| Area | Actual Level | Targeted Level for current Release | How, Evidences | Comments |
|---|
| Performance | 1 | 2 (Stretch Target may not reach) | AAF audit trails all transactions. With Dublin, we want to add additional Performance testing in ONAP, not just originating company. | - 0 -- none
- 1 – baseline performance criteria identified and measured
- 2 & 3 – performance improvement plans created & implemented
|
| Stability | 2 | 3 | AAF has clean record of Uptime in initial Company. Only need to finish work to have this happen in K8S | - 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
|
| Resiliency | 2 | 3 | See AAF Locator | - 0 – none
- 1 – manual failure and recovery (< 30 minutes)
- 2 – automated detection and recovery (single site)
- 3 – automated detection and recovery (geo redundancy)
|
| Security | 2 | 2 | https://bestpractices.coreinfrastructure.org/en/projects/2303 | - 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
|
| Scalability | 2 | 3 | AAF Locator changes allows for High Scale. Will be bringing to Architecture. | - 0 – no ability to scale
- 1 – single site horizontal scaling
- 2 – geographic scaling
- 3 – scaling across multiple ONAP instances
|
| ManageabilityNA | 1 | 1 | It is possible that in doing other OOM integration, we'll improve this as a matter of course. | - 1 – single logging system across components; instantiation in < 1 hour
- 2 – ability to upgrade a single component; tracing across components; externalized configuration management
|
| Usability | 1 | 2 (Stretch, depends on def of Usability Testing) | https://docs.onap.org/en/casablanca/guides/onap-provider/index.html | - 1 – user guide; deployment documentation; API documentation
- 2 – UI consistency; usability testing; tutorial documentation
|
