Bonn, December 9, 2016 Outcomes and Next Steps

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
© 2011 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Confidential 1 August 15th, 2012 BP & IA Team.
Advertisements

© 2007 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Pearson Addison-Wesley 1 Detailed Design Overview and Mid-Level Class Modeling.
Market Design of SE Europe: Reflections from the 3rd Forum on the Way Forward 6 th Permanent High Level Group Meeting Athens, 07 December 2003.
Proposed Co-convened WG1/2 Objectives, Schedule, and Activities Group Name: TP#1 Source: Omar Elloumi (Alcatel-Lucent), Laurent Laporte (Sprint) Meeting.
TSB 1 Overview of TSB Director’s Ad Hoc Group on IPR GSC 8, Ottawa, Canada, 27 April – 1 May 2003 by Houlin Zhao Director, Telecommunication Standardization.
L8 - March 28, 2006copyright Thomas Pole , all rights reserved 1 Lecture 8: Software Asset Management and Text Ch. 5: Software Factories, (Review)
Open Source and Info Models 17 Dec 2015 Bryan Sullivan, AT&T.
14 March 2016 Bryan Sullivan, AT&T Artur Tyloch, Canonical
December 18, :00am – 11:00am
International Telecommunication Union New Delhi, India, December 2011 ITU Workshop on Standards and Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Issues Antoine.
Jeju, 13 – 16 May 2013Standards for Shared ICT GSC Emergency Communications Task Force Report (GSC-EM TF) Presenter: Chantal Bonardi GSC-EM Task Force.
OPEN-O Modelling Project Proposal Version 1.2 Draft – For Review Chengli
Stages of Research and Development
Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
Stakeholders Meeting High-Level Update on the Forthcoming Consultations Incorporating ComFrame Text with Revised Insurance Core Principles (ICPs) La.
Task 1 Scope – Controller (L=ND)
NFV Information Modelling 3GPP SA5 Status
Bonn, December 9, 2016 Outcomes and Next Steps
ONF presentations to ETSI NFV Info Modelling Industry Status ONF Modeling Update 29 March 2016 Note that some points are related to the Multi-SDO Issues.
Workshop Discussion on Day-2
Consolidated M2M standards boost the industry
Capital Project / Infrastructure Renewal – Making the Business Case
Next Generation Distribution System Platform (DSPx)
Information Modelling Workshop Overview
ONAP Integration Through Information and Data Modeling
Global Standards Collaboration (GSC) 14
Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
ETSI NFV POCS and PLUGTESTS
17 Dec 2015 Bryan Sullivan, AT&T
TTC Activities on IPR in Standards
Gibraltar Resolution Planning Framework
Approach to finalize the TOSCA NFV profile
OASIS TOSCA Report for December ONAP Event
GSC-EM TF goal, as defined initially
draft-clacla-netmod-yang-model-update-02
Critical issues with TOSCA NFV profile direction
OASIS TOSCA Report for December ONAP Modeling Workshop
Key Information Summary (KIS)
ETSI Standardization Activities on M2M communications
Consideration of Modeling Evolution in ONAP Michela Bevilacqua Peter Wörndle and Tara Cummings 13 December , 2017.
IETF #99 Broadband Forum (BBF) YANG Update
Establish Process Governance
Max Riegel, Nokia (TG Chair)
Information Modelling Workshop Overview
IETF 103 NETMOD BBF YANG Update
GSC Emergency Communications Task Force Report (GSC-EM TF)
Sarah Hall Research Impact Strategy and Policy Manager &
ETSI NFV ISG IM/DM Modelling progress Report
Instructional Learning Cycle:
Multi-agency Safeguarding Adults Policy and Procedure
What elements to develop? What are communities of practice?
INSPIRE-based e-reporting pilots
CS310 Software Engineering Lecturer Dr.Doaa Sami
2003 Annual NSDL PI Survey A Collaborative Formative Evaluation
Participants, Patents, and Duty to Inform
Converged Network Management
CRKN and Canadiana Update
Ad-hoc Activity: Biodiversity and Water Progress Report
NFV adhoc Shitao li.
Nigel Davis & Kam Lam – 17 Dec 2015 (V4)
Information Modelling Workshop Overview
3GPP LAA Liaison Approval Process
Using State and Local Data to Improve Results
Brief update and critical issues
Recent Standardization Activities on Cloud Computing
Bernd Zeuner (Deutsche Telekom) December 2, 2018
ICOM TC Charter TC’s Scope Out of TC’s Scope Call for Participation
TCB Control Block Sharing: 2140bis draft-ietf-tcpm-2140bis-00
Capacity Access Review
Digital wellbeing workshop
Presentation transcript:

Bonn, December 9, 2016 Outcomes and Next Steps Information Modeling Workshop Outcomes and Next Steps Bonn, December 9, 2016

What is more important for TOSCA TOSCA contains both data and information model What is the TOSCA information model? Does TOSCA has the requirement to share the same common information model with other SDOs? What is the best practice of using TOSCA?

What is more important for TOSCA Creating and Hosting Repositories for Models and associated open source tooling Encourage ecosystem by simplifying adoption of common models and availability of tooling Document the infrastructure aspects that set the context for the tooling Consider how to overcome IPR barriers YANG: Benoit Claise / William Lupton TOSCA Templates: Arthur Berezin / Shitao Li Papyrus UML models: Bernd Zeuner / Augie Jagau Identify Domains that have their own information and Data models needed for deployment Analysis of overlaps and Touch Points Mapping of the models John Strassner / Nigel Davis Resolve question of TOSCA v YANG When is TOSCA applicable, and when is YANG applicable? How do they interact with each other? Converge understanding of these aspects including consideration of modeling language Alex Vul / Michael Brenner Comments: We need to collect template examples to build a “shared” repository. Maybe not only related to NFV application. Comments: Clarify the difference between YANG and TOSCA Different areas, domains, applications

My thoughts For CIM, TOSCA can be used in many areas, if multiple SDOs can share the same information model, the job for TOSCA will be easier. So I think TOSCA should support this work. There are a lot of projects and tools for YANG, such as UML to YANG mapping tool, YANG validators, YANG DB search. Does TOSCA plan to develop some similar projects and tools in the future?

