Bryan, Each Project is taking different approach and we will discuss this in next mano-wg meeting, about the Goals and their relevance. The OPERA team PTL Yingjun Li had discussions on the same last week and Jira tickets in OPERA reflect that.
So as part of mano-wg I will add this to discussions for best practices for us to work out. The Jira tickets are created for the same as https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/OPERA-1 https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/OPERA-2 - Specific to Compass [cid:image001.png@01D2249A.7676B3E0] Thanks Prakash Prakash Ramchandran [logo_huawei] R&D USA FutureWei Technologies, Inc Email: prakash.ramchand...@huawei.com<mailto:s.c...@huawei.com> Work: +1 (408) 330-5489 Mobile: +1 (408) 406-5810 2330 Central Expy, Santa Clara, CA 95050, USA From: mano-wg-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:mano-wg-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of SULLIVAN, BRYAN L Sent: Wednesday, October 12, 2016 9:20 AM To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; mano...@lists.opnfv.org Subject: [mano-wg] [MANO] Discussion of how to include MANO stack components into scenarios Hi all, Cross-posting as not all may be on the MANO-WG list yet. Subscribe here: https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/mano-wg As noted today on the IRC for the Infra call: bryan_att> Bryan Sullivan #info<https://www.irccloud.com/#%21/ircs://irc.freenode.net:6697/%23info> We should have a discussion on the MANO WG re the need for scenarios for MANO testing. IMO as noted we should have no direct dependency upon any scenario. MANO components can be installed and uninstalled, replaced, etc dynamically as part of test scripts or post-install scripts. <bryan_att> Bryan Sullivan #info<https://www.irccloud.com/#%21/ircs://irc.freenode.net:6697/%23info> As noted in the Models project we will be doing this for a variety of MANO stack components, both to install them (a reusable capability) and then to test them for specific features e.g. TOSCA blueprint compatibility, from onboarding, deployment, lifecycle management, etc. 8:49 AM #info<https://www.irccloud.com/#%21/ircs://irc.freenode.net:6697/%23info> So far we have developed support for Tacker and Cloudify, and OpenBaton, ARIA+JuJu, OSM, etc all can be addressed if we have time resources. These should all run on any scenario. <fdegir> #info<https://www.irccloud.com/#%21/ircs://irc.freenode.net:6697/%23info> How to handle MANO can be discussed within MANO WG and MANO WG can come up with a common way of handling these 8:50 AM <bryan_att> Bryan Sullivan #info<https://www.irccloud.com/#%21/ircs://irc.freenode.net:6697/%23info> and of course, very soon (I hope) OpenECOMP! * I started a MANO WG wiki page for the discussion at Integrating MANO Components in OPNFV<https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/mano/Integrating+MANO+Components+in+OPNFV>. Some initial thoughts are shown there in a table that we can co-edit: Goal Assumption/Rationale/Exceptions Comments MANO stack component integration does not require new scenarios VIM NBI provide a clean interface allowing MANO stack components to be added post-deploy, e.g. as we do today with vIMS, or as the Models project is doing for various VNFM/NFVO components. Exceptions might include MANO projects that depend (for some unclear/poor reason!) on a specific version/fork of a VIM. Multiple MANO stack components can coexist in a single OPNFV deploy MANO components, even those that offer the same/overlapping functions, can coexist as NBI consumers on OPNFV. Good use cases for this include interim phases toward a truly converged future, in which a SP may need to use various VNFMs that work with a particular VNF/service modeling toolset. In that case multiple MANO component deployment will be expected to work. * Thanks, Bryan Sullivan | AT&T
_______________________________________________ opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss