Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

WIP: DRAFT PROPOSAL FOR COMMENTS

The content of this template is expected to be fill out for M1 Release Planning Milestone.

follow

Platform Maturity Requirements (aka Carrier Grade)

fill Beijing Release Platform Maturity

Info

Use the "Copy" and "Move" options (available under the ..., top right of this page) to duplicate this template into your project wiki.
Use the Wiki to document the release plan. Don't provide PowerPoint.
Use as much diagrams and flow charts as you need, directly in the wiki, to convey your message.


Overview

Project NameEnter the name of the project
Target Release NameBeijing
Project Lifecycle StateIncubation
Participating Company Amdocs, AT&T, Bell

Scope

What is this release trying to address?

Provide an ELK implementation for ONAP as described on https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/debug-application-cluster/logging-elasticsearch-kibana/

LOG-89 - Getting issue details... STATUS

LOG-95 - Getting issue details... STATUS

Use Cases

Use Case: Residential Broadband vCPE (Approved)

Use Case: vFW/vDNS (Approved)

Use Case: VoLTE(approved)

Minimum Viable Product

The MVP for Amsterdam will:

    • Logging RI as a demo/reference for teams not currently running filebeat containers in their pods 
      Currently the following are using filebeat already (aai, appc, so, policy, portal, sdc, sdnc, vid)
    • Logging AOP based library for use by all component teams as a spring shared jar.
    • Emit standardized, machine-readable logging output, correlated by transaction ID.
    • Allow dynamic reconfiguration of logging providers. 
    • Provide a reference configuration for Elastic Stack, automatically deployed by Kubernetes and the ONAP Operations Manager.
    • Provide reference configurations for shipping and indexing of ONAP logs to the ELK stack via filebeat.
    • Provide standard Kibana dashboards for transaction traceability and general lucene spec log searches

Functionalities

Epics

Key Summary T Created Updated Due Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution
Loading...
Refresh

Stories

Key Summary T Created Updated Due Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution
Loading...
Refresh

Longer term roadmap

Release Deliverables

Indicate the outcome (Executable, Source Code, Library, API description, Tool, Documentation, Release Note...) of this release.

Deliverable Name

Deliverable Description

Revised logging guidelinesUpdates to What's New - ONAP Application Logging Guidelines reflecting new conventions and requirements.
Logging provider configuration defaultsRegularized configuration locations, simplifying deployment and customization.
Logging provider output defaultsRegularized output locations, simplifying deployment and customization, and the shipping and indexing of logs.
Logging provider migrationOptional standardization of logger providers, including upgrading from EOL Log4j 1.X.
Updated logging provider configuration(s)Updated, standardized configurations for all logging providers and ONAP components - specific to OOM in the OOM repo.
Filebeat configurationReference configuration for Elastic Stack Filebeat shipping.
Logstash configurationReference configuration for Elastic Stack Logstash indexing.
Elasticsearch configurationReference configuration for Elastic Stack Elasticsearch.
Kibana configurationReference configuration for Elastic Stack's Kibana Discover UI.
Elastic Stack deploymentAutomated OOM deployment of an Elastic Stack reference configuration, providing ONAP with an OOTB analytics platform.
DocumentationOther documentation supporting analytics configuration.

Sub-Components

none

Architecture

High level architecture diagram

Filebeat agent microservice per component feeds logs via emptyDir persistent volumes from each component docker container to the ELK stack pod via the logstash container.  These high level ELK paths are overlayed on a the reference vFirewall L4 use case of ONAP.


We fit in the overall architecture of ONAP as an OOM Kubernetes pod of 3 containers (ELK) and a per/microservice logstash container above - and below 

Logging Architecture#OOMDeployment

Platform Maturity

Refering to CII Badging Security Program and Platform Maturity Requirements, fill out the table below by indicating the actual level , the targeted level for the current release and the evidences on how you plan to achieve the targeted level.

AreaActual LevelTargeted Level for current ReleaseHow, EvidencesComments
Performance00
  • 0 -- none
  • 1 – baseline performance criteria identified and measured
  • 2 & 3 – performance improvement plans created & implemented
Stability11

OOM system up on cd.onap.info

for > 72 hours at ~10 tx/sec

LOG-144 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  • 0 – none
  • 1 – 72 hours component level soak w/random transactions
  • 2 – 72 hours platform level soak w/random transactions
  • 3 – 6 months track record of reduced defect rate
Resiliency2 (**)2 (**)
  • 0 – none
  • 1 – manual failure and recovery (< 30 minutes)
  • 2 – automated detection and recovery (single site)
  • 3 – automated detection and recovery (geo redundancy)
Security00
  • 0 – none
  • 1 – CII Passing badge + 50% Test Coverage
  • 2 – CII Silver badge; internal communication encrypted; role-based access control and authorization for all calls
  • 3 – CII Gold
Scalability11
  • 0 – no ability to scale
  • 1 – single site horizontal scaling
  • 2 – geographic scaling
  • 3 – scaling across multiple ONAP instances
Manageability11
  • 1 – single logging system across components; instantiation in < 1 hour
  • 2 – ability to upgrade a single component; tracing across components; externalized configuration management
Usability01
  • 1 – user guide; deployment documentation; API documentation
  • 2 – UI consistency; usability testing; tutorial documentation

** Standard OOB OOM Kubernetes resilience/stability

  • API Incoming Dependencies

List the API this project is expecting from other projects.
Prior to Release Planning review, Team Leads must agreed on the date by which the API will be fully defined. The API Delivery date must not be later than the release API Freeze date.