Detail report from the host

Re-cap Objectives Problem Statement Workshop Objectives Different information models and data models are being used amongst SDOs and open source communities resulting in fragmentation and complexity for implementation hence increased cost and delayed time to market There are several barriers to collaboration amongst SDOs and Open Source communities. Workshop Objectives To review progress since the original workshop held January 2016 at CableLabs Review issues that we considered important and if we didn’t make progress, understand why Address work that has been done on the issues collected from the first workshop Share latest understanding on how different information models and data models are impacted by NFV or are impacting NFV Identify roadblocks to progress and agree how to overcome them Continue to build collaboration and refresh commitment to work together to address the problem Consider whether to merge with the cross-industry Network and Service Management activity (workshop orgasnized by Deutsche Telekom earlier this week) Reach agreement on the next steps and assign owners

Agreed Topics to Focus Collaboration (1) Named Owners How to achieve a Common Information Model How realistic? Consider Federated Information Model(s) as evolutionary step Marc Flauw / Klaus Martiny Creating and Hosting Repository for Use Cases and Business Requirements Collection process? LingLi Deng / Robin Mersh Aligning Nomenclature Considered a barrier due to different language in different “domains” and more generally Agreed definitions of Data Model and Information Model (e.g. RFC 3444) Agreed definition of “micro-services” How to collect and where applicable, align nomenclature. Likely to be ongoing iterative process Mark Cummings / Nigel Davis Creating and Hosting Repositories for Models and associated open source tooling Encourage ecosystem by simplifying adoption of common models and availability of tooling Document the infrastructure aspects that set the context for the tooling Consider how to overcome IPR barriers YANG: Benoit Claise / William Lupton TOSCA Templates: Arthur Berezin / Shitao Li Papyrus UML models: Bernd Zeuner / Augie Jagau For every new SDO we close two others?

Agreed Topics to Focus Collaboration (2) Named Owners Identify Domains that have their own information and Data models needed for deployment Analysis of overlaps and Touch Points Mapping of the models John Strassner / Nigel Davis Resolve question of TOSCA v YANG When is TOSCA applicable, and when is YANG applicable? How do they interact with each other? Converge understanding of these aspects including consideration of modeling language Alex Vul / Michael Brenner Should we decompose domain models into smaller parts to be more useable and amenable to Federation and/or Abstraction? Separation of concerns Dependency on the Domain Listing Horizontal and vertical decomposition Harmonizing the semantics Impact of architectures (services, software, implementation architectures, etc.), e.g. Containers John Strassner / Nigel Davis / Marc Flauw

Agreed Topics to Focus Collaboration (3) Named Owners How to process the different views from the perspective of different domains John Strassner / Nigel Davis / Marc Flauw What other SDOs and Open Source communities do we need to involve? 3GPP (SA2, SA3), IEEE (802.1, 802.3, 802.19-Ethernet), GSMA, DMTF ODL, OpenStack, ON.Lab (i.e. CORD, ONOS), OIF, Open Air Interface Klaus Martiny, Robin Mersh, Scott Mansfield, Michel Besson, Augie Jagau

Next Steps Consider how to organize this group longer term Ensure transparency & even handedness Klaus Martiny, Don Clarke, Mark Cummings, Deng Hui Consider relationship with new Deutsche Telekom led cross-industry Networks and Service Management initiative (NSM) Consider adding some of these issues to the problem statement for NSM. Which issues? Klaus Martiny Refresh the mailing lists Separated NSM and Information Model Lists Potentially combine later? Consult with ETSI on continuing hosting of the lists Repositories for documents Hosting and management (Short term and longer term) Tetsuya Nakamura

Timescales Decide on relationship with NSM Strategy call End January Draft topic Scope Statements Discussion on review calls Initial analysis from each topic area Mid March Network & Service Management strategy Early April Initial proposals (something that we could share) Early June Face to face workshops June 2017? November / December 2017?

Organizational Considerations Deutsche Telekom will coordinate the cross-industry Network and Service Management collaboration Led by Klaus Martiny Considerations for organizing the ongoing multi-SDO Information Modeling collaboration Needs to be transparent and even handed Fully open, but subject to IPR constraints Possibility to simply replicate the Deutsche Telekom process, i.e. a future neutral host coordinates preparation of the next workshop Ideally a network operator or similarly neutral entity Or create a dedicated organization similar to a club Problematic for network operators, but might be Ok for SDOs and Open Source Communities

Media Messages Deutsche Telecom will issue PR (Klaus) Media message was not discussed, only the following guidelines for participating organization PR / blogs Guidelines Ok to list participating organizations, but do not name individual delegates Do not use the word “Represented” use the word “Participated” For example: “The following organizations participated in the Information Modeling Workshop: <List of organizations>” Mention some of the topics but please do not speculate on outcomes Group photo can be used (everyone agreed by being in it) Provide a contact for follow-up enquiry Please let us know if a blog or PR is published

Contacts Don Clarke d.clarke@cablelabs.com Michael Brenner michael@gigaspaces.com Tetsuya Nakamura t.nakamura@cablelabs.com Klaus Martiny klaus.martiny@telekom.de

Bernd Zeuner (DT) / IISOMI March 31, 2016