Open APIs

 View Only

  • 1.  Relationship between Geographic Site and GeographicAddress in TMF673 and TMF 674

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 16 days ago

    Hi!

    Im trying to understand how Geographic Site and Geographic Address relates to each other in TMF673 and TMF674. According to the data models

    A geographic site can have zero to many Geographic addresses (via Place), but a geographic address can only have 0 or 1 geographic site.

    I don't get why an address can't have multiple sites. Is it just a oversight, or is there some reason I'm missing?

    We are trying to model fiber termination points as sites, so the use case is that an address might have multiple fiber termination points.



    ------------------------------
    Bendik Stavelin
    Lyse Tele AS
    ------------------------------


  • 2.  RE: Relationship between Geographic Site and GeographicAddress in TMF673 and TMF 674

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 15 days ago

    Guess you should be using TMF675 Geographic Place as against TMF 673 Geographic Address. Site typically belongs to a Party and contains Addresses. Consider a large high rise building which can have multiple dwelling units which could be Sites of Customer or Service Provider having different postal addresses while all are located at a single location(geographic co-ordinates longitude and latitude),



    ------------------------------
    Srinivasa Vellanki
    Jio Platforms Limited
    Any opinions and statements made by me on this forum are purely personal, and do not necessarily reflect the position of my employer or TM Forum.
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 3.  RE: Relationship between Geographic Site and GeographicAddress in TMF673 and TMF 674

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 11 days ago

    Hi Bendik,

    When you have a closer look to the TMF673 GeographicAddress there is no relationship to TMF674 GeographicSite at all, only to TMF675 GeographicLocation.

    This is really on purpose. As a general rule in OpenAPI most relationships are only documented on one of the two Entities involved. This is really to avoid that two entities need to be modified for every change in relationship, which would be prone to errors.

    The relationship in this case is documented on the GeographicSite and not on the GeographicAddress. In most cases a GeographicAddress with its link to a GeographicLocation (GIS information) exists in the world, also without the existance of a CSP. The GeographicSite contains CSP specific information and can be linked to a GeographicAddress. Nothing in the API blocks the creation of multiple GeographicSites that point to the same GeographicAddress.

    Coming back to your fiber model, I started describing in TMFS017 some ideas on GeographicSite use for FTTH buildouts aligned with FTTH council specifications.

    In this document I describe GeographicSite with siteCategory=BuildingEntryPoint as the place where a fiber cable enters the building. If more than one fiber cable enters a building (e.g. redundancy) than obviously more than one GeographicSite of this category can be linked to the same GeographicAddress. 

    In case in-house cabling is documented I describe a further GeographicSite with siteCategory=OpticalTerminationOutlet to describe the places where outlets are installed for service. They are typically linked to a GeographicSubAddress and again nothing prohibits to have multiple outlets in the same premise.

    I hope this helps.

    Regards



    ------------------------------
    Koen Peeters
    OryxGateway FZ LLC
    ------------------------------

    Original Message


  • 4.  RE: Relationship between Geographic Site and GeographicAddress in TMF673 and TMF 674

    TM Forum Member
    Posted 8 days ago
    Edited by bendik stavelin 8 days ago
      |   view attached

    Hi Koen, 

    Thanks for the input. I should have specified that I was looking at the v5 spec, where Geographic Address do have a relationship with Geographic Site (have a look at the screenshot of the v5 resource model of geographic address I uploaded). I didn't realize that it wasn't the case for the v4 spec. I know that v5 is a work in progress, but still, I don't really get why they have given geographic address a 1 to 0..1 relationship with geographic site, when geographic site has a 1 - 0..* relationship with geographic address. It would have made sense if geographic site was left out of geographic address on purpose, as it was in v4, but when it's included, it doesn't help much having a 1 - 0..1 relationship.

    Except for that, your thoughts and descriptions align with my own, but where can I find the document you're describing, TMFS017? 

    edit: nevermind the last question, I found the TMFS017 document.



    ------------------------------
    bendik stavelin
    Lyse Tele AS
    ------------------------------

    Original Message