Dear all, I have added this topic to our next TSC call (4/30).
Best regards Catherine -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Eric Debeau via lists.onap.org Sent: Thursday, April 23, 2020 8:27 AM To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Lefevre, Catherine <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: DESBUREAUX Sylvain TGI/OLN <[email protected]> Subject: Re: [onap-tsc] [onap-cnf-taskforce] OVP 2.0 - Workstream 7 - ONAP POC and existing development work Hi Srini I have 2 concerns: - We are using ONAP term while using only one component from one project. If we generalize that position, it means that I can just use VES collector with my solution and states my solution is ONAP based. Why not, but we should agree at ONAP community. - We are using dedicated thread for the installation and it is not tested in the ONAP process as it is. As a result, it is difficult to validate it as ONAP technical recipe On technical topic, It is possible to select sub-components in OOM to only deploy relevant components. A&AI and DMAAP projects have started this effort and I belive that Sylvain would like to extend it for Guilin for other core projects. https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.onap.org_aai_oom_tree_components&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=_8s-Qg8dH9jVJb3N2InlcIFAGWzVSlbzfyVKvXEnlxU&e= https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.onap.org_oom_tree_kubernetes_dmaap_components&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=4Oy2l9g7fYBik7j1qoeJoIBDCHZv1cN9mSsfzQmD-Ww&e= As a result, you can only select the components required for your needs. I only raise concerns that I would like to share with TSC, but we should decide as a community. Best Regards Eric ________________________________________ De : [email protected] [[email protected]] de la part de Krzysztof Opasiak via lists.onap.org [[email protected]] Envoyé : mercredi 22 avril 2020 23:26 À : [email protected]; [email protected]; DEBEAU Eric TGI/OLN; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Objet : Re: [onap-cnf-taskforce] OVP 2.0 - Workstream 7 - ONAP POC and existing development work On 22.04.2020 23:14, Srini wrote: > Hi Eric, > > Just to be on the same page: > > 1. Application life cycle management on K8s Clusters is taken care by > following micro-services > 1. K8s Plugin Service in Multi Cloud project (new development) > 2. Mongo DB & etcd (Non-ONAP open source) > 3. SDC Client in Multi-Cloud (New development) > 4. SDC modifications > 5. SO modification > 6. Multi-Cloud broker modifications. > 2. ONAP4K8s is one recipe and useful for greenfield (e.g Enterprises > and Industry 4.0) deployments. It has following > 1. K8s Plugin Service in Multi Cloud project > 2. Security Micro-services (SMS, Vault, TPM related) > 3. 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. Such a feature is more than welcome in OOM so instead of creating this from scratch you can just submit a patch to OOM:) Patches are always welcomed > > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.onap.org_mult > icloud_k8s_tree_deployments_helm_onap4k8s&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQi > cvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5j > RnHVe8&s=n82OHFjD4Reoo8vY6NNhxFTeKUHkeUeSeW_YLyZdctQ&e= , > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__protect2.fireeye.com_url-3Fk-3Db34b8f34-2Dee9f335c-2Db34a047b-2D0cc47a3356b2-2D306c885440378ef9-26q-3D1-26u-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fgit.onap.org-252Fmulticloud-252Fk8s-252Ftree-252Fdeployments-252Fhelm-252Fonap4k8s-252C&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=wZuUAVCm6FlHmKtt5x4W4kg1NIfvM8nYGzo4qSPLGAo&e= > > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.onap.org_multicloud_k8s_tree_deployments_helm_onap4k8s&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=n82OHFjD4Reoo8vY6NNhxFTeKUHkeUeSeW_YLyZdctQ&e= > . > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__protect2.fireeye > .com_url-3Fk-3D4c32fa53-2D11e6463b-2D4c33711c-2D0cc47a3356b2-2D5fa68ca > 1d21ef0c1-26q-3D1-26u-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fgit.onap.org-252Fmulticlou > d-252Fk8s-252Ftree-252Fdeployments-252Fhelm-252Fonap4k8s&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=eMc7mEI7k9VMSOs-yCYgLz9LP1nFpcH4CqfnQbOk69I&e= > .> 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__git.onap > .org_oom_tree_kubernetes_onap_resources_overrides_onap-2D5g-2Dnetwork- > 2Dslicing.yaml&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_vo > XJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=-osif0Ohd3Mjs6YJZj > AOy72g7941Sine0hcmBPasHCQ&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__protect2.fireeye > .com_url-3Fk-3D91d50518-2Dcc01b970-2D91d48e57-2D0cc47a3356b2-2Db19b664 > 034a917f9-26q-3D1-26u-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fgit.onap.org-252Foom-252Ft > ree-252Fkubernetes-252Fonap-252Fresources-252Foverrides-252Fonap-2D5g- > 2Dnetwork-2Dslicing.yaml&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPa > wMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=UYp9i8Hy > MLnIdl-WswlsZvPCRm9LgoPgTHD8-yi5nxE&e= > > > 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://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.lfnetworking > .org_display_LN_OVP-2B2.0-2BWorkstreams&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMeMTSQicv > jIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6FlLRu5jRn > HVe8&s=1nscEJUBJ1iKBkx4RhKgjBqc6ndkzshiXuisJIhxh14&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__protect2.fireeye > .com_url-3Fk-3D6f5d5e21-2D329197a5-2D6f5cd56e-2D0cc47aa8f5ba-2Dc8e25d0 > 565acdc71-26q-3D1-26u-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fwiki.lfnetworking.org-252F > display-252FLN-252FOVP-252B2.0-252BWorkstreams&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMe > MTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6Fl > LRu5jRnHVe8&s=YJ47fvWpGPHdcd5hoCrcBQO_U2-MYEsF1egy4w6eltw&e= > > > I have also updated the following wiki - > https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__wiki.lfnetworking > .org_pages_viewpage.action-3FpageId-3D34603941&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_HUMe > MTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN6Fl > LRu5jRnHVe8&s=VUzQ8Fj7mAGESYu2NDhTGIruu0PfvWx1LG0HT2u8ihs&e= > <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__protect2.fireeye > .com_url-3Fk-3D26cea1db-2D7b02685f-2D26cf2a94-2D0cc47aa8f5ba-2D1d49586 > a26fe8cde-26q-3D1-26u-3Dhttps-253A-252F-252Fwiki.lfnetworking.org-252F > pages-252Fviewpage.action-253FpageId-253D34603941&d=DwIF-g&c=LFYZ-o9_H > UMeMTSQicvjIg&r=c31OYuaPawMl_ySS_voXJQ&m=dbiyDQbgUeOGt8QHA6_yESImt6uaN > 6FlLRu5jRnHVe8&s=7pPb3vQRn39LLwRRR8Xp6_xyeJ8FMIAQ2XbIjCrF0Fo&e= > > > 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. > > -- Krzysztof Opasiak Samsung R&D Institute Poland Samsung Electronics _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 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 (#6179): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-tsc/message/6179 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]] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
