You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 6 Next »


Section 3 of white paper :

Consumption Model

Section Contributors : AT&T (Brian Freeman, Scott Blandford ), Bell Canada (Marc-Alexandre Choquette), Vodafone (Atul Purohit), China Mobile (Lei Huang)

From an end user perspective, within the CSP – what are the key considerations, methods for adoption (technical, organizational, operational, etc…)

Reference Models for Consumption


Plan :

  • AT&T & Bell to share the model that they are using (Publically sharable), format 1 page bullet points & preferably a diagram (Editable, so that MAC can change as per standard format)
  • Vodafone to share the possible variants / models that are there in total (with examples), which will form part of beginning of the section (with a diagram for each option)
  • We need within a CSP roles, parts of the organization that will consume ONAP - ops, technical teams etc...and relevance / consideration points for consuming ONAP (here the points can be generic, ONAP can come in to address them)
  • China Mobile can help with pros - cons of various models, what works what requires work, various considerations around it
  • Anything else ?


We need 2 breakout calls between 4 of us before next meeting i.e. on 19th November. Ideally a 4-5 pager section 3 should be ready (Draft) by then.

Also look for Saad's initial view, useful areas can be incorporated here


  • Vodafone to share the possible variants / models that are there in total (with examples), which will form part of beginning of the section (with a diagram for each option)


  1. A project like ONAP can be consumed within a CSP in multiple ways -
    1. Build competency & deliver ONAP in-house
    2. Engage with a system integrator / principal who can do it for them
    3. Look for distribution by professional outfits
    4. Look at ONAP as a reference implementation, and choose a partner/vendor which does similar or all of the same functionalities
  2. Below table provides pros & cons of each model

    ONAP Consumption ModelProsConsExamples

    Build competency & deliver ONAP in-house

    • CSPs are in complete control of the code
    • ONAP out of the box functionality is not suited, CSPs can customize / enhance / change it
    • CSPs becomes more software culture oriented
    • CSPs will have to be much more involved in forum & exchange of information, contributions, involvements increase
    • Identifying software capabilities & building teams takes time & effort
    • Mind-Set change is the biggest impediment
    • Operating model (in-fact entire organizational construct) needs changing, which may be challenging
    AT&T, Bell Canada (any other ?)

    Engage with a System Integrator / Principal Vendor who can do it for them

    • This is an outsourced model, where an identified System Integrator / Principal Vendor takes the ownership of development, testing & deployment - means CSPs are still in control, but are doing it in a "Delegated" mode
    • Risk of delivery problems reduces, since professional System Integrators / Principal Vendors does "Delivery" for a living, they are more mature by design
    • CSPs have to keep track of changes, identify possible enhancements, requirements and get them delivered via identified System Integrator / Principal Vendor
    • Complacency may creep in if the "Delegated" partners are doing most of the heavy lifting - CSPs may becomes too dependent
    Amdocs, Accenture (any one else ?)

    Look for distribution by professional outfits

    • Similar to OpenStack distributions which are out there, ONAP can potentially have "Distro" professional outfits - who would provide a hardened (tested, fit for purpose) and well maintained software asset - which can then be -
      1. Either be developed in house or
      2. An external System Integrator / Principal Vendor can do it for CSPs
      3. Or, the "Distro" providing professional outfit can do it as part of their "Professional" services
    • Onus of keeping up with forum's workings, bug fixes in "Productized" version of ONAP etc...can be taken care by "Distribution" Professional Outfit
    • If chosen delivery option is not the same as the professional outfit, friction in delivery may creep in
    • Wholesome commitment of professional outfit to ONAP may need some monitoring
    Aarna Networks ( ?) Anyone else ?
    Look at ONAP as a reference implementation, and choose a partner/vendor which does similar or all of the same functionalities
    • There are multiple SDOs that ONAP adheres to, For Ex - TMF, 3GPP, ETSI, GSMA etc..., this model absolves CSPs from asking ala-carte SDO compliance to vendors while choosing their products; and instead place ONAP as a reference-able architecture (& for compliance) in front of vendors and get a product that best complies to standards
    • Depending on the chosen vendor, strengths of the vendor and up-keep of the application is complete owned by the vendor
    •  Software culture does not kick in
    • Dependency on vendor still high
     Many



  • No labels