Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re: Comments about Holmes

[zhao.huabing]

Hi Oliver and Yuan,


I think the below sentence in the Holmes project proposal is able to reflect 
the consensus we have reached during Beijing meeting and what we will be trying 
to achieve in the first Release.




DCAE supports Holmes to be deployed as an analytic application in the form of 
docker(s). Actual deployment options are flexible, which should be decided by 
the user/use cases, Holmes can be either deployed as a standalone alarm 
correlation application or be integrated into DCAE as an analytic application.




https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=5734499




Thanks,

Huabing









Original Mail



Sender:  
To: yuanyue10008526
CC:    

Date: 2017/06/13 22:48
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re:  Comments about Holmes






Yuan,

just to be clear we did agree to integrate Holmes into DCAE in release 1.0:  
"DCAE supports Holmes to be deployed as an analytic application in the form of 
docker(s)."

As for which use case is using which configuration this will have to be decided 
as part of the release planing I presume.

Thx

Oliver

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 10:29 AM  EDT, yuan@zte.com.cn wrote:
> 
> Hi Mazin,
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the Holmes team have deelply discussed with DCAE team off line and 
> in line during Beijing F2F meeting. Holmes team totally understood DCAE team 
> is proposing DCAE framework with perfect architecture and will be implemented 
> step by step. In release 1, Holmes will work independently to support close 
> loop for voLTE use case and Holmes team will keep in touch with DCAE team for 
> future integration. Keeping aligment in interface level but decouple the 
> components with each other would be better for open source practice. Let end 
> users make decision how they would like to integrating different components 
> in different scenarios.  
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Yuan Yue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 袁越 yuanyue
> 
> 资深战略规划师   Senior Strategy Planner
> 
> 技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System 
> Product
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <9ae3e214c17d49ed935d87c674ba3ee2.jpg>
> <24242e5637af428891c4db731e7765ad.jpg>
> 南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼
> 1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua 
> District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012
> T: +025 88013478 
> M: +86 13851446442 
> E: yuan@zte.com.cn 
> www.zte.com.cn
> 原始邮件
> 发件人： 
> 收件人：付光荣10144542
> 抄送人：  
> 日 期 ：2017年06月13日 04:45
> 主 题 ：Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re:  Comments about Holmes
> 
> 
> Ok. It would have been beneficial to have a deeper dive with the DCAE team 
> and the architecture team so you understand the flow and architecture.
> My view is not to allow this to run independently. They are serious efforts 
> in terms of life cycle management, resource management, 
> reliability, etc that one needs to support for each of these components, and 
> we can not repeat that work for each analytics service
> provided by each contributor. 
> 
> Hence DCAE tries to bring it all together and enable on boarding of different 
> types of Microservices.
> 
> 
>> On Jun 11, 2017, at 11:18 PM, fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Mazin,
>> 
>> We have discussed with Oliver and are now aware of that DCAE is an open 
>> platform that allows independent/external systems to be integrated with it. 
>> Based on this and to make Holmes more flexible, we proposed Holmes to be set 
>> up as a standalone project.
>> 
>> Being a standalone project does not mean that Holmes will not support DCAE. 
>> Holmes will expose DMaaP related APIs to the public and be released in the 
>> form of docker(s) so that it can be integrated with DCAE. Meanwhile, as an 
>> independent system,  Holmes can also be run in standalone mode, which 
>> enables it to be connected or utilized by other systems in ONAP directly.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Guangrong
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 发件人：zhaohuabing10201488
> 收件人：fuguangrong10144542
> 抄送人：mengzhaoxing10024238wangrui10208678
> 日 期 ：2017/06/12 09:05
> 主 题 ：Forward：Re: [onap-tsc] Comments about Holmes
> 
> From:  GILBERT,MAZINE(MAZINE)
> To:roberto.k...@orange.com fuguangrong10144542
> Cc:t...@lists.onap.org
> Date:  2017-06-11 06:08:46
> Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] Comments about Holmes
> 
>  
> Guangdong
> 
>  
> I realize the TSC arrived at a middle ground during the F2F meeting of having 
> Holmes as a separate project. I have tried to share my views on this 
> previously and it seems to have failed. DCAE is a framework for on operating  
> big data Microservices. Holmes is an analytics Microservice, that is policy 
> driven. The policies are set through Drools by the Policy engine, while the 
> analytics is done by DCAE. DCAE and Policy have well defined protocols to 
> help operate control loops. This  design was done so that developers can 
> 

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers Face-to-Face Meeting

[Vul, Alex]

How do we see this working on-line, across multiple time zones?

