...
Title | Responsible | Status | Last discussed | Notes | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
1 | Shared Cassandra Database |
| Regarding
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
2 | Change PNF to use pnf-id as unique key |
| Potentially breaking change:
See also:
Questions:
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
3 | AAI-BBS for Dublin |
| Started collating proposed changes in wiki AAI-BBS Proposals for Dublin Release Added
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
4 | AAI REST API | THIRILOSHINI KRISHNAKUMAR |
| 3 | AAI REST API | THIRILOSHINI KRISHNAKUMAR |
|
The reason behind the question is that, I’ll have to get Nodes from SDNC (third party) and add it to AAI. When there are 100s of nodes, making more than 100 API calls individually to add the nodes becomes expensive.
If the bulk operation is not supported, Can you please help me understand if there is any specific reason for not supporting it ?
2. I added some p-interfaces as part of adding a pnf. Please find below a sample json that I used. I use POSTMAN for all REST operations. The API to add the PNF: PUT
The reason behind the question is that, I’ll have to get Nodes from SDNC (third party) and add it to AAI. When there are 100s of nodes, making more than 100 API calls individually to add the nodes becomes expensive.
If the bulk operation is not supported, Can you please help me understand if there is any specific reason for not supporting it ?
2. I added some p-interfaces as part of adding a pnf. Please find below a sample json that I used. I use POSTMAN for all REST operations. The API to add the PNF: PUT https://10.1.8.105:8443/aai/v14/network/pnfs/pnf/T310-NE4 INPUT: { "pnf-name": "T310-NE4", "in-maint": false, "p-interfaces": { "p-interface": [ { "interface-name": "otu-1/1/0/E1.1", "in-maint": false }, { "interface-name": "otu-1/2/0/E1.1", "in-maint": false } ] } }
The pnf addition was successful. When I try to fetch the pnf, I expected to see the p-interfaces as well under the pnf element as that’s how I see in the pnf model. But I had to make a separate GET API call to see the interfaces.
The API to get the pnf: GET OUTPUT: { "pnf-name": "T310-NE4", "in-maint": false, "p-interfaces": { "p-interface": [ { "interface-name": "otu-1/1/0/E1.1", "in-maint": false }, { "interface-name": "otu-1/2/0/E1.1", "in-maint": false } ] } } The pnf addition was successful. When I try to fetch the pnf, <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <pnf xmlns="http://org.onap.aai.inventory/v14"> <pnf-name>T310-NE4</pnf-name> <pnf-id>059b7753-0c29-3407-a855-11174a1c77bc</pnf-id> <in-maint>false</in-maint> <resource-version>1550012822891</resource-version> </pnf>
----- I expected to see the p-interfaces in the above output
The API to get the p-interfaces: GET https://10.1.8.105:8443/aai/v14/network/pnfs/pnf/T310-NE4/p-interfaces OUTPUT: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <p-interfaces xmlns="http://org.onap.aai.inventory/v14"> <p-interface><interface- name>otu- <pnf-id>059b7753-0c29-3407-a855-11174a1c77bc</pnf-id> <in-maint>false</in-maint> <resource-version>1550012822891</resource-version> </pnf>
----- I expected to see the p-interfaces in the above output
The API to get the p-interfaces: GET https://10.1.8.105:8443/aai/v14/network/pnfs/pnf/T310-NE4/p-interfaces OUTPUT: <?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?> <p-interfaces xmlns="http://org.onap.aai.inventory/v14"> <p-interface><interface-name>otu-1/2/0/E1.1</interface-name><resource-version>1550012823703</resource-version><in-maint>false</in-maint></p-interface> <p-interface><interface-name>otu-1/1/0/E1.1</interface-name><resource-version>1550012824476</resource-version><in-maint>false</in-maint></p-interface> </p-interfaces> 1/2/0/E1.1</interface-name><resource-version>1550012823703</resource-version><in-maint>false</in-maint></p-interface> <p-interface><interface-name>otu-1/1/0/E1.1</interface-name><resource-version>1550012824476</resource-version><in-maint>false</in-maint></p-interface> </p-interfaces>
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
54 | range query |
| 7th Feb 2019 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
65 | Image footprint reduction as part of CIA project |
| 7th Feb 2019 | Reduction in size is mostly onf aai-common image as that based on ubuntu. 2/7 - Move the base image to be a part of ONAP Build, maybe aai-common repo
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
67 | AAI Questions |
| 7th Feb 2019 | We are trying to bring in transport network into ONAP as part of CCVPN usecase. We have some questions on AAI for the same. - We are using a SDN controller which exposes TAPI Rest APIs. I'll have to map the TAPI model to ONAP AAI Model to add the topology to AAI. We are planning to use a mediation which does the model mapping and push the topology to AAI. Is this approach valid or Is there any other standard approach of doing it ? Is there any example that i can refer to where somebody has done mapping from one model to AAI model. - Are there any examples of AAI Rest API to add/delete/update nodes,its interfaces and links to and from AAI inventory that i can refer to ? - The AAI model, may i know if it follows any standards ? - In the model under physical link and logical link, i do not see any endpoint information. May i know how the links are formed when it doesnt know what the endpoints are - We have a onap cluster running Beijing version. Is there any standard approach of upgrading it to Casablanca. Casablanca RESTAPI Documentation 2019-02-06 AAI Meeting Notes Amit Sinha discussed an approach for upgrading version | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
