Proposal of IpFlowDescription to allow asymmetric QoS flows and (re)introduce protocol definitions

[hdamker]

@emil-cheung proposed in PR #37 to introduce more detailed flow descriptions with an array of flowdescriptions of IpFlowDescriptions objects. It addresses the protocolIn/protocolOut parameter design issue (#32) and would allow asymmetric QoS flows (#36). Going forward it will also allow multiple flow descriptions as discussed in #13.

The PR wasn't merged as the proposed updated version of the simple QoD API (v0.8.0) #43 has solved issue #32 by omitting the parameters protocolIn and protocolOut, combined the previous two QoD APIs in one, and introduced other changes which require to rebase the proposed changes.

This issue is to preserve the proposal. Proposed YAML:
qos-stable-latency.yaml.txt

flowDescriptions within CreateSession schema:

flowDescriptions:
    type: array
    items:
      $ref: '#/components/schemas/IpFlowDescription'
    minItems: 1
    maxItems: 2

IpFlowDescription:
      type: object
      required:
        - direction
        - protocol
        - ueAddr
        - uePorts
        - remoteAddr
        - remotePorts        
      properties:
        direction:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/Direction'
        protocol:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/Protocol'
        ueAddr:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/Ipv4Addr'
        uePorts:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/PortsSpec'
        remoteAddr:
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/Ipv4Addr'
        remotePorts: 
          $ref: '#/components/schemas/PortsSpec'

[hdamker]

As discussed in https://github.com/camaraproject/QualityOnDemand/blob/main/documentation/MeetingMinutes/MOM-2022-09-23.md the proposed way forward is to first implement the "simple" API as proposed with v0.8.0 in #43 and then add flowdescriptions later. Added label "backlog".

[hdamker]

MOM-2023-12-01:

• Issue to be replaced with new issue to rework the flow definition parameters in general (devicePort, applicationServerPort) and potentially add further options, e.g. DSCP markings (see Add support for DSCP markings for QoD sessions #173)
• Action Point: create new issue, close Proposal of IpFlowDescription to allow asymmetric QoS flows and (re)introduce protocol definitions #51