From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Elhay Efrat
Sent: Monday, June 12, 2017 10:41 PM
To: Dhananjay Pavgi ; Gadiyar, Rajesh 
; GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
; Kenny Paul 
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

Good , can we do also F2F over webex , skype … something ☺?

From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Dhananjay Pavgi
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 6:45 AM
To: Gadiyar, Rajesh 
>; GILBERT, MAZIN E 
(MAZIN E) >; Kenny Paul 
>
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

+1

thanks & regards,
Dhananjay Pavgi
Mobile : +91 98220 22264
[cid:image002.png@01CE7323.F2727500]   [ONAP_logo_Sig]
www.techmahindra.com Platinum 
Member. Visit : http://www.onap.org

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Gadiyar, Rajesh
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 9:12 AM
To: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
>; Kenny Paul 
>
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

+1 Good idea ☺

From: > 
on behalf of "GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)" 
>
Date: Monday, June 12, 2017 at 2:01 PM
To: Kenny Paul >
Cc: "onap-disc...@lists.onap.org" 
>, onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

I was not present for this discussion. We need to have a meeting around the 3rd 
week of
July to go through project by project progress. Phil and I discussed a virtual 
meeting
since folks will be too busy to travel, and some may not be able to.

Would like to get a sense from the TSC community if this is appropriate and more
convenient while voting for dates.

thanks
Mazin

On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Kenny Paul 
> wrote:

Please respond to the doodle poll below no later than:
Thurs. 01:00 PM UTC
Thurs. 09:00 PM China
Thurs: 09:00 AM Eastern
Thurs: 06:00 AM Pacific

https://doodle.com/poll/7zufivqebtnvrhdt

Thank You.

Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

___
onap-discuss mailing list
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Ddiscuss=DwICAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=IKSC5mg8GeOiSar1dax3GQ=7n6f3RBF3LtkjuBpPhqrMbVfiHC_wqVOfDz5z3uutjM=8D2aZuG-pN820woJDvlHxyXQnkAsRt0bFjokAPWgc1E=


Disclaimer:  This message and the information contained herein is proprietary 
and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may 
review the policy at http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html externally 
http://tim.techmahindra.com/tim/disclaimer.html internally within TechMahindra.

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer
___
ONAP-TSC 

Re: [onap-tsc] Face to Face meeting agreements

[Alla Goldner]

I believe we can formally vote on this also on Thursday.

 Best regards, 

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division 
Amdocs Technology




-Original Message-
From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] 
On Behalf Of SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 9:23 PM
To: Kenny Paul 
Cc: onap-tsc 
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Face to Face meeting agreements


One more question. Did the toy use case (vDNS/vFirewall) we want to use for 
automated testing ever get formally approved. I know we briefly discussed it 
and everybody was nodding but to be honest I don’t recall if we actually voted 
on it. If we didn’t can we close on this Thu too?

Thx

Oliver

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 11:50 AM  EDT, Kenny Paul  
> wrote:
> 
> Sorry, That is what I thought from over the phone.
> 
> Best Regards,
> -kenny
> 
> Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager kp...@linuxfoundation.org
> 510.766.5945
> 
>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:35 PM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Kenny Paul  wrote:
>>> 
>>> All of the use cases were approved.
>>> 
>> 
>> That’s not correct. The toy use case and the vEPC/voLTE use case were 
>> approved. The vCPE use case is still being worked with the deadline for all 
>> use cases being the TSC meeting this Thu.
>> 
>> Oliver
> 

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,

you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer 

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Face to Face meeting agreements

[SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)]

One more question. Did the toy use case (vDNS/vFirewall) we want to use for 
automated testing ever get formally approved. I know we briefly discussed it 
and everybody was nodding but to be honest I don’t recall if we actually voted 
on it. If we didn’t can we close on this Thu too?

