Open APIs

  • 1.  Alignment across IG1228 and IG1224 from Activation perspective.

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Oct 07, 2021 14:56

    Hi All,

    I am going through the Mobile Use Case in IG1228 and I noticed that we don't use TMF640 Activation and Configuration API in the sequence diagrams. I see that the Resource Order Management System receives the TMF652 Resource Order and directly calls the HSS, PCRF and VMS APIs. Are we recommending that the Activation Systems should expose a TMF652 Resource Order API in an ODA Architecture and not TMF640 Activation and Configuration API? 


    In IG1224 NaaS Service Fulfillment Guidelines, we see a bigger role of TMF640 Service Activation and Configuration API where it is used to activate the Service in the Network. Do we have a different recommendations for B2B and B2C services in ODA where for Residential Services it is the TMF652 Resource Order API that is recommended and for complex connectivity services, it is recommended to expose TMF640 Service Activation and Configuration API for Activation?




    ------------------------------
    Kinshuk Kulshreshtha
    Oracle Corporation

    My views posted on this forum are personal, and do not reflect the position of my employer or TM Forum.
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Alignment across IG1228 and IG1224 from Activation perspective.

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Oct 07, 2021 21:47
    Hi Kinshuk,

        Yes, it is a keen observation and the NaaS team has taken one example and demonstrated how a traditional fulfillment process can be done using service abstraction to remove the resource knowledge from the BSS layer, therefore, increasing network agility, reducing time to market, and providing for non-technology-focused to deliver products and services. See IG1228 Use Case 10 ODA Flow with NaaS.

        But the team is more focused on enhancing IG1224 than redoing other use cases the "NaaS-way".   IG1224 rel 4.0 just came out and includes SQM, usage management, and the link with Autonomous Network and Intent-based request.  We are starting work on V5.0 focused on adding service tests, service problems, and more details on SQM/CLA and AN.

         Service providers have the choice to continue with the traditional method or transform to NaaS using service abstraction.





    ------------------------------
    Johanne Mayer
    MayerConsult Inc
    NaaS Compass Inc - www.naascompass.com
    ------------------------------



  • 3.  RE: Alignment across IG1228 and IG1224 from Activation perspective.

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Oct 08, 2021 03:25
    Hello

    And adding to Johanne response, you have to consider, Kinshuk, that IG1228 provided an example of an API call flow to solve UC. The intent is not to provide a 'normative' flow but to demonstrate one way to cover the UC. It's perfectly valid to describe other alternatives. This particularly true for this articulation between SOM and Resource domains where you can use ServiceOrder describing RFS + Resource, or Resource Order, or Service Activation & Configuration, or Resource Activation & Configuration.

    Ludovic

    ------------------------------
    Ludovic Robert
    Orange
    My answer are my own & don't represent necessarily my company or the TMF
    ------------------------------



  • 4.  RE: Alignment across IG1228 and IG1224 from Activation perspective.

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Oct 08, 2021 05:04
    Edited by Kinshuk Kulshreshtha Oct 08, 2021 05:05
    Hi Ludovic,

    Thanks for the clarification that IG1228 provides "one way" to cover the use case and it may not be the 'recommended way' to address the UC.

    Roland,

    Good to know about that you are planning to use TMF702 Resource Activation API that is in Beta.I think it makes a lot of sense to use it for individual resources. If you guys have regular working sessions to progress on IG1228 Mobile Use Case, I would like to be part of the working group as well so that I can contribute more to IG1228.

    ------------------------------
    Kinshuk Kulshreshtha
    Oracle Corporation

    My views posted on this forum are personal, and do not reflect the position of my employer or TM Forum.
    ------------------------------



  • 5.  RE: Alignment across IG1228 and IG1224 from Activation perspective.

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Oct 11, 2021 02:44
    Hi Kinshuk,

    The IG1228 meetings are on Thursday 2PM CET. I believe they are open to everyone that partipates in the ODA project.

    Best regards,

    ------------------------------
    Roland Leners
    SATEC GROUP
    ------------------------------



  • 6.  RE: Alignment across IG1228 and IG1224 from Activation perspective.

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Oct 08, 2021 04:30
    Hi Kinshuk,

    Referring to the IG1228 use case that you mention, we will consider introducing (as part of current Sprint-6) a component in charge of activation that is separate from order management. That component will be the provider of the activation and configuration APIs. We will initially focus on the resource activation API though (TMF702 in beta).

    So far we have tried to not press too far ahead of the technical architecture team that defines the components. That is why activation is currently subsumed in the order management component and why Open API compliant activation calls are not explicitly shown (see also the first note below figure 13 of v1 of the use case). However there are some indications that the technical architecture team is also considering separate activation components, which prompts us to have a look at this as part of the current Sprint-6.

    Best regards,

    ------------------------------
    Roland Leners
    SATEC GROUP
    ------------------------------