78 | Schema-service roadmap |
| 31th Jan 2019 | The schema-service is ready. Currently it provides file-sharing capabilities in terms of schema/edgerule files. In order for GraphGraph to take advantage of the schema parsing/processing in schema-service additional abstractions have to be implemented on top of the crude file2string functionality currently in schema-service. Open question:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
89 | New AAF Certificates at startup | Jimmy Forsyth |
| 24th Jan 2019 | AAF will generate certificates to the be used by the containers at startup; AAI services should use the run-time generated certs instead of the ones that are in the repos or oom charts. In dublin the services will mount a volume with certificates. This is on the roadmap for Dublin as a feature.
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
910 | AAI Backup and Restore |
| 10th Jan 2019 | Brian Freeman asked on Re: Backup and Restore Solution: ONAP-OOM : what would be the approach to backup an entire ONAP instance particualarly SDC, AAI, SDNC data ? would it be a script with all the references to the helm deploy releases or something that does a helm list and then for each entry does the ark backup ? What is the AAI strategy for backup and restore? What is the overall ONAP strategy for backup and restore? Should it be unified with the data migration strategy as per "Hbase to Cassandra migration" on 2018-11-14 AAI Meeting Notes?
Jimmy didn't directly raise the topic but there was movement - Keong Lim asked "if istio service mesh is a no-go, is there a replacement for secure onap communications? is backup/restore/upgradability included in s3p?" Michael O'Brien replied that a reference tool set for backup and restore was introduced in Casablanca: Backup and Restore Solution: ONAP-OOM Mike Elliott said he would look at Brian's question, AAI will provide support as needed. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1011 | aai-cassandra performance issues | Keong Lim |
| 10th Jan 2019 | Michael O'Brien has documented performance issues in aai-cassandra:
hector has discovered that the stress test jar (liveness probe?) in aai-cassandra is hammering the cpu/ram/hd on the vm that aai is on - this breaks the etcd cluster (not the latency/network issues we suspected that may cause pod rescheduling) Is there something that should be tweaked in AAI config? Or documentation on the recommended setup to run the VM? I'll come to the next AAI meet (conflicts with pomba meet) -
LOG Meeting Minutes 2019-01-15
On-hold for 3 weeks (end of January) - if until then no performance issues reported agenda item will be closed | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1112 | get notified of AAI Cassandra issues automatically |
| 24th Jan 2019 | Mike Elliott wrote in OOM Meeting Notes - 2018-12-5 f. AAI team wanted to get notified of AAI Cassandra issues automatically Keep an eye out for new issues! Question: Keong Lim should this be part of a larger A&AI monitoring and failure prevention initiative | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1213 | Purpose of fields in AAI |
| Dénes Németh wrote in
In think it would be good to answer what is the meaning of the field (collection of PEMs of the CA xor URL) Questions: 1. Is AAI intended to strictly prescribe how the fields are used and what contents are in the values? Even if (1) is true, AAI is not really in any position to enforce how clients use the data, so really (2) is always true and we need to consult the original producers of the data and the ultimate consumers of the data to document their intended meanings. How do we push to have documentation on the purpose and meaning of the fields in AAI? Where does all this documentation go? Should the documentation be backed up by validation code? See also discussion about AAI in 2018-11-28 ExtAPI Meeting notes 29th Nov: Started on new wiki page AAI Schema Producer-Consumer Pairings | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1314 | Copyright license header restricted to 1 company |
| 24th Jan 2019 | In the copyright /** * ============LICENSE_START======================================================= * org.onap.aai * ================================================================================ * Copyright © 2017-2018 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights reserved. If there is a company other than AT&T the build fails saying the license header is wrong New cases found in gerrit reviews on aai/traversal: Keong Lim to try a license change in aai/resources to see if it also fails the same verify job. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1514 | Return codes and messages for WS |
| Is there a guide for the description of the error message and the error codes? How are new error states (message + code) added? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1516 | OOM Artifacts |
| Some of our top level OOM deployment artifacts are not unique (i.e. don’t take namespace into account as all other deployables), is that intentional? | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1617 | AAI test data bootstrap | Keong Lim |
| Looking at AAI usage in OOF - HPA guide for integration testing by Dileep Ranganathan, wondering whether there is a better way to bootstrap AAI test data?