Thx

Oliver

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 11:50 AM  EDT, Kenny Paul  
> wrote:
> 
> Sorry, That is what I thought from over the phone.
> 
> Best Regards, 
> -kenny
> 
> Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
> kp...@linuxfoundation.org
> 510.766.5945
> 
>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:35 PM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>> 
>>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Kenny Paul  wrote:
>>> 
>>> All of the use cases were approved.
>>> 
>> 
>> That’s not correct. The toy use case and the vEPC/voLTE use case were 
>> approved. The vCPE use case is still being worked with the deadline for all 
>> use cases being the TSC meeting this Thu.
>> 
>> Oliver
> 

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Use case subcommittee

[Alla Goldner]

Hi Kenny,

This was already set up by Casey.
The meetings information is here: 
https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/Usecase+subcommittee


Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology


[cid:image001.png@01D2E483.93B5A750]

From: Kenny Paul [mailto:kp...@linuxfoundation.org]
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 8:10 PM
To: Alla Goldner 
Cc: onap-tsc@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] Use case subcommittee

Added to the to-do list.

Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

On Jun 1, 2017, at 9:03 PM, Alla Goldner 
> wrote:

Hi all,

Yesterday we approved creation of Use case subcommittee.
I propose to have bi-weekly conference calls, starting after next week’s f2f 
meeting.

I will ask Linux Foundation to send out invitation and create wiki page for 
this subcommittee.

Best regards,

Alla Goldner

Open Network Division
Amdocs Technology



This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer
___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,

you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer 

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers Face-to-Face Meeting

[Arul Nambi]

+1 for virtual meetings

From: onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Elhay Efrat
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 1:41 AM
To: Dhananjay Pavgi ; Gadiyar, Rajesh 
; GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
; Kenny Paul 
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

Good , can we do also F2F over webex , skype … something ☺?

From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Dhananjay Pavgi
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 6:45 AM
To: Gadiyar, Rajesh 
>; GILBERT, MAZIN E 
(MAZIN E) >; Kenny Paul 
>
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [onap-tsc] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

+1

thanks & regards,
Dhananjay Pavgi
Mobile : +91 98220 22264
[cid:image002.png@01CE7323.F2727500]   [ONAP_logo_Sig]
www.techmahindra.com Platinum 
Member. Visit : http://www.onap.org

From: onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-tsc-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of Gadiyar, Rajesh
Sent: Tuesday, June 13, 2017 9:12 AM
To: GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E) 
>; Kenny Paul 
>
Cc: onap-disc...@lists.onap.org; onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

+1 Good idea ☺

From: > 
on behalf of "GILBERT, MAZIN E (MAZIN E)" 
>
Date: Monday, June 12, 2017 at 2:01 PM
To: Kenny Paul >
Cc: "onap-disc...@lists.onap.org" 
>, onap-tsc 
>
Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-discuss] Tentative July ONAP Developers 
Face-to-Face Meeting

I was not present for this discussion. We need to have a meeting around the 3rd 
week of
July to go through project by project progress. Phil and I discussed a virtual 
meeting
since folks will be too busy to travel, and some may not be able to.

Would like to get a sense from the TSC community if this is appropriate and more
convenient while voting for dates.

thanks
Mazin

On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:08 PM, Kenny Paul 
> wrote:

Please respond to the doodle poll below no later than:
Thurs. 01:00 PM UTC
Thurs. 09:00 PM China
Thurs: 09:00 AM Eastern
Thurs: 06:00 AM Pacific

https://doodle.com/poll/7zufivqebtnvrhdt

Thank You.

Best Regards,
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

___
onap-discuss mailing list
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__lists.onap.org_mailman_listinfo_onap-2Ddiscuss=DwICAg=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg=IKSC5mg8GeOiSar1dax3GQ=7n6f3RBF3LtkjuBpPhqrMbVfiHC_wqVOfDz5z3uutjM=8D2aZuG-pN820woJDvlHxyXQnkAsRt0bFjokAPWgc1E=


Disclaimer:  This message and the information contained herein is proprietary 
and confidential and subject to the Tech Mahindra policy statement, you may 
review the policy at http://www.techmahindra.com/Disclaimer.html externally 
http://tim.techmahindra.com/tim/disclaimer.html internally within TechMahindra.

