Status

IMPLEMENTED

Submitter
Contributors
Proposed ReleaseCasblanca
JIRA Ticket(s)

VNFRQTS-245 - Getting issue details... STATUS

07-09-2018: This proposal has been modified to reflect further refinement in the approach to make the process simpler for authors.

For any contributors who would like to edit the VNF Requirements document.

The enhanced toolkit that we are proposing has been developed to help users edit the VNF Requirements documents in a quicker fashion, as well as adding more functional capabilities of the this project. Outlined in this document are the added tools we are proposing:

Current Process

  1. All Requirements manually maintained within RST files.

    1. For example:
      **Resource Description**
      -------------------------
      * R-77707 The VNF provider **MUST** include a Manifest File that contains a list of all the components in the VNF package.
      * R-66070 The VNF Package **MUST** include VNF Identification Data to uniquely identify the resource for a given VNF provider. The identification data must include: an identifier for the VNF, the name of the VNF as was given by the VNF provider, VNF description, VNF provider, and version.
      * R-69565 The VNF Package **MUST** include documentation describing VNF Management APIs. The document must include information and tools for:

  2. No additional information about individual requirements is maintained.

    1. For example:
      1. Release
      2. Testable
      3. etc.

  3. Requirements must be manually updated in multiple locations within the RST files.

    1. Requirements must be managed within the proper Chapter and Section, AS WELL AS within the Appendix.

Proposed Process

Objectives

This proposal aims to address the following objectives:

  • Associate standard, structured metadata with each requirement to aid in a variety of use cases such as dependency tracking, searching, filtering, and reporting.
  • Export requirements in a machine-readable format for use by other projects such as the VNF Validation Project.
  • Generate different formats and outputs without duplicating requirement content (ex: appendices, tables, CSV files, etc.)
  • Provide traceability within the document between requirements, test cases, and other items within the documents.

Approach

Requirements will still be maintained in the reStructuredText file, but they will be shifted to structured directives using the sphinxcontrib-needs extension.  This extension provides a way to meet each of the needs above.

Here is an example of a requirement after the conversion:

Requirement Example
.. req::
	:id: R-01334
	:keyword: MUST
	:target: VNF
	:links_incoming: R-01335


	The VNF **MUST** conform to the NETCONF RFC 5717, Partial Lock Remote Procedure Call


These requirement definitions can be processed by the sphinxcontrib-needs extension and used in a variety of ways.

  • Summary tables can be created via a needtable directive which provides a number of capabilities such as:
    • Export to a variety of formats such as CSV, Excel, and PDF
    • Filtering
    • Sorting
  • All requirements can be exported as JSON file for consumption by other projects.
  • By default metadata is hidden in the HTML document, but can easily be expanded to allow readers to learn more about the requirement.

Metadata Standards

The following table outlines the proposed standard metadata elements that will be associated with the requirements. This list may change over time.

Field Name

Required

vs. Optional

Data TypeValid Values/FormatNotes
targetRequiredString

VNF, VNFC, VNF PROVIDER, VNF HEAT ORCHESTRATION TEMPLATE,

VNF PACKAGE, PNF, XNF

The component to which the requirement applies.
keywordRequiredStringMUST, MUST NOT, SHOULD, SHOULD NOT, MAYThe RFC 2119 keyword for the requirement
introducedOptionalStringlower case release name (ex: bejing, casablanca)The release the requirement was initially introduced
updatedOptionalStringlower case release nameThe release the requirement was last modified
impactsOptionalList of StringComma separated list of ONAP components (ex: so, sdc)The various ONAP components that need to be aware of any changes to the requirement
validation_modeOptionalStringstatic, stand_alone, in_service

How the requirement is validated:

static - validated by statically inspecting the VNF package data

stand_alone - validated by running tests against the VNF itself

in_service - validated in the context of a full or partial ONAP deployment

validated_byOptionalList of String

Comma separated list:

vvp, vnfsdk, sdc

Projects that implement validations of this requirement.
test_caseOptionalRST Link
Link to source file that implement the test case
notesOptionalStringFree form textShort notes about the requirement





test_parse_yaml
  • No labels

5 Comments

  1. the v. "defined keyword" metadata field should be changed to "RFC2119 keyword" or similar.

    the I. "description" metadata field should have a length constraint of one sentence.

    1. Hey Steven! I updated the "defined keyword" metadata to "RFC2119 Keyword", but for the "description" field, when you say one sentence, do you mean one line?

      Because if you look at the example above for R-66070 under the Current Process Flow section, you can see there are requirements with multiple sentences.

      1. The discussion under VNFRQTS Requirement Format discussion request requirements to be formatted as single sentences.

        if we have multiple sentence requirements, then  we should raise the bug reports to fix these.

  2. Should 'target' include PNF as well, since it currently includes VNF and XNF? Does VNF Package imply the TOSCA Template?

  3. I don't have an issue with adding PNF to target. At this point we only have some general PNF guidelines (not specific PNF requirements), but we can add it for future use if needed.

    And, yes - the VNF Package would refer to the TOSCA onboarding package unless Steven Wright has a different interpretation.