Hi Eric,
Just to be on the same page:
1. Application life cycle management on K8s Clusters is taken care by
following micro-services
* K8s Plugin Service in Multi Cloud project (new development)
* Mongo DB & etcd (Non-ONAP open source)
* SDC Client in Multi-Cloud (New development)
* SDC modifications
* SO modification
* Multi-Cloud broker modifications.
2. ONAP4K8s is one recipe and useful for greenfield (e.g Enterprises and
Industry 4.0) deployments. It has following
* K8s Plugin Service in Multi Cloud project
* Security Micro-services (SMS, Vault, TPM related)
* Mongo DB & etcd (Non-ONAP open source)
>From the beginning, we wanted to make sure that everything we do is modular
>and can be deployed standalone fashion, keeping micro-service architecture
>principles in mind.
ONAP4K8s recipe need not be used if the intention is to use along with rest of
ONAP (SDC, SO, AAF, OOF etc...). We have both models supported (standalone or
integrated).
ONAP4K8s is mainly for greenfield scenarios.
If the term 'ONAP' in ONAP4K8s is confusing, we can rename this recipe as
something else. I think based on another email on similar subject, you seem to
be implying that if people are not using some components such as SDC, SO, AAF
are not used, then it should not be called as ONAP. If this is the concern, we
don't mind removing ONAP4K8s page altogether and put it in places (such as
Akraino/ICN) where it is being used. Let us know.
Is the concern/confusion that we are not using OOM for this profile? If this is
the concern, we do have plans to ensure that OOM is leveraged for creating the
profile with above services as in (2). But at this time, OOM granularity is
selection of projects, but not micro-services in each project. Hence, we
created something to move forward.
Thanks
Srini
From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On
Behalf Of Eric Debeau via lists.onap.org
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2020 11:51 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected];
[email protected]; [email protected]
Subject: Re: [onap-cnf-taskforce] OVP 2.0 - Workstream 7 - ONAP POC and
existing development work
Hi
I participated this afternoon to the various sessions around CNF where there is
a lot of activities for this long journey towards managing CNF.
However, I am still confused about the communication about ONAP4K8S and the
statement that we should rely on ONAP4K8S to manage CNF in ONAP.
We can not state that ONAP4K8 is an ONAP profile. Based on the code available
on the ONAP repo
https://git.onap.org/multicloud/k8s/tree/deployments/helm/onap4k8s, we can see
that ONAP4K8S is not using existing ONAP project. There is a dedicated chart
for the deployment not reusing existing ONAP ones (managed by OOM project):
https://git.onap.org/multicloud/k8s/tree/deployments/helm/onap4k8s. It is only
based on one Docker from multicoud project (multicloud-ks), mongodb, etcd and
other common components with no reference to existing official ONAP charts
defined in OOM repo.
I have no problem if we consider it clearly as a PoC, but we can not claim that
is an ONAP profile and the way we communicate on ONAP4K8S is not clear an is
very confusing.
As an example of "ONAP profile", we can find one for 5G slicing use-case where
the use-case team has defined an optimized subset of ONAP components for their
slicing use-case:
https://git.onap.org/oom/tree/kubernetes/onap/resources/overrides/onap-5g-network-slicing.yaml
We really need to clarify this topic.
Best Regards
Eric
________________________________
De :
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
[[email protected]] de la part de Ranny Haiby (Samsung) via
lists.onap.org [[email protected]]
Envoyé : mardi 21 avril 2020 01:56
À :
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>;
[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
Objet : Re: [onap-cnf-taskforce] OVP 2.0 - Workstream 7 - ONAP POC and existing
development work
Hi Catherine,
Thanks for defining the scope of WS7. I admit it was not clear to me before,
and now it makes much sense.
One thing If I may suggest - the phrasing of "Initial experimentations with
basic CNF(s)..." sounds a bit non-committal, as if we are not sure if and when
we want to support CNFs. How about "Incremental improvements to accommodate for
CNF(s) in order to validate..."
Regards,
Ranny.
From:
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
on behalf of Catherine LEFEVRE
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Reply-To:
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>,
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Date: Monday, April 20, 2020 at 12:16 PM
To:
"[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>"
<[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Subject: Re: [onap-cnf-taskforce] OVP 2.0 - Workstream 7 - ONAP POC and
existing development work
Resent-From: <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>
Team,
I have tried to define the scope of WS07 track as follows:
WS07 Scope: ONAP POCs & Existing Development Work to support CNFs
* Initial experimentations with basic CNF(s) in order to validate
onboarding, instantiation of multiple CNFs, monitoring, etc. processes
* Implement what you learn from ETSI-based CNF support
* Pursue our Cloud Native Security journey by leveraging the benefits of a
Service Mesh
https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/display/LN/OVP+2.0+Workstreams<https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=6f5d5e21-329197a5-6f5cd56e-0cc47aa8f5ba-c8e25d0565acdc71&q=1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.lfnetworking.org%2Fdisplay%2FLN%2FOVP%2B2.0%2BWorkstreams>
I have also updated the following wiki -
https://wiki.lfnetworking.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=34603941<https://protect2.fireeye.com/url?k=26cea1db-7b02685f-26cf2a94-0cc47aa8f5ba-1d49586a26fe8cde&q=1&u=https%3A%2F%2Fwiki.lfnetworking.org%2Fpages%2Fviewpage.action%3FpageId%3D34603941>
I have merged #1 and #5 together.
Under item #1 - I have also added the CDS work developed in Frankfurt as
suggested by Lucasz
Shall I also merge #3 SO with the new #1 cFW POC ?
If yes then I can rename #1 as "Initial experimentations with basic CNF(s) in
order to validate onboarding, instantiation of multiple CNFs, monitoring
processes"
So it gives us more time to evaluate the two paths - SO & Multi-Cloud.
The OVP Cloud Native session is on day3 so it would be great if we can finalize
our WS07 section before that
I have also added a note 'draft version' so it gives us an opportunity to
refine our mind.
Thanks in advance for your support.
Best regards
Catherine
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations
confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce
message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages
electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou
falsifie. Merci.
This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged
information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete
this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been
modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#6170): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/6170
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/73203622/21656
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/leave/2743226/1412191262/xyzzy
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