This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to the Amdocs policy statement,
you may review at https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer
This message and the information contained herein is proprietary and 
confidential and subject to 

Re: [onap-tsc] Scheduling weekly meeting for DCAE

[Kenny Paul]

Added to the to-to list.

Best Regards, 
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

> On Jun 12, 2017, at 6:53 AM, JI, LUSHENG (LUSHENG)  
> wrote:
> 
> Hello Casey,
>  
> DCAE would like to schedule a weekly meeting for every Thursday 9:AM-10:00AM 
> EDT, or 9PM-10PM Beijing Time, 6-7 PDT, etc.  Recurring starting from this 
> week.  Could you please help adding the meeting on the community calendar?
>  
> Also we would like to request to use an ONAP shared Zoom account for hosting 
> the call.  Could you please coordinate and let me know the details?
>  
> Thank you very much,
>  
> Lusheng Ji
> ONAP DCAE
> ___
> ONAP-TSC mailing list
> ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org 
> https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc 
> 

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

[onap-tsc] Proposal: Open Lab subcommittee

[Chengli Wang]

Hi ONAP TSC,

Follow up the last topic on community labs discussed in the F2F meeting in 
Beijing, I had a discussion with Helen and Oliver and got some consensus on 
this. 
I would like to propose the open lab subcommittee to coordinate each community 
lab to support ONAP test and demo, etc.

The following is our draft proposal. Welcome any comments/suggestions.

Regards,
Chengli

Open Lab Subcommittee

TSC subcommittee purpose:
It is responsible to define and maintain the requirements, monitor the 
availability and coordinate the usage of the community labs. 
The subcommittee will coordinate community lab resources to support release use 
case testing, community demo for marketing events if needed, and the 
interoperation testing with 3rd part components, or others.

TSC subcommittee expected deliverables
The subcommittee will publish the required/recommended device list of each kind 
of lab in terms of different application scenarios.
The subcommittee will maintain and update the available status/usages of each 
lab, for example resource allocation,  releases,  management and maintenance, 
etc. 

TSC subcommittee starting participants:
The open lab subcommittee is open to all interested participants.
or
The open lab subcommittee is restricted to those committed to provide 
physical/virtual labs to the community.___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Face to Face meeting agreements

[Kenny Paul]

Sorry, That is what I thought from over the phone.

Best Regards, 
-kenny

Kenny Paul,  Technical Program Manager
kp...@linuxfoundation.org
510.766.5945

> On Jun 12, 2017, at 1:35 PM, SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER) 
>  wrote:
> 
> 
>> On Jun 12, 2017, at 4:31 PM, Kenny Paul > > wrote:
>> 
>> All of the use cases were approved.
>> 
> 
> That’s not correct. The toy use case and the vEPC/voLTE use case were 
> approved. The vCPE use case is still being worked with the deadline for all 
> use cases being the TSC meeting this Thu.
> 
> Oliver

___
ONAP-TSC mailing list
ONAP-TSC@lists.onap.org
https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-tsc

Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re: Comments about Holmes

[SPATSCHECK, OLIVER (OLIVER)]

Yuan,

just to be clear we did agree to integrate Holmes into DCAE in release 1.0:  
"DCAE supports Holmes to be deployed as an analytic application in the form of 
docker(s)."

As for which use case is using which configuration this will have to be decided 
as part of the release planing I presume.

