Open APIs

 View Only
Back to discussions
Expand all | Collapse all

Relationship between CFS and Resource

  • 1.  Relationship between CFS and Resource

    Posted Mar 06, 2024 05:00

    Hello experts,

    In the relatively new TMFS003 "Order Capture - Fiber Contract", it is identified that the SID does not support defining prerequisite relationships between CFS Specification and Resource Specification. Consequently, a respective JIRA ticket was created: [ISA-905] Add a relationship between CFS Spec and Resource Spec - TM Forum JIRA

    However, there is no word about how this relationship is supposed to be reflected in corresponding CFS and Resource instances.

    The obvious candidate would be "supportingResource", but it is explicitly specified for Services that "Note: only Service of type RFS can be associated with Resources."

    I believe that such relationship (between CFS and Resource instances) is necessary as well. Incidentally, we have recently encountered this need in our work on Product-Service-Resource modelling.

    Do you agree? Does anyone have a different view?

    Best regards,



    ------------------------------
    Opher Yaron
    Proximus SA
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Mar 07, 2024 07:51

    Hi Opher, I totally agree with you.

    And I enriched the JIRA ticket I initiated, to be able to trace this type of catalogue relationship at inventory level. 

    Thank you



    ------------------------------
    Sylvie Demarest
    Orange
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    Posted Mar 07, 2024 08:55

    Hi Sylvie, thank you.

    Best regards,



    ------------------------------
    Opher Yaron
    Proximus SA
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Mar 07, 2024 11:34

    hey,

    If I understand the SID correctly:

    1. CFSSpec (know-how) requires at least one RFSSpec (technical solution)
    2. and of course the RFSSpec requires at least one RSpec

    so you have an (indirect) relationship between CFSSpec and RSpec.


    can you share your example of a CFSSpec that requires a RSpec without a RFSSpec "in the middle"?

    Since you posted in the API community, do you want to see that CFSSpec -> RSpec relationship in the service catalogue API?



    ------------------------------
    Kind regards,

    Matthieu Hattab
    Lyse Platform
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 5.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Mar 07, 2024 12:14

    Hi Matthieu, you can have a look to the ODA use case TMFS008, especially the Service and Resource Catalog view : we described the example of a Mobile Line CFSspec, with its 4G and 5G RFSspec, plus a pre-requisite link to a SIM Card or an eSIM profile resource.

    We express here that the SIM card is a functional pre-requisite to the Mobile Line. It is not part of the Mobile Line RFSspec, as it constitutes a dedicated product, that can be ordered or changed by the customer without asking a change at the Mobile Line product itself.

    So if we add this relationship in the SID model, we will also need to be able to have it in the related API.

    Hope it clarifies.



    ------------------------------
    Sylvie Demarest
    Orange
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 6.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    Posted Apr 22, 2024 22:03
    Edited by Dan d'Albuquerque Apr 29, 2024 00:30

    Hi @Sylvie Demarest

    The latest update to TMFS008 - Service/Resource Catalog View for a Postpaid Mobile Line use case (3.1.0) has added a relationship directly between the eSIM product spec and the eSIM profile logical resource (see below).  In earlier versions of SID, this relationship was typically only for tangible goods.  I can see from the previous use case version 3.0.1 that the eSIM CFS has now been removed.  Will this change be reflected in SID (or has it already)?

    Thanks



    ------------------------------
    Dan d'Albuquerque
    Individual
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 7.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted May 03, 2024 10:49

    Hi Dan, 

    You're right, in SID this relationship seems to be limited to tangible Products specification, not only in the comments but also in the model itself: the relationship ProductSpecRealizedAs between ProductSpec and ResourceSpec is a navigation relationship and the available details show a link through Stock Item.

    @Kevin Scaggs and @Jean-Marie Magueur what do you think to extend this type of relationship to logical resources (for which a CFSspec and RFSspec levels of description is not always useful) ?



    ------------------------------
    Sylvie Demarest
    Orange
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 8.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Mar 08, 2024 04:10
    Edited by Dave Milham 8 days ago

    My recollection is that CFSS can alternatively  point to Resource Factions Functions. this was introduced to support logical resources as seen in Virtualisation such as NFV.   This is described in GB922 Resource v23.0.0 – TM Forum

    I would need to look at the SID model to check the cardinality of the link between CFSS and RFSS so won't comment on that until I have checked

    I do recall in the SID Configuration ABE a suggestion that RFS should be replaced by configuration and profiles but this proposal has not been actioned as there are legacy case where RFS are the most suitable form of models.

