As I understand correctly:
First of all, from its functionality, Microservices Framework focus on helping
project which uses microservices to easier manage their services, including
register/discover, etc. through its services bus; it is the content, and where
it will be installed, is out of its scope. And OOM focus on where it will be
installed, (from theory, it could be packed in a VM or a container), but OOM
chose docker.
Secondly from its distribution, Microservices Framework is part of ONAP itself;
while OOM will be distributed as tools for ONAP, just as some tools which will
be distributed from Integration project.
Regards,
Helen Chen
On 5/10/17, 1:23 PM, "SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)" <spat...@research.att.com>
wrote:
One more question. I am wondering what the relationship of the Microservice
Framework (https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Microservices+Framework) and below
is.
Below says:
>> The OOM addresses the current lack of consistent platform-wide method in
managing software components, their health, resiliency and other lifecycle
management functions.
the Microservice Framework proposal says:
>>Standardize ONAP platform Microservies concepts & principles and provide
key framework
it seems the Microservice Framework is a subset of the the Operations
Manager and container proposal in scope.
Am I interpreting this correctly?
Thx
Oliver
> On May 10, 2017, at 3:35 PM EDT, Sauvageau, David
<david.sauvag...@bell.ca> wrote:
>
> Oliver – I can move it there. Was not aware thanks
>
> On 2017-05-10, 3:30 PM, "SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)"
<spat...@research.att.com> wrote:
>
>
> I would assume so otherwise we would have duplication.
>
> On an editorial note I thought we were supposed to move the proposal
links above the project proposal draft line here:
>
>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_Proposing-2BA-2BProject&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=9iyuArzgyekj47PZSPfIijI2cSHsUJtAlcTA0X_udNI&m=cWvCFE12-w_VUckpxGTlbzQL9KTHmva1ejCez71IL9c&s=KRq5UXk7n766idl0S3NdoJnXVXF7vWo4f17PKdHET6o&e=
>
> when they are ready for the TSC review period.
>
> Thx
>
> Oliver
>
>> On May 10, 2017, at 3:11 PM EDT, Yunxia Chen <helen.c...@huawei.com>
wrote:
>>
>> Hi, David,
>> Could this manager be used for “Distribution” and “Packaging” of ONAP?
Please refer to:
>>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_Integration&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=9iyuArzgyekj47PZSPfIijI2cSHsUJtAlcTA0X_udNI&m=cWvCFE12-w_VUckpxGTlbzQL9KTHmva1ejCez71IL9c&s=XtcCxrSC2x1iAS_-wkrcO7OCAMRT4JckuzoQHdrNC88&e=
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Helen Chen
>>
>> From: <onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org> on behalf of "Sauvageau, David"
<david.sauvag...@bell.ca>
>> Date: Wednesday, May 10, 2017 at 11:30 AM
>> To: "onap-tsc@lists.onap.org" <onap-tsc@lists.onap.org>
>> Subject: [onap-tsc] Project Proposal: ONAP Operations Manager / ONAP on
Containers
>>
>> Dear TSC,
>>
>> I would like to formally propose 2 projects to simplify the deployment
and the operations of the ONAP platform and components.
>>
>> Project: ONAP Operations Manager (Formerly ONAP controller) -
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_display_DW_ONAP-2BOperations-2BManager&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=9iyuArzgyekj47PZSPfIijI2cSHsUJtAlcTA0X_udNI&m=cWvCFE12-w_VUckpxGTlbzQL9KTHmva1ejCez71IL9c&s=JKrpL9bPGtCjFYFOQv1RHpooQ1UEvvb5Sqbl3r_-TTY&e=
>>
>> This proposal introduces the ONAP Platform OOM (ONAP Operations Manager)
to efficiently Deploy, Manage, Operate the ONAP platform and its components
(e.g. MSO, DCAE, SDC, etc.) and infrastructure (VMs, Containers). The OOM
addresses the current lack of consistent platform-wide method in managing
software components, their health, resiliency and other lifecycle management
functions. With OOM, service providers will have a single dashboard/UI to
deploy & un-deploy the entire (or partial) ONAP platform, view the different
instances being managed and the state of each component, monitor actions that
have been taken as part of a control loop (e.g., scale in-out, self-heal), and
trigger other control actions like capacity augments across data centers.
>>
>> Sub-project: ONAP Operations Manager / ONAP on Containers -
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.onap.org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D3247305&d=DwIGaQ&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=9iyuArzgyekj47PZSPfIijI2cSHsUJtAlcTA0X_udNI&m=cWvCFE12-w_VUckpxGTlbzQL9KTHmva1ejCez71IL9c&s=JpUYmrsZsg6RjZKDiep2Pih0JSdBKmoI6wxVFzvDVWA&e=
>>
>> This project describes a deployment and orchestration option for the
ONAP platform components (MSO, SDNC, DCAE, etc.) based on Docker containers and
the open-source Kubernetes container management system. This solution removes
the need for VMs to be deployed on the servers hosting ONAP components and
allows Docker containers to directly run on the host operating system.
>>
>> The primary benefits of this approach are as follows:
>> • Life-cycle Management. Kubernetes is a comprehensive system for
managing the life-cycle of containerized applications. Its use as a platform
manager will ease the deployment of ONAP, provide fault tolerance and
horizontal scalability, and enable seamless upgrades.
>> • Hardware Efficiency. As opposed to VMs that require a guest operating
system be deployed along with the application, containers provide similar
application encapsulation with neither the computing, memory and storage
overhead nor the associated long term support costs of those guest operating
systems.
>> • Deployment Speed. Eliminating the guest operating system results in
containers coming into service much faster than a VM equivalent. This advantage
can be particularly useful for ONAP where rapid reaction to inevitable failures
will be critical in production environments.
>> • Cloud Provider Flexibility. A Kubernetes deployment of ONAP enables
hosting the platform on multiple hosted cloud solutions like Google Compute
Engine, AWS EC2, Microsoft Azure, CenturyLink Cloud, IBM Bluemix and more.
>>
>>
>> We currently have the support of Bell, AMDOCS, AT&T, Orange, Ericsson
and Gigaspaces on the project and still looking for more. Please review and
comment!
>>
>> Thanks,
>> David Sauvageau, Bell Canada.
>>
>> *** PS you may have received this proposal twice since my original
seemed to have bounced.
>> _______________________________________________
>> ONAP-TSC mailing list
>> ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
>>
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Dtsc&d=DwICAg&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=3WBYkehchaQg0p_gO26aU_ahomnFHCk_-us7kcQebm4&m=yB6Zlr7ptLoci_qKEikJCGJWSWLLlBtsohz8HBAeWzQ&s=y0xLpPDW39I4Hj5OjEFwhpgFZYqukCp3BYWyD_K7Zvc&e=
>
>
>
_______________________________________________
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