Thx

Oliver

> On Jun 13, 2017, at 10:29 AM  EDT, yuan@zte.com.cn wrote:
> 
> Hi Mazin,
> 
> 
> 
> I believe the Holmes team have deelply discussed with DCAE team off line and 
> in line during Beijing F2F meeting. Holmes team totally understood DCAE team 
> is proposing DCAE framework with perfect architecture and will be implemented 
> step by step. In release 1, Holmes will work independently to support close 
> loop for voLTE use case and Holmes team will keep in touch with DCAE team for 
> future integration. Keeping aligment in interface level but decouple the 
> components with each other would be better for open source practice. Let end 
> users make decision how they would like to integrating different components 
> in different scenarios.  
> 
> 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Yuan Yue
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 袁越 yuanyue
> 
> 资深战略规划师   Senior Strategy Planner
> 
> 技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System 
> Product
> 
> 
> 
> 
> <9ae3e214c17d49ed935d87c674ba3ee2.jpg>
> <24242e5637af428891c4db731e7765ad.jpg>
> 南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼
> 1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R Center II, No.50, Software Avenue,YuHua 
> District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012
> T: +025 88013478 
> M: +86 13851446442 
> E: yuan@zte.com.cn 
> www.zte.com.cn
> 原始邮件
> 发件人： ;
> 收件人：付光荣10144542;
> 抄送人： ; ;
> 日 期 ：2017年06月13日 04:45
> 主 题 ：Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re:  Comments about Holmes
> 
> 
> Ok. It would have been beneficial to have a deeper dive with the DCAE team 
> and the architecture team so you understand the flow and architecture.
> My view is not to allow this to run independently. They are serious efforts 
> in terms of life cycle management, resource management, 
> reliability, etc that one needs to support for each of these components, and 
> we can not repeat that work for each analytics service
> provided by each contributor. 
> 
> Hence DCAE tries to bring it all together and enable on boarding of different 
> types of Microservices.
> 
> 
>> On Jun 11, 2017, at 11:18 PM, fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn wrote:
>> 
>> Hi Mazin,
>> 
>> We have discussed with Oliver and are now aware of that DCAE is an open 
>> platform that allows independent/external systems to be integrated with it. 
>> Based on this and to make Holmes more flexible, we proposed Holmes to be set 
>> up as a standalone project.
>> 
>> Being a standalone project does not mean that Holmes will not support DCAE. 
>> Holmes will expose DMaaP related APIs to the public and be released in the 
>> form of docker(s) so that it can be integrated with DCAE. Meanwhile, as an 
>> independent system,  Holmes can also be run in standalone mode, which 
>> enables it to be connected or utilized by other systems in ONAP directly.
>> 
>> Regards,
>> 
>> Guangrong
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 发件人：zhaohuabing10201488
> 收件人：fuguangrong10144542;
> 抄送人：mengzhaoxing10024238;wangrui10208678;
> 日 期 ：2017/06/12 09:05
> 主 题 ：Forward：Re: [onap-tsc] Comments about Holmes
> 
> From:  GILBERT,MAZINE(MAZINE);
> To:roberto.k...@orange.com; fuguangrong10144542;
> Cc:t...@lists.onap.org;
> Date:  2017-06-11 06:08:46
> Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] Comments about Holmes
> 
>  
> Guangdong
> 
>  
> I realize the TSC arrived at a middle ground during the F2F meeting of having 
> Holmes as a separate project. I have tried to share my views on this 
> previously and it seems to have failed. DCAE is a framework for on operating  
> big data Microservices. Holmes is an analytics Microservice, that is policy 
> driven. The policies are set through Drools by the Policy engine, while the 
> analytics is done by DCAE. DCAE and Policy have well defined protocols to 
> help operate control loops. This  design was done so that developers can 
> build, test and deploy their own Microservices (correlations, predictions,, 
> normalization, compressions, analytics, etc) without having to establish yet 
> another independent component in ONAP.  There are numerous large-scale  
> correlation engines adopted by many operators and vendors today. Holmes is 
> one example. This flexibility in the design in ONAP. allows companies to plug 
> and play their Microservices function without additional dependencies or 
> software development. This approach  is successful and how it is employed in 
> AT 
> 
>  
>  
> I strongly suggest you spend sometime to better understand how DCAE and 
> open/close loops work in ONAP. It is very important that we enable 
> disaggregation and flexibility so that developers can innovative quickly. I 
> will  rely heavily on the architecture subcommittee to 

Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re: Comments about Holmes

[yuan.yue]

Hi Mazin,




I believe the Holmes team have deelply discussed with DCAE team off line and in 
line during Beijing F2F meeting. Holmes team totally understood DCAE team is 
proposing DCAE framework with perfect architecture and will be implemented step 
by step. In release 1, Holmes will work independently to support close loop for 
voLTE use case and Holmes team will keep in touch with DCAE team for future 
integration. Keeping aligment in interface level but decouple the components 
with each other would be better for open source practice. Let end users make 
decision how they would like to integrating different components in different 
scenarios.  




