Open APIs

Hello,

During CTK conformance tests for Service Inventory (TMF638), there are some issues and I would like to clarify some scenarios about GET operations.

Running CTK there are some test cases which requires mandatory service fields among others:

- ServiceRelationship
- supportingResour
ce
supportingService
relatedParty
In model, those fields are marked as 0.. Shouldn´t be aligned with CTK as optional? Also, there are some scenarios that some of those fields maybe be not applicable, but if those services appear it will fail CTK tests.

E.g. Consider the service composed by:
CFS-RFS-Resource.
If the user request a Get CFS by Id, the  CFS will not have supportingResource, intead RFS will. Anyway, CTK seems to always expect supportingResour
ce in response.

Could you please help to clarify if there are some ongoing discussion to make those fields optional in further releases?

Thanks a lot in advance




------------------------------
Mauricio Dassi
Ericsson Inc.
------------------------------

Hi Mauricio
I suggest to take it up with @Henrique Rodrigues, who is responsible for creating the CTKs. Also @Ludovic Robert may have what to say, as functional lead in the Service area.​​
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: Jun 08, 2020 08:26
From: Mauricio Dassi
Subject: TMF 638 (R18.5.x) - Mandatory fields from CTKs but optional in model

Hello,

During CTK conformance tests for Service Inventory (TMF638), there are some issues and I would like to clarify some scenarios about GET operations.

Running CTK there are some test cases which requires mandatory service fields among others:

- ServiceRelationship
- supportingResour
ce
supportingService
relatedParty
In model, those fields are marked as 0.. Shouldn´t be aligned with CTK as optional? Also, there are some scenarios that some of those fields maybe be not applicable, but if those services appear it will fail CTK tests.

E.g. Consider the service composed by:
CFS-RFS-Resource.
If the user request a Get CFS by Id, the  CFS will not have supportingResource, intead RFS will. Anyway, CTK seems to always expect supportingResour
ce in response.

Could you please help to clarify if there are some ongoing discussion to make those fields optional in further releases?

Thanks a lot in advance




------------------------------
Mauricio Dassi
Ericsson Inc.
------------------------------

Hi Jonathan, thank you for the info. I have sent now this question to Henrique as suggested.
Regards.

------------------------------
Mauricio Dassi
Ericsson Inc.
------------------------------

Original Message:
Sent: Jun 08, 2020 09:49
From: Jonathan Goldberg
Subject: TMF 638 (R18.5.x) - Mandatory fields from CTKs but optional in model

Hi Mauricio
I suggest to take it up with @Henrique Rodrigues, who is responsible for creating the CTKs. Also @Ludovic Robert may have what to say, as functional lead in the Service area.​​
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: Jun 08, 2020 08:26
From: Mauricio Dassi
Subject: TMF 638 (R18.5.x) - Mandatory fields from CTKs but optional in model

Hello,

During CTK conformance tests for Service Inventory (TMF638), there are some issues and I would like to clarify some scenarios about GET operations.

Running CTK there are some test cases which requires mandatory service fields among others:

- ServiceRelationship
- supportingResour
ce
supportingService
relatedParty
In model, those fields are marked as 0.. Shouldn´t be aligned with CTK as optional? Also, there are some scenarios that some of those fields maybe be not applicable, but if those services appear it will fail CTK tests.

E.g. Consider the service composed by:
CFS-RFS-Resource.
If the user request a Get CFS by Id, the  CFS will not have supportingResource, intead RFS will. Anyway, CTK seems to always expect supportingResour
ce in response.

Could you please help to clarify if there are some ongoing discussion to make those fields optional in further releases?

Thanks a lot in advance




------------------------------
Mauricio Dassi
Ericsson Inc.
------------------------------