Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-02-06 Thread Ryota Mibu 
Aaron,


OK, I added that topic in today’s agenda for Doctor meeting.


Talk to you soon,
Ryota

From: Aaron Smith [mailto:aasm...@redhat.com]
Sent: Tuesday, February 07, 2017 12:06 AM
To: Mibu Ryota(壬生 亮太) <r-m...@cq.jp.nec.com>
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi Ryota,
 I think this is a good plan.  We can start the discussion in the Doctor 
meeting and continue on the "Polling vs Event capture” if needed.


Maybe also start the discussion on what might be the architecture for a 
monitoring / notification framework.  Not necessarily
including or not including any of the current component projects; more a 
discussion of the "ideal" solution to work towards

Aaron

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Ryota Mibu 
<r-m...@cq.jp.nec.com<mailto:r-m...@cq.jp.nec.com>> wrote:
Hi,


Of course, I’m interested in such topic. The problem is I cannot join Barometer 
meeting as it would be 2 AM in my time zone… I hope someone can take notes.

Doctor project is still candidate to have such discussion. And I’m open to add 
them to our meeting agenda. How about having “Polling vs Event capture” topic 
in tomorrow’s Doctor meeting first. If we need to dive into detail of 
monitoring, you can continue two hours later in Barometer meeting.


BR,
Ryota

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>
 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>]
 On Behalf Of Carlos Goncalves
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 5:01 AM
To: Aaron Smith <aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>>
Cc: Huangmeng (Sam) <huangm...@huawei.com<mailto:huangm...@huawei.com>>; Matvey 
Bossis (New Account) 
<matvey.bos...@huawei.com<mailto:matvey.bos...@huawei.com>>; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>; 
Eliezer Dekel (A) <eliezer.de...@huawei.com<mailto:eliezer.de...@huawei.com>>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Sounds good to me.
Thanks Aaron and Maryam!

Carlos

On 26 Jan 2017, at 20:23, Aaron Smith 
<aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hi,
 Maybe we could dedicate a portion of an upcoming Barometer meeting to discuss 
and put together talking points for a longer meeting?
We have been encourage by the alignment that has been happening within the 
Barometer project.  (VES and the telemetry / event
definition work)

Aaron

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Tahhan, Maryam 
<maryam.tah...@intel.com<mailto:maryam.tah...@intel.com>> wrote:
Hi Folks
On the barometer<https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/fastpath> side, we’ve been 
looking and actively contributing to collectd to collect system statistics and 
to enable the monitoring of Events and metrics for the NFVI, with the goal of 
leveraging the features it has under the topics you mention. We’d be very 
interested in partaking in a discussion around the topics below to see how 
aligned we are, or if/how we can align. I think there’s a strong alignment with 
VES here also.

One possibility is through the Weekly Technical Discussion forum, another would 
be to dedicate a few of the barometer weekly calls to this (which we would be 
happy to do, as an open call and without project focus).

BR
Maryam


From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an "ideal" 
monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>



--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it work

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-02-06 Thread Aaron Smith 
Hi Ryota,
 I think this is a good plan.  We can start the discussion in the Doctor
meeting and continue on the "Polling vs Event capture” if needed.


Maybe also start the discussion on what might be the architecture for a
monitoring / notification framework.  Not necessarily
including or not including any of the current component projects; more a
discussion of the "ideal" solution to work towards

Aaron

On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:00 AM, Ryota Mibu <r-m...@cq.jp.nec.com> wrote:

> Hi,
>
>
>
>
>
> Of course, I’m interested in such topic. The problem is I cannot join
> Barometer meeting as it would be 2 AM in my time zone… I hope someone can
> take notes.
>
>
>
> Doctor project is still candidate to have such discussion. And I’m open to
> add them to our meeting agenda. How about having “Polling vs Event capture”
> topic in tomorrow’s Doctor meeting first. If we need to dive into detail of
> monitoring, you can continue two hours later in Barometer meeting.
>
>
>
>
>
> BR,
>
> Ryota
>
>
>
> *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:
> opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *Carlos
> Goncalves
> *Sent:* Friday, January 27, 2017 5:01 AM
> *To:* Aaron Smith <aasm...@redhat.com>
> *Cc:* Huangmeng (Sam) <huangm...@huawei.com>; Matvey Bossis (New Account)
> <matvey.bos...@huawei.com>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; Eliezer
> Dekel (A) <eliezer.de...@huawei.com>
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI /
> APP monitoring
>
>
>
> Sounds good to me.
>
> Thanks Aaron and Maryam!
>
>
>
> Carlos
>
>
> On 26 Jan 2017, at 20:23, Aaron Smith <aasm...@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>  Maybe we could dedicate a portion of an upcoming Barometer meeting to
> discuss and put together talking points for a longer meeting?
>
> We have been encourage by the alignment that has been happening within the
> Barometer project.  (VES and the telemetry / event
>
> definition work)
>
>
>
> Aaron
>
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Tahhan, Maryam <maryam.tah...@intel.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Folks
> On the barometer <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/fastpath> side, we’ve
> been looking and actively contributing to collectd to collect system
> statistics and to enable the monitoring of Events and metrics for the NFVI,
> with the goal of leveraging the features it has under the topics you
> mention. We’d be very interested in partaking in a discussion around the
> topics below to see how aligned we are, or if/how we can align. I think
> there’s a strong alignment with VES here also.
>
>
>
> One possibility is through the Weekly Technical Discussion forum, another
> would be to dedicate a few of the barometer weekly calls to this (which we
> would be happy to do, as an open call and without project focus).
>
>
>
> BR
>
> Maryam
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [
> mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> <opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>] *On Behalf Of *Aaron Smith
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
> *To:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP
> monitoring
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>   Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an
> "ideal" monitoring framework might look like.
>
>
>
> Topics might include:
>
>   - Polling vs Event capture
>
>   - Platform independent monitor agent
>
> - Network Interfaces
>
> - Kernel events
>
> - VM / Container monitoring
>
> - Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
>
>   -  Common Object model
>
> - Agent configuration
>
> - Performance
>
>- <<50ms
>
>
>
> This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
>
> concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Aaron
>
>
> --
>
> Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
>
> NFV Partner Engineering
>
> Red Hat
>
> aasm...@redhat.com
>
> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
> See how it works at redhat.com
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
> Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
>
> NFV Partner Engineering
>
> Red Hat
>
> aasm...@redhat.com
>
> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
> See how it works at redhat.com
>
> ___
&

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-02-06 Thread Ryota Mibu 
Hi,


Of course, I’m interested in such topic. The problem is I cannot join Barometer 
meeting as it would be 2 AM in my time zone… I hope someone can take notes.

Doctor project is still candidate to have such discussion. And I’m open to add 
them to our meeting agenda. How about having “Polling vs Event capture” topic 
in tomorrow’s Doctor meeting first. If we need to dive into detail of 
monitoring, you can continue two hours later in Barometer meeting.


BR,
Ryota

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Carlos 
Goncalves
Sent: Friday, January 27, 2017 5:01 AM
To: Aaron Smith <aasm...@redhat.com>
Cc: Huangmeng (Sam) <huangm...@huawei.com>; Matvey Bossis (New Account) 
<matvey.bos...@huawei.com>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; Eliezer Dekel 
(A) <eliezer.de...@huawei.com>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Sounds good to me.
Thanks Aaron and Maryam!

Carlos

On 26 Jan 2017, at 20:23, Aaron Smith 
<aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hi,
 Maybe we could dedicate a portion of an upcoming Barometer meeting to discuss 
and put together talking points for a longer meeting?
We have been encourage by the alignment that has been happening within the 
Barometer project.  (VES and the telemetry / event
definition work)

Aaron

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Tahhan, Maryam 
<maryam.tah...@intel.com<mailto:maryam.tah...@intel.com>> wrote:
Hi Folks
On the barometer<https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/fastpath> side, we’ve been 
looking and actively contributing to collectd to collect system statistics and 
to enable the monitoring of Events and metrics for the NFVI, with the goal of 
leveraging the features it has under the topics you mention. We’d be very 
interested in partaking in a discussion around the topics below to see how 
aligned we are, or if/how we can align. I think there’s a strong alignment with 
VES here also.