Regards,

Yuan Yue













袁越 yuanyue


资深战略规划师   Senior Strategy Planner



技术规划部/技术规划部/系统产品 Technology Planning Dept./Technology Planning Dept./System 
Product









南京市雨花区软件大道50号中兴通讯3号楼1/F,Building 3, ZTE Nanjing R Center II, No.50, Software 
Avenue,YuHua District,Nanjing,P.R.China 210012
T: +025 88013478 

M: +86 13851446442 
E: yuan@zte.com.cn 
www.zte.com.cn














原始邮件



发件人： 
收件人：付光荣10144542
抄送人：  
日 期 ：2017年06月13日 04:45
主 题 ：Re: [onap-tsc] Forward:Re:  Comments about Holmes






Ok. It would have been beneficial to have a deeper dive with the DCAE team and 
the architecture team so you understand the flow and architecture.

My view is not to allow this to run independently. They are serious efforts in 
terms of life cycle management, resource management, 

reliability, etc that one needs to support for each of these components, and we 
can not repeat that work for each analytics service

provided by each contributor. 
 
Hence DCAE tries to bring it all together and enable on boarding of different 
types of Microservices.
 
On Jun 11, 2017, at 11:18 PM, fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn wrote:
 





Hi Mazin,


We have discussed with Oliver and are now aware of that DCAE is an open 
platform that allows independent/external systems to be integrated with it. 
Based on this and to make Holmes more flexible, we proposed Holmes to be set up 
as a standalone project.


Being a standalone project does not mean that Holmes will not support DCAE. 
Holmes will expose DMaaP related APIs to the public and be released in the form 
of docker(s) so that it can be integrated with DCAE. Meanwhile, as an 
independent system,  Holmes can also be run in standalone mode, which enables 
it to be connected or utilized by other systems in ONAP directly.


Regards,


Guangrong


 


 


 







  







发件人：zhaohuabing10201488

收件人：fuguangrong10144542

抄送人：mengzhaoxing10024238wangrui10208678

日 期 ：2017/06/12 09:05

主 题 ：Forward：Re: [onap-tsc] Comments about Holmes


 





From:  GILBERT,MAZINE(MAZINE)

To:roberto.k...@orange.com fuguangrong10144542

Cc:t...@lists.onap.org

Date:  2017-06-11 06:08:46

Subject:Re: [onap-tsc] Comments about Holmes

 
 

Guangdong
  
I realize the TSC arrived at a middle ground during the F2F meeting of having 
Holmes as a separate project. I have tried to share my views on this previously 
and it seems to have failed. DCAE is a framework for on operating  big data 
Microservices. Holmes is an analytics Microservice, that is policy driven. The 
policies are set through Drools by the Policy engine, while the analytics is 
done by DCAE. DCAE and Policy have well defined protocols to help operate 
control loops. This  design was done so that developers can build, test and 
deploy their own Microservices (correlations, predictions,, normalization, 
compressions, analytics, etc) without having to establish yet another 
independent component in ONAP.  There are numerous large-scale  correlation 
engines adopted by many operators and vendors today. Holmes is one example. 
This flexibility in the design in ONAP. allows companies to plug and play their 
Microservices function without additional dependencies or software development. 
This approach  is successful and how it is employed in AT 

I strongly suggest you spend sometime to better understand how DCAE and 
open/close loops work in ONAP. It is very important that we enable 
disaggregation and flexibility so that developers can innovative quickly. I 
will  rely heavily on the architecture subcommittee to ensure Holmes is 
properly disaggregated when used in ONAP.
  
Thanks and look forward to your contributions to R1.
  
Mazin

GetOutlook  for iOS  

_From: roberto.k...@orange.com  
   Sent: Wednesday, June 7, 2017 11:29 AMSubject: Re: [onap-tsc] 
Comments about HolmesTo: <   fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn> Cc: < 
  t...@lists.onap.org>   

Thanks for your comments. This will be discussed and decided at the TSC. Best 
regard. Roberto

  
De : fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn [mailto:fu.guangr...@zte.com.cn] Envoyé : mercredi 
7 juin 2017 16:42 À