    Ed note corrected spell checker typo 7/5/2024 -changed  Factions tp Functions ;-(

    ------------------------------
    Dave Milham
    TM Forum, Chief Architect
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 9.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Mar 08, 2024 09:39

    In addition to above, I have raised concern or use case about RFS to CFS relationship representation like in our use case for CFS we have created RFS specification using SID model and against RFS necessary logical connection/circuit has been created. Now in order to provide related resource reference in CFS or RFS as part of TMF 638 we do have supporting Service and supporting Resource to provide its service and resource relationship but in TMF 639 for given resource logical connection or CKT we don't have any entity to provide RFS service relationship so that using 639 also we can traverse to RFS service specification.

    Just want to know view on these as well in addition to above use case.



    ------------------------------
    Mahesh Choudhari
    BT Group plc
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 10.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted May 06, 2024 02:33
    Edited by Jag Baddukonda May 06, 2024 02:34

    Hi Dave,

    Normally both Physical RS and Logical RS are mapped to the RFSS i.e. the Resource spec should map to the RFSS. This also enables a clean model in the Service Inventory. The Resource Inventory API also need to be updated to reflect this (raised by Mahesh).

    The end goal is to trigger the correct Fulfillment actions and hence a Resource Spec categorized as Physical RS and Logical RS are enough to drive the subsequent fulfillment actions.

    @Dan: There is scope for optimization in the model you have given starting from the PS. But that is a different topic :-)

    Regards,



    ------------------------------
    Sri-Jagadish (Jag) Baddukonda
    Deutsche Telekom AG
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 11.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Aug 26, 2024 13:46
    Edited by Zoran Stojanovic Aug 27, 2024 02:50

    In essence, the question is as follows: in TMFS004, there is a relationship "requires" between CFS Landline Connectivity and Physical Resource Box 1. How is that communicated to Service Order manager using TMF641 where there is no relationship between CFS and required resource? Shipment order goes to Shipping CFS, however, if Customer Order manager (COM) sends a resource order to Resource Order Manager using TMF652, how is the relationship "requires" between CFS and Resource is communicated from Customer OM to Service OM? The same question is for TMFS008, where physical SIM is Physical resource ordered through a Resource Order, while Mobile Line as a CFS that requires SIM is ordered via TMF641 as a Service Order.  Should we extend TMF641 to register the relationship between CFS and Resource? Or, would there be an option as a workaround (and not too much deviation from the standard) to have a CFS and RFS next to PR also for a physical resource, so that Service OM receives it as a service order and manage the relationship with the service order for Connectivity?



    ------------------------------
    Zoran Stojanovic
    Odido Netherlands B.V.
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 12.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    Posted Aug 27, 2024 04:39

    Hi Zoran

    The latest version of TMFS008 Postpaid Mobile Line already contains the relationship between CFS -> Physical Resource Spec (see below).  The question is whether the POOM places a TMF700 Shipping Order (for a Stock Item/Physical Resource) or a TMF652 Resource Order (for a StockItem/Physical Resource) as you mentioned above.  Presumably there have been discussions on this within the ODA team, but I cannot see any progress on the community or from the minutes of the Open API architecture meetings.

    @Jag Baddukonda perhaps you have an update based from discussions on the Supply Chain Management ODA component?



    ------------------------------
    Dan d'Albuquerque
    Individual
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 13.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    TM Forum Member
    Posted Aug 27, 2024 04:52
    Edited by Zoran Stojanovic Aug 28, 2024 02:47

    Thanks Dan, yes I know, there is the relationship in the model between the CFS and Resource, it is also in the model of TMFS004, see below. My question is how this relationship is communicated in service order using TMF641 where there is only possible to have reference between RFS and Resource. How does Service Order manager become "aware" of this relationship if it gets TMF641 Service order for Connectivity only?



    ------------------------------
    Zoran Stojanovic
    Odido Netherlands B.V.
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 14.  RE: Relationship between CFS and Resource

    Posted Aug 27, 2024 05:12

    Hi Zoran

    TMF641 Service Ordering API would need to be extended (by TMF or otherwise) to add in a resourceRelationship sub-resource.  The API already has serviceRelationship as well as supportingService/supportResource so this would be a relatively straightforward extension.

    Good luck!



    ------------------------------
    Dan d'Albuquerque
    Individual
    ------------------------------

    Original Message