TMF relationships

[Joshua Chen FX]

Hello all,

I am reading the TMF doc, and want your opinions on :

• CFS > RFS
  • do you always need at least one RFS or can a CFS be standalone?
• RFS>RS
  • do you always need at least one RS or can a RFS be standlone?
    
    

according to TMF,  RFS requires at least 1 RS

what are your thoughts? I am thinking the guideline should be, if you don't manage the resource you dont need it as part of your PSR (i.e. no product inventory created for that resource)

[ShashankInamdar · Accepted solution]

Hi @Joshua Chen FX ,

Great question!

Understanding the dynamics between Customer Facing Services (CFS) and Resource Facing Services (RFS) in the context of TMF concepts is pivotal for grasping the balance between service abstraction and technical implementation.

CFS and RFS Relationship:
At its core, a CFS represents an abstraction at the service layer, agnostic of the underlying technology or vendor. Conversely, an RFS is specialized and technology-specific, offering a technical view of the service.

For instance, a 'Broadband Connection' CFS might be mapped to 'Fibre Access' or 'Wireless Access' RFS, reflecting the diverse technological implementations supporting the customer-facing broadband service.

Cases Where RFS May Not Be Needed:
There are scenarios where an RFS may not be necessary:

1. High-Level Business Service:
- In cases where the CFS represents a high-level business service without a direct need for technical implementation, an RFS may not be defined. For example, an insurance company offering a "Homeowners Insurance" CFS might handle risk assessment, policy management, and claims processing without a dedicated RFS model.

2. Services from External Parties:
- Services sourced from external parties may not have internal RFS models. Consider a travel agency providing a "Flight Booking" CFS, where the actual flight availability and booking process rely on external airline systems and resources.

3. Aggregated Services:
- Services combining multiple underlying services or resources might not have direct RFS representations but are virtual constructs aggregating various RFSs. Think of a telecom provider offering a "Home Entertainment Bundle" CFS, combining internet, TV, and streaming services.

RFS-Resource Construct:
Moving to the RFS-Resource construct, a Resource represents a physical or logical entity required to deliver the Resource Facing Service. For instance, a 'Fibre Access' RFS necessitates an 'ONT' (Optical Network Terminal) as a Resource.

Cases Where RFS Does Not Require a Resource:
There are instances when an RFS may not require a Resource:

1. Logical Grouping of Capabilities:
- An RFS might represent a logical grouping of capabilities without needing a direct mapping to Resources. For example, a "Security Monitoring" RFS could aggregate data from various security tools without owning the underlying infrastructure.

2. RFS Leveraging External Resources:
- An RFS might rely on Resources managed by external parties. Consider a "Data Analytics" RFS using cloud-based storage and compute resources without having direct control over them.

If you have more questions or wish to explore specific scenarios further, feel free to ask!

Regards

Shashank

[Joshua Chen FX]

@ShashankInamdar  I cannot say how much I appreciate your input/help!

can you elaborate on - not sure I understand:

. Cases Where RFS May Not Be Needed:
Aggregated Services:

•  Services combining multiple underlying services or resources might not have direct RFS representations but are virtual constructs aggregating various RFSs. Think of a telecom provider offering a "Home Entertainment Bundle" CFS, combining internet, TV, and streaming services."
  
  i

  
  if we change the above screenshot and make them CFS instead of PO/PS ==> do you mean that the ''parent'' CFS will not have a RFS, instead the relations with RFS are at the children CFS (broadband, video. home phone) 

[ShashankInamdar]

You do still the need PO/PS.

PS is representing the package of configurable features being sold to the customer.

PO is making the PS available to the market and has a price tag, contract term etc. associated with it.

In the example I quoted about 'Home Entertainment Bundle' CFS, I meant to imply this is a group/aggregated CFS which may have other children CFSS such as TV Service, Streaming Service.

And the "Home Entertainment Bundle," as a higher-level virtual construct, may not have a direct RFS representation. Instead, the individual components (TV, Internet, Streaming) may have their own RFS representations.

[Mahesh_Krishnan]

@ShashankInamdar your response was very insightful!! Thank you!

As I build out the model I find myself constantly thinking about the order decomposition as well, as each Specification creates an order task, except if you use a "Composed Of relationship". I am not sure if I am correct in thinking this way but I am evaluating if I really need an Order Task for a particular Resource, and if one is created what would a agent who is assigned to it really do. The way I am looking at the entire product model is that it facilitates order decomposition; that is it! Am I correct in thinking this way?