Thanks for background information. I think the challenge is how to quantify "widely available". 50% or less is certainly not "widely available". Maybe 80%? 90%? If 100% is excessive. Then it tranlates to 4 installers (given current 5 in total), and relevant combinations.
Thanks Bin -----Original Message----- From: Dave Neary [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 12:41 PM To: HU, BIN <[email protected]>; Christopher Price <[email protected]>; Tapio Tallgren <[email protected]>; [email protected] Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]if the l3vpn feature is completed fully in C release Hi, For my part, my understanding of this when Chris, Hongbo and myself wrote it in New Hampshire, our intention was to communicate that a feature was not elligible if it was only done for one specific stack or one installer - this was our best guess at communicating "widely available". I think all installers and all possible stack combinations would be excessive. Thanks, Dave. On 01/18/2017 03:37 PM, HU, BIN wrote: > Maybe wordsmithing, but I think "2 installers and 2 SDN controllers" still > means "specific". It is just slightly loosened from "specific one" to > "specific two". > > I believe that the essence of, and also logically, "must not require a > specific ..." really means "any currently available" in OPNFV. > > Thanks > Bin > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Dave > Neary > Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 12:20 PM > To: Christopher Price <[email protected]>; Tapio Tallgren > <[email protected]>; [email protected] > Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]if the l3vpn feature is > completed fully in C release > > Hi, > > On 01/18/2017 03:31 AM, Christopher Price wrote: >> I was not aware that “all installers must support” a feature for there to be >> a dovetail suite to validate it. >> Maybe we should review the “qualification criteria” again on Friday’s call. > > The wording we came up with in the test requirements was: > * Tests must not require a specific NFVi platform composition or > installation tool > > In other words, not all, but at least 2 installers and 2 SDN controllers > should support the feature. > > Dave. > >> Completely agree that we need to do this in Gerrit. >> >> / chris >> >> On 2017-01-18, 08:59, "Tapio Tallgren" >> <[email protected] on behalf of >> [email protected]> wrote: >> >> On 01/18/2017 12:53 AM, Dave Neary wrote: >> > Hi Hongbo, Jose, >> > >> > As I was saying on the Dovetail calls, I have some concerns about >> moving >> > tests into the Dovetail test suite too early. >> > >> > In the Dovetail test requirements, we have: >> > >> > "* Test cases must pass on OPNFV reference deployments >> > * Tests must not require a specific NFVi platform composition or >> > installation tool >> > * Tests must not require unmerged patches to the relevant upstream >> > projects" >> > >> > And in the CVP requirements, we have the following section: >> > >> > "The overall CVP compliance verification scope tied to an OPNFV release >> > is determined by the Committee. The OPNFV TSC defines and maintains the >> > compliance verification procedures and associated tools. The scope is >> > constrained to features, capabilities, components, and interfaces >> > included in an OPNFV release that are generally available in the >> > industry (e.g., through adoption by an upstream community)." >> > >> > >> > I wonder if this functionality is sufficiently widely adopted in >> > commercial NFVi and VIM solutions to pass this bar. >> > >> > Thanks, >> > Dave. >> >> I have no opinion about L3VPN as such, but I read this to mean that the >> code should be part of a released upstream projects and that OPNFV >> installers should all support it. >> >> What would be the best way to discuss these? Currently, the test cases >> are on a wiki page which makes it a little difficult to comment them. >> Would it make sense to copy the whole test areas and test cases wiki >> page to an Etherpad? Or should the whole page be put to gerrit for >> commenting? >> >> -Tapio >> >> _______________________________________________ >> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss >> > > -- > Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy Open Source and Standards, Red > Hat - http://community.redhat.com > Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338 > _______________________________________________ > opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss > -- Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com Ph: +1-978-399-2182 / Cell: +1-978-799-3338 _______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
