Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

Q: What can end users do with ONAP Honolulu? What operations are supported (service design? Deployment? Day-0 configuration? Day 1/2 configuration? LCM?), and what will be supported in Istanbul?

  • A: Lukasz Rajewski For the "native helm" path - on-boarding, Helm enrichment with CDS, meaning modifying values in Helm templates.
  • Day 2 operation config-assign/config-deploy - add/modify resources after the initial deployment, which may be used for upgrade.
  • CNF status checking is supported in Honolulu, will be enhanced in Istanbul.
  • Seshu Kumar Mudiganti SO merged the "native helm" and "ETSI" paths for a more 'Plug&Play'


Q: What is the format of CNF packaging? Is it based on Helm? Does it follow ETSI-NFV specifications?

A: Fernando Oliveira

  • packaging - SOL04 may need a bit of work still. Descriptors are still being discussed in ETSI about containerized models. Lots of discussion but no consensus yet.  Orchestration meetings on Mondays 8am Eastern
  • Packaging is based on the CSAR format (for both the 'helm native' and 'ETSI' Format
  • CNF Descriptor Proposal page:  https://wiki.onap.org/x/VwsqBg 
  • Magma CNF onboarding is following similar path than what we have implemented for CNF vFW

Q: Where is the documentation for CNF on-boarding and deployment? 

...

Q: Are there "CNF requirements" available in ONAP, similar to the "VNF Requirements"?

Q: How could developers get involved? Where do you mostly need help? Are there open Jira tickets people can start working on?A: 

  • Call for developers to implement in Jakarta new features:
    • CNF Control Loop 
    • Integration with XGVela
    • Merging Native Helm/ETSI flows
    • Entreprise use cases
    • etc
  • Istanbul CNF Orchestrator

...

Q: What it is not supported today and is part of the roadmap?

Q: What do we need to ask to CNF Vendors to be onboarded on the ONAP Platform?

  • Vendors are welcome to test their CNFs, so we can have the solution validated with a larger set of Network Functions

A: 

Questions from the audience

Action Items

  •  

Q: What has changed in CNF packaging since Frankfurt?

  • A: In Frankfurt, the Helm chart was a 'second class citizen' in SDC. In Honolulu there is native support for Helm charts. SO understands Helm type now.

Q: Is there a plan to support NETCONF configuration, or will the solution be limited to CDS CBAs? Is there alignment with C&PS?

  • A: No integration with C&PS, but it may happen at a later stage. But this is a good approach and may be discussed further in the CNF Taskforce.