Similarly, Scott Seabolt and J Armstrong / Joss Armstrong wrote for APPC Sample A&AI Data Setup for vLB/vDNS for APPC Consumption and Script to load vLB into AAI:
Similarly:
Related
One for VIM: How-To: Register a VIM/Cloud Instance to ONAP and
Potential issues:
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1718 | AAI too slow for OOF/HAS | Keong Lim |
| Under OOF Homing and Allocation Service (HAS) section, Dileep Ranganathan wrote about Project Specific enhancements:
See also
Similarly to the "AAI too slow for Holmes" item below, this introduction of extra caching of AAI data is a worrisome development and sad indictment of the performance of the system architecture. What can we do about this? Would the AAI Cacher
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
1819 | MultiCloud usage of AAI for HPA telemetry/time-series data to OOF |
| Bin Yang and Lianhao Lu wrote in
HPA telemetry data collection and make it persistent in A&AI, from which OOF can leverage during its decision making process.and
and The reason why we propose here is that VES mechanism doesn't store the telemetry data into A&AI. And OOF now can only get those kind of data from A&AI. Some concerns:
| 19 | AAI-BBS for Dublin |
|
and The reason why we propose here is that VES mechanism doesn't store the telemetry data into A&AI. And OOF now can only get those kind of data from A&AI. Some concerns:
| Is it already covered by spike? If so, how to consume the events? If not, how to make AAI publish new events to DMaaP?||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
20 | Orchestration Scenarios for VNFs |
| Comments on Orchestration Scenarios related to AAI: Viswanath Kumar Skand Priya / Viswanath KSP said:
and Fernando Oliveira replied: For the first question: I think that A&AI needs to maintain the VNF instance ↔ VNFM instance and the NS instance ↔ NFVO instance relationship for subsequent life cycle operations, i.e. a scale or heal operation. The path would be something like Event (VNF Instance, Busy) → DCAE (policy for VNF instance) → Policy Evaluation (VNF instance, Scale-out) → SO (VNF instance, Scale-out) → A&AI (find VNFM instance for the VNF instance) → SO (VNF instance, VNFM instance, Scale-out) → SOL003 Adapter (VNFM instance, VNF instance, Scale-out) → VNFM instance (VNF Instance, Scale-out). As I understand, ESR has "esr-vnfm-list", which has an "esr-vnfm", which has "esr-system-info-list", which has "esr-system-info", which has a "relationship-list" that can contain relationships to "generic-vnf" and other AAI objects. The "generic-vnf" object also contains "self-link", "ipv4OamAddress", "ipv4OamGatewayAddress", etc, which links the AAI object back to its "source-of-truth" external-system. Is there some new data, new schema or new API that is required on top of this? Fernando Oliveira; Apologies for my lack of knowledge, but a few comments:
Bo Lv can comment more on the current ESR capabilities, but I believe there are only 3 kinds of systems so far: EMS, VNFM and third-party SDNC. ESR could be extended to handle VNFO as another kind of system. Fernando Oliveira : I created JIRA stories:
for various parts of the scenario. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
21 | Modeling team R4 discussion, including extra AAI attributes in a model-driven way |
| 15th Nov 2018 | Modelling team having Service Instance thoughts by Chesla Wechsler, which will affect AAI schema. Also referred from comments on ONAP R4+ Service Modeling Discussion Calls 9)“vhn-portal-url”?“Bandwidth”,"QoS","SLA",etc, attribtutes that not all the services need but still need to be stored in certain service instance: stored as a schemaless field on the service-instance vertex (Chesla will follow up) (my concerns: according to the call, is that ok if we set a "global-type of service" and a "customized-type of service", then mapped it with internal descriptor, and A&AI's model only stores global type in service instance's schema, but stores the customer-faced attributes of service in a schemaless way? Chesla Wechsler Kevin Scaggs Andy Mayer) See also Modeling 2018-11-13 The service-instance already uses a "metadata" relationship, which can store an arbitrary list of key-value pairs, but perhaps AAI should extend the use of the "properties" element, which is also an arbitrary list of name-value pairs or the "extra-properties" element, which is also an arbitrary list of name-value pairs. 