Prior to the delivery date, it is a good practice to organize an API review with the API consumers.

API NameAPI DescriptionAPI Definition DateAPI Delivery dateAPI Definition link (i.e.swagger)
To fill outHigh level description of the APIDate for which the API is reviewed and agreedTo fill outLink toward the detailed API description
  • API Outgoing Dependencies

API this project is delivering to other projects.

API NameAPI DescriptionAPI Definition DateAPI Delivery dateAPI Definition link (i.e.swagger)
EELFAT&T EELF20170201Beijing Relase
  • Third Party Products Dependencies

Third Party Products mean products that are mandatory to provide services for your components. Development of new functionality in third party product may or not be expected.
List the Third Party Products (OpenStack, ODL, RabbitMQ, ElasticSearch,Crystal Reports, ...).

NameDescriptionVersion
JAX-RSJava API for Restfull Service2.0

In case there are specific dependencies  (Centos 7 vs Ubuntu 16. Etc.) list them as well.

  • Testing and Integration Plans

Unit testing is via each developer deploying their change locally on their OOM deployment

Integration CD testing hourly via the following framework exercises the ELK stack pods in OOM

http://jenkins.onap.info/job/oom-cd/

reported on http://kibana.onap.info:5601/app/kibana

Work to formalize the CI/CD framework is being done via  OOM-500 - Getting issue details... STATUS

  • Gaps

This section is used to document a limitation on a functionality or platform support. We are currently aware of this limitation and it will be delivered in a future Release.
List identified release gaps (if any), and its impact.

Gaps identifiedImpact
To fill outTo fill out
  • Known Defects and Issues

Provide a link toward the list of all known project bugs.

Key Summary T Created Updated Due Assignee Reporter P Status Resolution
Loading...
Refresh

  • Risks

List the risks identified for this release along with the plan to prevent the risk to occur (mitigation) and the plan of action in the case the risk would materialized (contingency).

Risk identifiedMitigation PlanContingency Plan
To fill outTo fill outTo fill out
  • Resources

Fill out the Resources Committed to the Release centralized page.

  • Release Milestone

The milestones are defined at the Release Level and all the supporting project agreed to comply with these dates.

  • Team Internal Milestone

This section is optional and may be used to document internal milestones within a project team or multiple project teams. For instance, in the case the team has made agreement with other team to deliver some artifacts on a certain date that are not in the release milestone, it is erecommended to provide these agreements and dates in this section.

It is not expected to have a detailed project plan.

DateProjectDeliverable
To fill outTo fill outTo fill out
  • Documentation, Training

  • Contributions: Logging Guidelines, the wiki and read-the-docs content.
  • Highlight the team contributions to the overall Release Documentation and training asset
  • High level list of documentation, training and tutorials necessary to understand the release capabilities, configuration and operation.
  • Documentation includes items such as:
    • Installation instructions
    • Configuration instructions
    • Developer guide
    • End User guide
    • Admin guide
    • ...

Note

The Documentation project will provide the Documentation Tool Chain to edit, configure, store and publish all Documentation asset.


Other Information

  • Vendor Neutral

If this project is coming from an existing proprietary codebase, ensure that all proprietary trademarks, logos, product names, etc. have been removed. All ONAP deliverables must comply with this rule and be agnostic of any proprietary symbols.

  • Free and Open Source Software

FOSS activities are critical to the delivery of the whole ONAP initiative. The information may not be fully available at Release Planning, however to avoid late refactoring, it is critical to accomplish this task as early as possible.
List all third party Free and Open Source Software used within the release and provide License type (BSD, MIT, Apache, GNU GPL,... ).
In the case non Apache License are found inform immediately the TSC and the Release Manager and document your reasoning on why you believe we can use a non Apache version 2 license.

Each project must edit its project table available at Project FOSS.


Charter Compliance

The project team comply with the ONAP Charter.

.


  • No labels

1 Comment

  1. Reviewing from Jason's presentation TSC 20170104 - OSX - works fine

    We can follow the level 1 and desired level 2 as guidelines on our overall requirements for M1 in Beijing - which align with the work started in Amsterdam.

    TSC 2018-01-04

    Req 1 - single logging system across ONAP

    Req 2 - Transaction tracing across ONAP components

    Contributions

    • AT&T feedback on carrier grade requirements (Lee Breslau) Lee Breslau
      •Transaction tracing is more important than the ability to instantiate in less than an hour
      •Suggested revision of levels:
      •0 – All ONAP components use a single logging system
      •1 – Transaction tracing across components; Instantiation in less than 4 hours; Ability to  independently upgrade a single component
      •2 – Instantiation in less than 1 hour