classes and associations that are not necessary for a basic usage then shows examples of usage,
Nigel ran through the above diagram.
During TAPI discussions on NEP/CEP model several multi-layer compact forms of CEP have been proposed. The internal structures are relatively complex including multiplexing reversal. These structures emphasize then need for a spec representations (it is necessary to enable the orchestrator to interpret the data of the structure). Some predefined patterns may be suitable as there are only a few cases of complexity. The apparent constraints are summarized below:
Complex order tends to go with fixed internal connectivity and simple 1:1 adapter flow
Connection flexibility options are limited to the patterns of the MTNM mapping mode property (although their may be some additional directional variety)
The adapter is complex in some cases
There are multiple LP occurrences in a single spec
The inter-LP flow is relatively simple not requiring full fledged LpPortSpecs
For TAPI, it is expected that an equipment spec occurrence complex would have a related structure of NEP/CEP occurrences which where each CEP would reference a CEP spec (built following the simplified spec definition). The CEP spec structure would be defined to cover the extent of the cases anticipated so far with extension opportunities for more sophisticated cases. It is unlikely that the full capability of the spec model will be required for TAPI in the near future. Nevertheless, it is still important to enable the opportunity for full expansion.
Some examples are shown below:
Nigel ran through the following picture (TR-547-TAPI Reference Implementation Agreement_v2.0_am.docx slide 16) and interpreted the signal flows
Nigel Davis Need specs for the DSR NEP (has 4 bidirectional ports) and the CEP above it to describe the flow (TR-547-TAPI Reference Implementation Agreement_v2.0_am.docx slide 16)
Nigel DavisConstruct simple spec example using layer hierarchy modelfor the OTN payload structure, try longhand form, correct number of occurrence set, based on some specific ports. Code it in JSON form of YANG. Note that the action "Nigel DavisLay out the spec model with sufficient occurrence pattern of equipment in it. Relate UML to Yang. Action item from2021 Sep 07-10 : OIMT Virtual Face-to-Face" is superseded by this action.
Nigel DavisCover combinatorial rule for layer protocol options. "And" & "Or" in spec language.
Nigel Davis skimmed through the document SpecLanguageCore.docx
Rationale of the need for a general language of capability that is machine interpretable
The challenges
Key concepts
Progressing to the language
JSONized Yang (Jang)
Schema for schema
Narrowing
Equipment example, Yang tree, instance example,
The schema, long-hand definition (formal structure), short-hand definition
LTP/CEP/NEP Example,
Nigel asked whether need ITU-T's permission to put ITU-T material (e.g., Tabl 7-1B/G.709) in ONF draft or published document.
Kam to check with ITU-T A.25
It provides generic procedures for incorporating (in whole or in part, with or without modification) the documents of other organizations in ITU‑T Recommendations (or other ITU‑T documents) and provides guidance for other organizations on how to incorporate ITU‑T Recommendations (or other ITU‑T documents), in whole or in part, in their documents. These procedures are applied each time a proposal for incorporation is made.
Will put SpecLanguageCore.docx in ONF internal site for sharing the draft
Nigel Davis To explore the programming language RUST
Aggregate application to LTP (ND & MS) Deferred to next call
Discussion
OAM draft document review (AM & ND) Deferred to next call
Nigel DavisCover combinatorial rule for layer protocol options. "And" & "Or" in spec language.
Nigel DavisTake the spec model, prune out the stuff that are not relevant to simple layer hierarchy, look at how to apply the general principles (slide 32) notation to the stack of layers & rules, write it in the context of the original spec structure. Note that the action "Nigel Davis To prune out the unneeded stuff from the current Spec document so that to show the Yang "when" and "must" of the Occurrence pattern. Action item from2021 Sep 07-10 : OIMT Virtual Face-to-Face" is covered by this action.
Nigel DavisConstruct simple spec example using layer hierarchy modelfor the OTN payload structure, try longhand form, correct number of occurrence set, based on some specific ports. Code it in JSON form of YANG. Note that the action "Nigel DavisLay out the spec model with sufficient occurrence pattern of equipment in it. Relate UML to Yang. Action item from2021 Sep 07-10 : OIMT Virtual Face-to-Face" is superseded by this action.
Nigel Davis Provide a mapping from "Task" terminology to other terminology sets (e.g., Use Case, Workflow...)
Nigel Davis Construct draft temporal model document
Correct errors in the temporal model instance example
Consider model addition to allow IncorporatedTe to also be a contained TeElement (not reusable) to remove need for additional TemporalExpressions.
Better describe union and intersection rules (same type unions and different type intersect)
INTERSECT_COMPLEMENT should be two properties (TE incorporation union/intersection and Complement referenced TE true/false
Nigel Davis Make corrections to the streaming model as discussed including
Corrections to comments from meeting
Multiplicities around StreamHandler
Nigel Davisadd missing information flow corresponding to (2a) in Agg/Component diagram
Nigel DavisApply delegating root stereo type to ports in the model and prepare brief refactoring of LTP port applying the delegating root.
Nigel DavisMartin Skorupski To prune/clean-up LTP and FC model into two interrelated small models (aggregates) and then generate YANG from them.
Nigel Davis Provide a skeleton document as described in oimt2021.ND.005_OAM.pptx that sets out the rationale for use of existing FC and LTP to represent OAM entities. Note that the action "Nigel Davis Early draft of OAM document using existing model and explaining key features that enable it to be used for OAM, then projecting this model towards a TAPI-like solution. Action item from 2021-09-23 OIMT Meeting notes" is covered by this action.
Nigel DavisAndrea MazziniReview first draft of skeleton OAM document and determine whether content can be partitioned between AM and ND. Aim for 1.6 release.
Nigel Davis Review draft Temporal Expression document. Note that the action "Nigel Davis Draft temporal expression document" is covered by this action.
Nigel Davis Assemble basic draft document material for streaming (part of TR-512.8).
Nigel Davis Review draft streaming document material (part of TR-512.8).
Nigel DavisMalcolm Betts Provide write up of ClientContext and ServerContext relationship. Update A.15 with this text. Also provide plan for completion of TR-512.A.15 in conjunction with plan for TR-512.8
0 min
Next calls
Plan
Meeting planning proposal (where each meeting will deal with the corresponding actions (with the date of the meeting)):
Discuss what is needed for theEquipment meeting
DSR NEP spec with 4 bidirectional ports
Combinatorial rules for LP options
Discuss simplified Spec
Including IETF/IEFF w.r.t. simplified Spec
Discuss RUST
Discuss Task terminologies
Aggregate application to LTP
Overview of Control Task documentation
OAM draft document review
Temporal draft document review
Equipment discussion/resolution and preparation for delivery of document
Validate progress and plan model and documentation development
Review all relevant minutes/action resolution and draft document progress against plan including
Streaming (T65)
Task (T57)
Equipment (T8a)
Temporal (T73)
Spec (T56)
OAM (T5)
Aggregate (T64b)
Views/Context (11b)
TR-512.A.15 (and corresponding TR-512.8)
This includes some aspects of controller zero trust (T78)
Consider progress on and plan for delivery of
Compute and storage (T36)
Media multipoint addition to .A.4 (T77)
Construct detailed action plan for delivery on target date
Review draft streaming document material (part of TR-512.8).
