Thank you for your reply!
I just want to eliminate or understand the contradiction in TMF641_Service_Ordering_Management_API_User_Guide_v4.0.1
I see comment for
supportingResource
supportingResource
|
A list of resource references (ResourceRef [*]). A list of supporting resources (SupportingResource [*]).Note: only Service of type RFS can be associated with Resources.
|
but there is an example below:
{
...
"serviceOrderItem": [{
"id": "1",
"action": "modify",
"state": "acknowledged",
"service": {
"id": "456",
"@type": "Service",
"href": "http://serverlocation:port/serviceInventoryManagement/v4/service/456",
"state": "active",
"serviceType": "CFS",
"serviceCharacteristic": [{
"id": "452-gh6",
"name": "InputPort",
"valueType": "string",
"value": "456/7"
}
],
"supportingResource": [{
"id": "3456_DFG5-H690",
"href": "http://serverlocation:port/resourceInventoryManagement/v4/resource/3456_DFG5-H690",
"@referredType": "CloudResource"
}
]
},
"@type": "ServiceOrderItem"
}
]
}
And in this JSON we see that supportingResource are applied to CFSS, not RFSS, in attribute "serviceType": "CFS"
My questions are:
1) can we use
supportingResource in CFS ?
2) can we order RFSS in serviceOrders OR they must be decomposed from CFSS on the SOM side?------------------------------
Victor Kosonogov
MTS Group HQ
------------------------------
Original Message:
Sent: Feb 11, 2021 02:29
From: Ludovic Robert
Subject: Passing resource number from TMF639 to TMF641
Hello,
Within Orange we use the ServiceOrder (TMF641) for CFS but also for RFS. We consider RFS as service.
We expose a TMF641 (CFS granularity) at the 'northbound' of the Product system. The ServiceOrderManagement system receive this CFS-Based service order and compute the RFS to be applied. If the 'resource domain' in charge of this delivery could manage the RFS itself we send it via a TMF641 (RFS granularity). This is our 'preferred' way of interact because it allows decoupling between the SOM and resource domain.
This is probably a good topic to be discussed in ODA and in particular for E2E process....I'm sure we'll have distinct fair perspectives.
Hope it helps
Ludovic
------------------------------
Ludovic Robert
Orange
My answer are my own & don't represent necessarily my company or the TMF
Original Message:
Sent: Feb 10, 2021 15:36
From: Jonathan Goldberg
Subject: Passing resource number from TMF639 to TMF641
Hi Victor
As an OSS novice, I don't see why 641 couldn't be used for ordering RFS as well as CFS.
But I'll defer to the experts, tagging them here: @Johanne Mayer @Ludovic Robert @Vance Shipley
------------------------------
Jonathan Goldberg
Amdocs Management Limited
Any opinions and statements made by me on this forum are purely personal, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the TM Forum or my employer.
Original Message:
Sent: Feb 10, 2021 11:35
From: Victor Kosonogov
Subject: Passing resource number from TMF639 to TMF641
Thanks you, Jonathan. That makes sense, sure!
But it leads to ordering instances of RFSS. We see following comment in JSON on supportingResource :
>Note: only Service of type RFS can be associated with Resources
Does it mean that TMF641 is for ordering of RFSS along with CFSS?
Previously I believed that the RFSS should be under CFSS in TMF633 and the serviceOrder contains only references to CFSS.
------------------------------
Victor Kosonogov
MTS Group HQ
Original Message:
Sent: Feb 10, 2021 11:11
From: Jonathan Goldberg
Subject: Passing resource number from TMF639 to TMF641
Hi Victor
The Service entity has an array attribute supportingResource of type Resource. You could use this to point to the resource entity(ies) that you had created in the inventory.
Does this make sense?
Hope it helps
------------------------------
Jonathan Goldberg
Amdocs Management Limited
Any opinions and statements made by me on this forum are purely personal, and do not necessarily reflect the position of the TM Forum or my employer.
Original Message:
Sent: Feb 09, 2021 05:31
From: Victor Kosonogov
Subject: Passing resource number from TMF639 to TMF641
Hi,
We @MTS, are trying to align our platform APIs based on TMF633, TMF634, TMF638, TMF639 for our business use cases.
When selling the product, we gave the physical device (physical resource saved in TMF639) to the customer. Next, we order the service (TMF641) and want to pass the serial number (or generated resource ID from TMF639) of the issued device in the serviceOrder. This is because we want to activate the service on exactly this device. To transmit a number, we have to use the serviceCharacteristics (which is the only one that has a attribute "@value" in TMF641), but it seems that this is not the most appropriate place, since the serial number of the issued device does not look like the characteristics of the service. This value is more similar to the associated activation parameters of the service, rather than its characteristics.
How is it more correct to pass such values?
------------------------------
Regards
Victor Kosonogov
MTS Group HQ
------------------------------