Hi John Let’s recap what was discussed and agreed as a team: * For Amsterdam release, Kubernetes is the first OOM technical implementation to be created. This is the seed code available and what the team agreed to work on * The cloudily implementation has not been demoed yet and no seed code available. It was agreed by the team that cloudily would be a stretch target.
I want to make sure we align to what the OOM team has agreed to deliver. Comments? On Jul 25, 2017, at 6:39 PM, NG, JOHN <jn1...@att.com<mailto:jn1...@att.com>> wrote: Huabing, Ok, let’s focus on Consul integration for the Amsterdam release … - In Day 0 OOM instantiation, Cloudify is the first OOM module to be created. - Cloudify creates Consul as the next OOM module. Cloudify registers itself in Consul. - Cloudify then creates the rest of the OOM modules (Postgres, API Handler, Dashboard), and registers each module in Consul. And Consul starts performing health checks against them. - OOM instantiation is now complete. - OOM deploys MSB as one of the first ONAP components. OOM provides/configures MSB with the location of the Consul API for access and discovery. - OOM then continues to deploy the rest of the ONAP components and modules, and registers them with Consul. Comments? John ------------------------------------------------------- John Ng AT&T Labs – D2 Architecture 200 Laurel Ave, D5-3D16 Middletown, NJ 07748 +1 732 420 3742 +1 732 310 3253 (mobile) joh...@att.com<mailto:joh...@att.com> ------------------------------------------------------- From: zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn<mailto:zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn> [mailto:zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn] Sent: Monday, July 24, 2017 9:48 PM To: NG, JOHN <jn1...@att.com<mailto:jn1...@att.com>> Cc: LUCAS, JACK <jflu...@research.att.com<mailto:jflu...@research.att.com>>; HU, JUN NICOLAS <jh2...@att.com<mailto:jh2...@att.com>>; BENNETT, RICH <rb2...@att.com<mailto:rb2...@att.com>>; david.sauvag...@bell.ca<mailto:david.sauvag...@bell.ca>; TORAB, HABIB M <ht1...@att.com<mailto:ht1...@att.com>>; roger.maitl...@amdocs.com<mailto:roger.maitl...@amdocs.com>; MURRAY, JOHN <j...@research.att.com<mailto:j...@research.att.com>>; meng.zhaoxi...@zte.com.cn<mailto:meng.zhaoxi...@zte.com.cn>; RATH, CHRISTOPHER A <c...@research.att.com<mailto:c...@research.att.com>>; GAULD, ANDREW G <ag1...@att.com<mailto:ag1...@att.com>>; onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org> Subject: Re:RE: [MSB][OOM]The July Virtual Developers Event Topic : OOM & MSB Interaction Hi John, I'm afraid that I can't agree that. There is a clear boundary between OOM and MSB and their project scopes are totally different. I think these have already been fully discussed in the community in the last few months and approved by TSC at the Beijing meeting. Right now our first priority should be the release goal of Amsterdam and we should focus on our last agreement - the integration point at Consul. Given that MSB is providing Microservice Infrastructure for ONAP components, I hope we can do it ASAP. Thanks, Huabing Original Mail Sender: <jn1...@att.com<mailto:jn1...@att.com>>; To: zhaohuabing10201488; <jflu...@research.att.com<mailto:jflu...@research.att.com>>; <jh2...@att.com<mailto:jh2...@att.com>>; <rb2...@att.com<mailto:rb2...@att.com>>; <david.sauvag...@bell.ca<mailto:david.sauvag...@bell.ca>>; <ht1...@att.com<mailto:ht1...@att.com>>; <roger.maitl...@amdocs.com<mailto:roger.maitl...@amdocs.com>>; <j...@research.att.com<mailto:j...@research.att.com>>;MengZhaoXing10024238; <c...@research.att.com<mailto:c...@research.att.com>>; <ag1...@att.com<mailto:ag1...@att.com>>; CC: <onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org>>; Date: 2017/07/25 07:05 Subject: RE: [MSB][OOM]The July Virtual Developers Event Topic : OOM & MSB Interaction Hi Huabing, I am not sure whether this topic has been discussed yet. We have an alternative proposal and added Slide 6 on the ppt file you uploaded on the MSB page. Please review and share your thoughts. Our proposal is to merge MSB and OOM. We agree that there should be a common software framework and implementation of the service registration and service discovery functions. We agree that there should be a shared Consul instance to support the registration/discovery functions. We want to avoid any potential collisions where multiple parties register services with the same names/URIs – so we might need to work out rules (name spaces) to prevent them. One question we have is whether there is a use case that shows MSB operating outside of OOM for microservices/service endpoints? We could not think of any and so recommend that merging MSB and OOM be considered. We see that microservices and ONAP components being deployed and managed by OOM in a common process: 1. OOM (Cloudify) creates virtualized infrastructure and container/kubernetes cluster via TOSCA based blueprints 2. OOM (Cloudify) triggers (via kubernetes) the dockerized image (microservice or ONAP component module) to be created 3. OOM (Registry) listens for container creation in the pod and registers the new container 4. OOM (Discovery) updates inventory database and begins to health check the new container (microservice or ONAP module) 5. OOM (Discovery) updates health status to Internal/External Gateways 6. OOM (Gateways) route service requests to healthy service endpoints 7. OOM (Cloudify) performs recovery, healing, scale actions based on health status Please provide feedback and we would be happy to discuss. John ------------------------------------------------------- John Ng AT&T Labs – D2 Architecture 200 Laurel Ave, D5-3D16 Middletown, NJ 07748 +1 732 420 3742 +1 732 310 3253 (mobile) joh...@att.com<mailto:joh...@att.com> ------------------------------------------------------- From: zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn<mailto:zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn> [mailto:zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn] Sent: Friday, July 21, 2017 2:33 AM To: LUCAS, JACK <jflu...@research.att.com<mailto:jflu...@research.att.com>>; HU, JUN NICOLAS <jh2...@att.com<mailto:jh2...@att.com>>; BENNETT, RICH <rb2...@att.com<mailto:rb2...@att.com>>; david.sauvag...@bell.ca<mailto:david.sauvag...@bell.ca>; TORAB, HABIB M <ht1...@att.com<mailto:ht1...@att.com>>; roger.maitl...@amdocs.com<mailto:roger.maitl...@amdocs.com>; MURRAY, JOHN <j...@research.att.com<mailto:j...@research.att.com>>; NG, JOHN <jn1...@att.com<mailto:jn1...@att.com>>; meng.zhaoxi...@zte.com.cn<mailto:meng.zhaoxi...@zte.com.cn>;zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn<mailto:zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn> Cc: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org<mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org> Subject: [MSB][OOM]The July Virtual Developers Event Topic : OOM & MSB Interaction Hi there, Will you be able to attend this topic: OOM & MSB Interaction? I would appreciate it if both OOM team and the AT&T cloudify proposal folks could join to discuss it. https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8232264<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D8232264&d=DwMGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=5LKtWT5wddsBjHf0brinYQ&m=eiSr4Okc2E51NbwnGRhI8377nWKXQ9xU3K-TWIdEFTQ&s=oPe9m6IvYhtrTOT1MCZzrQplzp6t2LsjQAsuyiVzc3o&e=> Thanks, Huabing
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list onap-discuss@lists.onap.org https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss