Hi Chris, and Dave, who also raised this question about ipv6 during the TSC 
call,

The question of ipv6 data path testing, like a v6ping, was considered and 
analyzed, but the conclusion was that the data path support in opnfv scenarios 
is still very weak. The one case that could potentially be supported is to test 
v6-overlay ping with a v6Router, but that test case was not only done as a 
manual process, to my knowledge, and was not automated to be regularly run. 
Folks in ipv6 project, please comment if my understanding is inaccurate in any 
way. In short, we don't have good options in ipv6 data path testing in Danube. 
We hope to rectify the problem in E. 

Partly for this reason, ipv6 is optional in the proposed suite, not mandatory.

For documentation of RefStack, dovetail's plan was that those would be 
documented, and I think an initial sample had been started a while ago. I see 
this as a work item to be completed, not a scope question.

Regards
Wenjing

-----Original Message-----
From: Christopher Price [mailto:[email protected]] 
Sent: Tuesday, June 27, 2017 1:07 AM
To: Tim Irnich <[email protected]>; Dave Neary <[email protected]>; 
Wenjing Chu <[email protected]>; Tianhongbo 
<[email protected]>; Tallgren, Tapio <[email protected]>; Georg 
Kunz <[email protected]>
Cc: TSC OPNFV <[email protected]>; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [dovetail] TSC and DoveTail 
meeting to discuss scope and needs for CVP testing

Hi Folks,

Did we come to any conclusions on a couple of outstanding points that come to 
my mind as things to come to decisions on as they establish our technical scope:
1) Is it OK for instance that test cases only evaluate API responses?  I am 
thinking of suites like the IPv6 where we do not pass any IPv6 traffic in the 
system as part of our compliance suite at this time.
2) Do we intend to document the inherited test cases for RefStack?  If not, and 
we are not curating those tests in any way ourselves, maybe we should pull them 
out as explicit tests cases and refer instead to the RefStack documentation and 
infer that we expect RefStack to be passed on an OPNFV deployed system as a 
pre-requisite.  
We need a clear way of handling those test cases, either we curate them 
ourselves or we have a clear agreement with the OpenStack interop WG on how we 
leverage that suite.  At this time we list an own curated version but provide 
no documentation of the test cases, why they were selected and the procedure 
for selection.

Cheers,
        Chris

On 2017-06-23, 11:50, "Tim Irnich" <[email protected]> wrote:

    Hi Dave, all,
    
    Sorry for misunderstanding your point. In that case, is there any other 
feedback from other TSC members on the proposal?
    
    Tapio & Ray, I think we should reserve some time in next week's TSC to go 
over the suggested test scope (both mandatory and optional parts) for Danube 
compliance testing once more so that the Dovetail team can be confident about 
focusing on the right things.
    
    Regards, Tim
    
    -----Original Message-----
    From: Dave Neary [mailto:[email protected]]
    Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 01:53
    To: Tim Irnich <[email protected]>; Wenjing Chu 
<[email protected]>; Christopher Price <[email protected]>; 
Tianhongbo <[email protected]>; Tallgren, Tapio 
<[email protected]>; Georg Kunz <[email protected]>
    Cc: TSC OPNFV <[email protected]>; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
<[email protected]>
    Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [dovetail] TSC and DoveTail 
meeting to discuss scope and needs for CVP testing
    
    Hi Tim,
    
    On 06/20/2017 09:02 PM, Tim Irnich wrote:
    >> I would like to see us document some of the NFV related requirements
    >> which are common across all RFCs from telcos, and which are available
    >> in all viable VIM products.
    >
    > This is exactly the intention of the proposal, under the side
    > constraint of drawing from already existing tests. The question to the
    > TSC was if this is enough for an initial release. I think your answer is 
no.
    
    On the contrary - the initial release scope is fine, my comment was on the 
"future plans" piece.
    
    Thanks,
    Dave.
    
    --
    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

Reply via email to