15th Nov: Having seen Chesla's presentation, it should be called "Model-driven schema" rather than "schemaless" behaviour, since the idea is that the changes are controlled by SDC modelling. Seems aligned to the eventual goal in AAI Schema Service Use Case Proposals and AAI Schema Service. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
22 | AAI too slow for Holmes |
| 1st Nov 2018 | Guangrong Fu mentioned AAI in Baseline Measurements based on Testing Results:
The problem for caching is how to know when to update the cached data. Even though the access time may be fast for Holmes, the risk is using out-of-date data, so the correlations will be wrong anyway. Also, duplicating the AAI data outside of AAI is probably a bad architectural decision. Making AAI faster for these use cases would be better. Has there been a performance analysis of where the time is spent? Could it help to use ElasticSearch (e.g. as in sparky)? Should Holmes have a batch interface to get more AAI data in fewer calls? Or a better correlation API that results in fewer calls? 31st Oct: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/topic/27805753 1st Nov:
Would the AAI Cacher
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
23 | 2 Types of logging in A&AI WS |
| 1st Nov 2018 | There are 2 types of logging in the services
Is that correct? Shouldn't there be just 1 type? 1st Nov: After Casablanca release investigate logging guidelines and figure out what library to use in order to unify logging within A&AI 26th Nov: See also ONAP Application Logging Specification - Post Dublin 29th Nov: how does this fit with
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
24 | Disable unused web services (see also Helm chart requested values) |
| 20th Dec 2018 | Could we disable unused (i.e. not integrated) A&AI web services, so that the deployment is faster and the resource footprint is smaller? e.g. Champ (any other ws?) Motivation: Decrease the resource footprint for A&AI (ONAP) deployments Idea: we could support 2 different deployments 1. full (normal) deployment and 2. barebones deployment. The point of the "barebone" deployment would be to deploy only the essential services necessary for proper functioning of A&AI (leaving out services like cacher, sparky, graphadmin, having 1 cassandra node instead of 3 or 5 etc). In order to reduce hardware/cloud costs (mainly the memory footprint) it could be beneficial to support a minimalistic A&AI deployment. 1st Nov: Venkata Harish Kajur and Pavel Paroulek - investigate how to disable/enable charts in A&AI so we can create a core group of pods which handle the use-cases and than extended group will all the services. Consider a group of unused/unintegrated services (like Champ). Consider other possible groups (like GUI?)
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
25 | AAI Champ |
| 1st Nov 2018 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
26 | AAI HAProxy and 2-way-TLS |
| 29th Nov | Technical solution to either decommission the proxy or make design changes to AAF to enable client side certificates. After VF2F we will know if this is a requirement in Dublin. We discuss after this date. question raised: MSB - would client authentication be supported?
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
27 | named-query replacements | James Forsyth |
| 31th Jan 2019 |
Need to replace custom queries currently in use by these systems (and others?) in Dublin toward the retirement of the named-query API in Dublin
Christopher Shang is leading the effort to deprecate named queries in e-Comp. Next steps: get data from teams in order to prepare for testing the change from named queries to custom queries. See also AAI Named Queries
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
28 |
...