One possibility is through the Weekly Technical Discussion forum, another would 
be to dedicate a few of the barometer weekly calls to this (which we would be 
happy to do, as an open call and without project focus).

BR
Maryam


From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an "ideal" 
monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>



--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-26 Thread Carlos Goncalves 
Sounds good to me.
Thanks Aaron and Maryam!

Carlos

On 26 Jan 2017, at 20:23, Aaron Smith 
<aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>> wrote:

Hi,
 Maybe we could dedicate a portion of an upcoming Barometer meeting to discuss 
and put together talking points for a longer meeting?
We have been encourage by the alignment that has been happening within the 
Barometer project.  (VES and the telemetry / event
definition work)

Aaron

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Tahhan, Maryam 
<maryam.tah...@intel.com<mailto:maryam.tah...@intel.com>> wrote:
Hi Folks
On the barometer<https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/fastpath> side, we’ve been 
looking and actively contributing to collectd to collect system statistics and 
to enable the monitoring of Events and metrics for the NFVI, with the goal of 
leveraging the features it has under the topics you mention. We’d be very 
interested in partaking in a discussion around the topics below to see how 
aligned we are, or if/how we can align. I think there’s a strong alignment with 
VES here also.

One possibility is through the Weekly Technical Discussion forum, another would 
be to dedicate a few of the barometer weekly calls to this (which we would be 
happy to do, as an open call and without project focus).

BR
Maryam


From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an "ideal" 
monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>



--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-26 Thread Aaron Smith 
Hi,
 Maybe we could dedicate a portion of an upcoming Barometer meeting to
discuss and put together talking points for a longer meeting?
We have been encourage by the alignment that has been happening within the
Barometer project.  (VES and the telemetry / event
definition work)

Aaron

On Thu, Jan 26, 2017 at 8:03 AM, Tahhan, Maryam <maryam.tah...@intel.com>
wrote:

> Hi Folks
> On the barometer <https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/fastpath> side, we’ve
> been looking and actively contributing to collectd to collect system
> statistics and to enable the monitoring of Events and metrics for the NFVI,
> with the goal of leveraging the features it has under the topics you
> mention. We’d be very interested in partaking in a discussion around the
> topics below to see how aligned we are, or if/how we can align. I think
> there’s a strong alignment with VES here also.
>
>
>
> One possibility is through the Weekly Technical Discussion forum, another
> would be to dedicate a few of the barometer weekly calls to this (which we
> would be happy to do, as an open call and without project focus).
>
>
>
> BR
>
> Maryam
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [
> mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> <opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>] *On Behalf Of *Aaron Smith
> *Sent:* Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
> *To:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP
> monitoring
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
>   Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an
> "ideal" monitoring framework might look like.
>
>
>
> Topics might include:
>
>   - Polling vs Event capture
>
>   - Platform independent monitor agent
>
> - Network Interfaces
>
> - Kernel events
>
> - VM / Container monitoring
>
> - Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
>
>   -  Common Object model
>
> - Agent configuration
>
> - Performance
>
>- <<50ms
>
>
>
> This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
>
> concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> Aaron
>
>
> --
>
> Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
>
> NFV Partner Engineering
>
> Red Hat
>
> aasm...@redhat.com
>
> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
> See how it works at redhat.com
>



-- 
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-26 Thread Tahhan, Maryam 
Hi Folks
On the barometer<https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/fastpath> side, we’ve been 
looking and actively contributing to collectd to collect system statistics and 
to enable the monitoring of Events and metrics for the NFVI, with the goal of 
leveraging the features it has under the topics you mention. We’d be very 
interested in partaking in a discussion around the topics below to see how 
aligned we are, or if/how we can align. I think there’s a strong alignment with 
VES here also.

One possibility is through the Weekly Technical Discussion forum, another would 
be to dedicate a few of the barometer weekly calls to this (which we would be 
happy to do, as an open call and without project focus).

BR
Maryam


From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an "ideal" 
monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-26 Thread Feng Liu (A) 
Hi Aaron and Doctor team,

Those are indeed very interesting areas, for some of the topics in the list, 
I’d like to point you to the OpNFV VES 
project(https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/ves), which, imo, share some common 
interests in terms of agent based data collections, common event models, etc. 
Together with doctor team, we may create some interesting discussions.

Cheers,

Feng


From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Juvonen, Tomi 
(Nokia - FI/Espoo)
Sent: January 26, 2017 08:33
To: Aaron Smith; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi Aaron, Doctors, all,

These topics looks very important indeed when looking to reach Telco 
requirements for fault management as a whole. Totally +1 for this discussion.

Doctor has not yet addressed the actual monitoring part that much and would be 
nice to get that in shape. That is also complicated and there has been a lack 
of resources to give more thought to this. For example “HW specific 
configuration” needed to catch HW events. Monitoring agent could totally have 
us fast fault information and that would be a great thing to have.

Doctor requirement is currently time consumed from fault detected to alarm 
caught by consumer (user/tenant/project). Anyhow user point of view it is 
essential to have < 50ms for as many faults as possible from fault occurrence 
to alarm caught by consumer. This means detection have to be as fast as 
convenient without wasting too much resources. Surely framework on top of that 
also need to be optimized and having as straight path to have alarm to consumer 
as possible. I have been working a bit with that, but it is not that easy to 
optimize with current Doctor architecture.

Br,
Tomi

From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org>
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org<mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org>
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an "ideal" 
monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-25 Thread Juvonen, Tomi (Nokia - FI/Espoo) 
Hi Aaron, Doctors, all,

These topics looks very important indeed when looking to reach Telco 
requirements for fault management as a whole. Totally +1 for this discussion.

Doctor has not yet addressed the actual monitoring part that much and would be 
nice to get that in shape. That is also complicated and there has been a lack 
of resources to give more thought to this. For example “HW specific 
configuration” needed to catch HW events. Monitoring agent could totally have 
us fast fault information and that would be a great thing to have.

Doctor requirement is currently time consumed from fault detected to alarm 
caught by consumer (user/tenant/project). Anyhow user point of view it is 
essential to have < 50ms for as many faults as possible from fault occurrence 
to alarm caught by consumer. This means detection have to be as fast as 
convenient without wasting too much resources. Surely framework on top of that 
also need to be optimized and having as straight path to have alarm to consumer 
as possible. I have been working a bit with that, but it is not that easy to 
optimize with current Doctor architecture.

Br,
Tomi

From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Aaron Smith
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2017 7:12 PM
To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP 
monitoring

Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an "ideal" 
monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

--
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com<mailto:aasm...@redhat.com>

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com<http://redhat.com>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-24 Thread Yujun Zhang 
That would be an interesting topic.

We have already started something on inspector[1]. We may create one for
monitor as well.

[1]: https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-73

On Wed, Jan 25, 2017 at 1:12 AM Aaron Smith  wrote:

> Hi,
>   Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an
> "ideal" monitoring framework might look like.
>
> Topics might include:
>   - Polling vs Event capture
>   - Platform independent monitor agent
> - Network Interfaces
> - Kernel events
> - VM / Container monitoring
> - Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
>   -  Common Object model
> - Agent configuration
> - Performance
>- <<50ms
>
> This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
> concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).
>
> Thoughts?
>
> Aaron
>
> --
> Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
> NFV Partner Engineering
> Red Hat
> aasm...@redhat.com
>
> Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
> See how it works at redhat.com
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor] Further discussion of NFVI / APP monitoring

2017-01-24 Thread Aaron Smith 
Hi,
  Would there be interest in a separate meeting to discussion what an
"ideal" monitoring framework might look like.

Topics might include:
  - Polling vs Event capture
  - Platform independent monitor agent
- Network Interfaces
- Kernel events
- VM / Container monitoring
- Common bus for Events / Telemetry / Config
  -  Common Object model
- Agent configuration
- Performance
   - <<50ms

This would be an informal brainstorming activity with more emphasis on
concepts than existing projects (unless necessary).

Thoughts?

Aaron

-- 
Aaron Smith | Senior Principal Software Engineer
NFV Partner Engineering
Red Hat
aasm...@redhat.com

Better technology. Faster innovation. Powered by community collaboration.
See how it works at redhat.com
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss