Tommy, Hi, this is open source, you are welcome to join the project and/or attend the weekly meeting at 1100 EDT GMT-5 on Tuesdays. You can comment on any page, jira or meeting as we all try to get the release out by helping each other. In the next meeting we will be working with some of your AT&T developers in narrowing down some guidelines issues – there are about 4-7 AT%T working logging in public onap so far.
The original PDF is attached for reference only – mostly for AT&T personnel to compare to. We are using the Beijing guiidelines as a “guide” to bringing the release in line. – ignore the PDF. Have to be honest I am still reverse engineering the original AT&T EELF guidelines and the differences between the current spec. I was hoping that working on an RI would help in understanding the logging guidelines – but have not had a lot of time to spend on the project lately. My official name is F. Michael – as you know some corporate I.T systems force your first name hence the “frank” – have not used it since I changed my name at 10 to avoid “Frankenstein” bullying (had a big forehead and was German at the time). /michael From: CARPENTER, TOMMY J (TOMMY J) [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2018 18:28 To: Michael O'Brien <[email protected]> Subject: ONAP Logging Standards Michael (or is it Frank??) Our team comes to you battered, starved, and hungry, seeking logging answers =) The current ONAP logging page is a bit of a mess: https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=20087036 1) It has lots of red todos, even for R2, and we are between M3 and M4.. 2) it uses vague language like “consider using EELF” 3) It posts the original EELF field requirements as a PDF document but it’s unclear whether that must be adhered to https://wiki.onap.org/download/attachments/1015849/ONAP%20application%20logging%20guidelines.pdf?api=v2 4) there is discussion in the page itself about a field format that matches *one* of the EELF files however the PDF describes four files all with different formats, so which format should be used? What I would like to know is, is the PDF linked above going to stick around in R3, or is the logging formats and the number of files going to be revisited? We have some components that log to ELK but not in EELF format, and I want to know whether it’s worth the work adhering to that PDF or whether there are expected changes coming soon. If the logging *format* is going to change significantly soon, we are going to hold off on implementing that PDF as is. 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 <https://www.amdocs.com/about/email-disclaimer>
_______________________________________________ onap-discuss mailing list [email protected] https://lists.onap.org/mailman/listinfo/onap-discuss
