David, Yes right now the use cases have some hard coding to support them. The ModifyConfig used by APPC is legacy and should be deprecated. We do need to re-visit their API as well as to better support in the platform VNF specific payloads for recipes. But where do actors/recipes/payloads get defined? In the SDC Catalog? Or is that SME knowledge that should be configurable either via CLAMP or Policy? These are still open items to discuss.
We view the code being created in policy/drools-applications to be organic and suited for the Use Cases. Not necessarily designed to be used for Production. The policy platform itself allows you to build your own internal templates/models/policies that are suitable for your internal use. For actor implementations what we’d like to see is a common API from Policy to the SO and Controllers via Dmaap and also allow for customized Controllers (eg. Helpdesk ticket, Q-chat, other types of controllers, etc). The SO API in the vDNS use case is quite complicated and requires a lot of coding to support. This is not ideal long-term. Keep in mind ONAP is far from a released product, there will still need to be several releases for such items to be discussed and sorted out. I invite you to join the Control Loop Sub Committee and help use work towards that goal. Thanks, Pam Dragosh ONAP Policy PTL From: <[email protected]> on behalf of "Bainbridge, David" <[email protected]> Date: Friday, March 16, 2018 at 2:47 AM To: onap-discuss <[email protected]> Subject: [onap-discuss] Policy: Current State, Actors, APPC, and SO Hello, I am looking to better understand the current state of the policy modules in ONAP (master branch). I started looking at the policy code because I was wondering how to add a policy for a VNF. My initial thought was that I would be able to define a policy yaml file with an actor of APPC and a payload of some Netconf data and when the policy was triggered the Netconf would be pushed via APPC to my VNF. Looking at the code, it appears that this is not quite how it works today. If I interpreted the code correctly it appears that the APPC ModifyConfig recipe is hard coded to interact with the vFW VNF and has not yet been fleshed out to be generic. Is this an accurate assessment, or am I missing something? Next I headed down the code path to understand how a policy with the SO actor might look like. Here too it appears that things are not fully fleshed out and only the create VF orchestration is supported and that with a focus on the vDNS VNF. Again, I am looking for confirmation that my assessment it accurate and would be happy to learn I am incorrect. If my assessments are accurate, how can I better understand the direction both the APPC and SO actor will be implemented in the future and what is the expected timeline? Avèk respè, /david
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
