Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  1. achieve the Casablanca S3P requirement for Casablanca in the limits the available resources permit.
  2. making the support of new micro-service generic(no code development needed to support new mS)
    by implementing policy-models concept (together with DCAE-DS/SDC, Policy-engine).
ScopePriorityCommitter LeadCommitter LeadResources CommittedEpic Dependencies 
 CLAMP Architecture high Gervais-Martial Ngueko AT&T, Nokia

 

  

Jira
serverONAP JIRA
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
keyCLAMP-260

 Policy, SDC 
      
S3P  high Gervais-Martial Ngueko  Nokia

 

 

Jira

 

server

Use Cases

ONAP JIRA
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
keyCLAMP-258

Jira
serverONAP JIRA
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
keyCLAMP-265

 



Use Cases

The existing use The existing use cases are still going to be supported and additional use cases will be supported for the Casablanca Release (as defined by the Control loop sub committee: auto-scale out use case), BBS use case is a stretch goal depending on resources committed by interested companies)

Minimum Viable ProductMinimum Viable Product

The minimum viable product that we aim to reach within R4 is to have the CLAMP application Casablanca(R3) features at least running with, the new policy-model and blueprint template, as artifact exchanged between CLAMP and DCAE-D.

...

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.

see also Platform Maturity Requirements (S3P).

  • Reach CII passing badge, increasing test coverage as remaining item
  • AAF CADI integration
  • Infrastructure setup for js test coverage
AreaActual levelTargeted level for current releaseHow, EvidencesComments
Performance0

0

(given CLAMP is design time there is no point to adhere to L2 requirement) 

Run performance basic test, depends on performance criteria availability for level 1 - not able to commit to more than what was done on Beijing
  • Level 0: no performance testing done
  • Level 1:
  • 0 -- none
  • 1 – baseline performance criteria identified and measured
  • 2 & 3 – performance improvement plans created & implemented
  • measured  (such as response time, transaction/message rate, latency, footprint, etc. to be defined on per component)
  • Level 2: performance improvement plan created 
  • Level 3: performance improvement plan implemented for 1 release (improvement measured for equivalent functionality & equivalent hardware)

minimum level for Dublin is 0 except for Control Loop projects. 


see Performance levels

Stability112

Participate to Stability runs Level 1

Jira
serverONAP JIRA
columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
keyCLAMP-100276


Integration Team is responsible to run the platform test to prove level 2.

  • Level 0: none beyond release requirements
  • Level 1: 72 hour component-level soak test (random test transactions with 80% code coverage; steady load)
  • Level 2: 72 hour platform-level soak test (random test transactions with 80% code coverage; steady load)
  • Level 3: track record over 6 months of reduced defect rate

minimum level for Dublin:2 

see Stability levels

  • 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

    Resiliency1

    1

    (given CLAMP is design time there is no point to adhere to L2 requirement) 

    Jira
    serverONAP JIRA
    Jira
    serverONAP JIRA
    serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
    keyCLAMP-83

    • Level 0 – none: no redundancy
    • Level 1 : support manual failure and recovery (< detection & rerouting or recovery within a single site; tested to complete in 30 minutes)
    • Level 2 : support automated detection and recovery (single site)
    • 3 – automated detection and recovery (geo redundancy)
    Security11
    • 0 – none
    • 1 – CII Passing badge + 50% Test Coverage, including no critical and high known vulnerabilities>60 days old
    • 2 – CII Silver badge; internal/external communication encrypted; role-based access control and authorization for all calls based on CADI
    • 3 – CII Gold
    Scalability11

    Level 1 single site horizontal scaling

    Jira
    serverONAP JIRA
    serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
    keyCLAMP-102

    • 0 – no ability to scale
    • 1 – single site horizontal scaling
    • 2 – geographic scaling
    • 3 – scaling across multiple ONAP instances
    • failure detection & rerouting 
      • within a single geographic site
      • stateless components: establish baseline measure of failed requests for a component failure within a site 
      • stateful components: establish baseline of data loss for a component failure within a site
    • Level 3: support automated failover detection & rerouting 

      • across multiple sites 

      • stateless components 

        • improve on # of failed requests for component failure within a site 

        • establish baseline for failed requests for site failure 

      • stateful components 

        • improve on data loss metrics for component failure within a site 

        • establish baseline for data loss for site failure


    Minimum Levels (Dublin)

    • Runtime Projects: Level 2 (stretch goal Level 3)
      • NOTE: For Dublin, the building blocks will be put in place for Level 3 geo-redundancy, and a few projects will pilot it
    • All other Projects: Level 1 (stretch goal Level 2)

    see Resiliency Levels 

     

    Security11

    same as in Casablanca, not enough resource to allocate to this effort.



    see Security Levels

    Scalability11

    Level 1 single site horizontal scaling

    Jira
    serverONAP JIRA
    serverId425b2b0a-557c-3c0c-b515-579789cceedb
    keyCLAMP-102

    • Level 0: no ability to scale
    • Level 1: supports single site horizontal scale out and scale in, independent of other components
    • Level 2: supports geographic scaling, independent of other components
    • Level 3: support scaling (interoperability) across multiple ONAP instances

    Minimum Levels (Dublin)

    • Runtime Projects: Level 1 
      • NOTE: For Dublin, the building blocks will be put in place for Level 2 geographic scaling, and a few projects will pilot it
    • All other Projects: Level 0 

    see Scalability levels 

    Manageability1

    1

    (2, if CLAMP can get more resource from the community)


    • Level 1:
      • All ONAP components will use a single logging system.
      • Instantiation of a simple ONAP system should be accomplished in <1 hour with a minimal footprint
    • Level 2:
      • A component can be independently upgraded without impacting operation interacting components
      • Component configuration to be externalized in a common fashion across ONAP projects
      • All application logging to adhere to ONAP Application Logging Specification v1.2
      • Implement guidelines for a minimal container footprint
    • Level 3
      • Transaction tracing across components

    Minimum Levels (Dublin)

    • All Projects: Level 2
      • New projects should adhere to v1.2
      • Existing projects have stretch goal for v1.2
    • Stretch Goal: Level 3 
    • Note: some work will be done in Dublin to test/prep for a release upgrade strategy

    see Manageability Levels 

    UsabilityManageability1

    1

    (2,  if if CLAMP can get more resource from the community)

    • 1 – single logging system across components; instantiation in < 1 hour
    • 2 – ability to upgrade a single component; tracing across components; externalized configuration management
      ; All application logging to adhere to
      ONAP Application Logging Specification v1.2

    • 3 - Transaction tracing across components

    CLAMP is not anticipating new API at this point, so we are technically compliant with API CVS at this point

    • Level 1:

        • User guide created
        • Deployment documentation
        • API documentation
        • Adherence to coding guidelines
    • Level 2:
    • Level 3
        • Consistent UI across ONAP projects
        • Usability testing conducted
        • API Documentation
    • Level 4
        • API Documentation
          • All API’s for a given project
    Usability1

    1

    (2, if CLAMP can get more resource from the community)

    CLAMP is not anticipating new API at this point, so we are technically compliant with API CVS at this point

    • 1 – user guide; deployment documentation; API documentation
    • 2 – API documentation; usability testing; tutorial documentation;All new API’s and
          •  and Documentation Guidelines
      ; All existing APIs must be documented in Swagger 2.0
    • 3 - UI consistency; usability testing; API Documentation

      (changed and external APIs follow policy)

      Minimum Levels (Dublin)

      • All Projects: Level 2
      • Stretch Goal: External APIs also follow the Versioning Strategy


    • see Usability Levels

      4 - API Documentation (all follow policy)

       


    API Incoming Dependencies

    ...

    Risk identifiedMitigation PlanContingency Plan
    new policy api(and contents) for CRUD operations on policies not defined yet use old policy API

    create config. policy the old("R3 release") way

    blueprint generated by DCAE-D (SDC) might not be compatible with DCAEkeep current manual blueprint onboarding in SDC (as VFI).manually created blueprint with correct format manually on boarded in SDC and distributed to CLAMP and DCAE. 
    new DCAE API to get status of µS not yet defined   use current DCAE api monitor only µS created by CLAMP 

    Resources

    Link toward the Resources Committed to the Release centralized page.

    Release Milestone

    ...