[onap-discuss] pairwise testing between MultiCloud and OOF

[Yang Bin]

Dear Sarat,

   Would you please suggest how to conduct the pairwise testing 
between OOF and MultiCloud?

As my understanding, the capacity check API has already been verified from 
Beijing Release, so should we test it again in this release?
Another interaction is indirect and pertaining to HPA testing which OOF should 
select the flavors and pass to multicloud via SO indirectly. I guess this part 
relies on the pairwise testing between SO and MultiCloud which is in progress.

Thanks

Best Regards,
Bin Yang,Solution Engineering Team,Wind River
ONAP Multi-VIM/Cloud PTL
Direct +86,10,84777126Mobile +86,13811391682Fax +86,10,64398189
Skype: yangbincs993


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12885): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12885
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27106867/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-discuss] user/pass for appc api index with OOM deployed ONAP

[Yang Bin]

Hi Taka

As I am going to do some simple pairwise testing between APPC and multicloud, I 
found that the user/pass (which was admin/admin) is not valid while I am trying 
to access the following apidox index: 
http://10.12.6.138:30230/apidoc/explorer/index.html


Would you please shed some light on this issue?
Thanks

Best Regards,
Bin Yang,Solution Engineering Team,Wind River
ONAP Multi-VIM/Cloud PTL
Direct +86,10,84777126Mobile +86,13811391682Fax +86,10,64398189
Skype: yangbincs993


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12884): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12884
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27106696/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-discuss] [msb] Kong 1.0 released

[Tal Liron]

This is a good question -- there is a lot of overlap in functionality. The
main difference is that Kong only operates at level 7 and supports only
APIs. But for APIs it has many more features beyond what Envoy can offer,
and the deployment is more sensible: Envoy requires proxies at both sides
of the communication, while Kong requires just a gateway.

I see room for both products, really: handle all APIs via Kong while having
Envoy safeguard all the lower level communication (including, perhaps, TLS).

Another big difference is that Istio+Envoy is transparent, while if you use
Kong you need to configure the whole application to use it as its gateway.

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 9:59 AM Addepalli, Srinivasa R <
srinivasa.r.addepa...@intel.com> wrote:

> Hi Tal,
>
>
>
> Does Kong has place if ISTIO is adopted (with ISTIO-ingress)?
>
>
>
> Thanks
>
> Srini
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* onap-discuss@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Tal Liron
> *Sent:* Monday, October 8, 2018 5:56 AM
> *To:* onap-discuss 
> *Subject:* Re: [onap-discuss] [msb] Kong 1.0 released
>
>
>
> I have nothing specific in mind, just everything. :) We would benefit if
> we can switch to using an upstream project with broad industry support.
> It's worth evaluating.
>
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 5:19 AM 赵化冰  wrote:
>
> Hi Tal,
>
> Good point!
>
> Sorry for the late, it was the national holiday in China last week.
>
> It definitely worths looking into the
> Kong, actually, the ideas behind MSB and Kong are very similar,
> we could explore the enhancements borrowed from Kong what can benefit ONAP.
>
> Do you have anything in particular in your mind?
>
>
>
> Cheers,
>
> Huabing
>
>
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 12:49 AM Tal Liron  wrote:
>
> Hi MSB folk,
>
>
>
> Kong  1.0 was just released. I see it as
> having some overlap with MSB, and it's used quite a lot in the enterprise.
> Perhaps it's worth looking into it as a supplement or replacement?
>
> 
>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12882): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12882
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26443378/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-discuss] updated CII Badging dashboard for ONAP

[Tony Hansen]

From the ONAP wiki page for CII Badging 
(https://wiki.onap.org/display/DW/CII+Badging+Program), there is a link to a 
dashboard (http://tlhansen.us/onap/cii.html) showing the current CII badging 
status for all ONAP projects. It’s been updated to have a set of displays lower 
down that will show you at a glance the status of EACH question for ALL of the 
projects in ONAP. You can then drill down to the actual responses used by each 
project, or see ALL of the responses. Using your mouse, hover or click on the 
items to see the additional information, or click on the [+]/[-] icons to 
expand/collapse information.

I hope people working on CII badging will find it useful.

Tony

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12881): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12881
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/27005468/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-discuss] [msb] Kong 1.0 released

[Srini]

Hi Tal,

Does Kong has place if ISTIO is adopted (with ISTIO-ingress)?

Thanks
Srini


From: onap-discuss@lists.onap.org [mailto:onap-discuss@lists.onap.org] On 
Behalf Of Tal Liron
Sent: Monday, October 8, 2018 5:56 AM
To: onap-discuss 
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [msb] Kong 1.0 released

I have nothing specific in mind, just everything. :) We would benefit if we can 
switch to using an upstream project with broad industry support. It's worth 
evaluating.

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 5:19 AM 赵化冰 
mailto:zhaohuab...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Tal,
Good point!
Sorry for the late, it was the national holiday in China last week.
It definitely worths looking into the Kong, actually, the ideas behind MSB and 
Kong are very similar, we could explore the enhancements borrowed from Kong 
what can benefit ONAP.
Do you have anything in particular in your mind?

Cheers,
Huabing

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 12:49 AM Tal Liron 
mailto:tli...@redhat.com>> wrote:
Hi MSB folk,

Kong 1.0 was just released. I see it as having 
some overlap with MSB, and it's used quite a lot in the enterprise. Perhaps 
it's worth looking into it as a supplement or replacement?


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12878): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12878
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26443378/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-discuss] S3P and the adoption of ONAP normative container base images in Dublin

[Adolfo Perez-Duran]

Hello Jason,

The CIA project has identified a set of normative container base images
 to
the adopted by all ONAP projects in Dublin.

Both the Integration project  and ONAP PTLs have expressed support for the
adoption of these images. Use of these images by ONAP projects will be a
requirement for Dublin M3.

Adoption of these base images could enable/impact S3P in at least two ways
(you may have other suggestions):

1. ONAP base images are platform agnostic. ONAP containers developed by
ONAP could be deployed on a variety of cloud providers. This has an impact
on ONAP portability.

2. ONAP base images are more efficient, require less time to pull, storage,
deploy and update. This has an impact on efficiency of operations and ONAP
deployability.

PTLs suggested reaching out to you to make you aware of the decision and to
get your input to ensure that this requirement (adopting ONAP normative
images) is properly considered and called out as part of the S3P
requirements for Dublin.

Thanks,

Adolfo

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12875): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12875
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26874697/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-discuss] [docs] Reminder: Vote on day and time for the docs meeting

[Sofia Wallin]

Friendly reminder!
If you are interested in joining the docs project, please add preferable time 
slot.

The poll will be closing Thursday this week.

Best regards,
Sofia

From: Sofia Wallin 
Date: Thursday, 4 October 2018 at 10:59
To: "jh2...@att.com" , rich bennett , 
"timo.per...@nokia.com" , "ks0...@att.com" 
, "sw3...@att.com" , "james.yang...@huawei.com" 
, "guosha...@chinamobile.com" 
, "liying...@chinamobile.com" 
, "kongl...@chinamobile.com" 
, "eric.deb...@orange.com" , 
"onap-discuss@lists.onap.org" 
Subject: [onap-discuss] [docs] Vote on day and time for the docs meeting

Hello docs team and PTLs,

Please fill in the poll to decide on the best day and time to run the docs 
meeting.
The options were discussed at Tuesday’s meeting.

Others who might be interested in joining are welcome to add preferable time 
slot.

https://doodle.com/poll/gutqzmtcrswcmk2y

 Thanks,
Sofia

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12873): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12873
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26874325/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-discuss] [msb] Kong 1.0 released

[Tal Liron]

I have nothing specific in mind, just everything. :) We would benefit if we
can switch to using an upstream project with broad industry support. It's
worth evaluating.

On Mon, Oct 8, 2018 at 5:19 AM 赵化冰  wrote:

> Hi Tal,
> Good point!
> Sorry for the late, it was the national holiday in China last week.
> It definitely worths looking into the
> Kong, actually, the ideas behind MSB and Kong are very similar,
> we could explore the enhancements borrowed from Kong what can benefit ONAP.
> Do you have anything in particular in your mind?
>
> Cheers,
> Huabing
>
> On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 12:49 AM Tal Liron  wrote:
>
>> Hi MSB folk,
>>
>> Kong  1.0 was just released. I see it as
>> having some overlap with MSB, and it's used quite a lot in the enterprise.
>> Perhaps it's worth looking into it as a supplement or replacement?
>> 
>>
>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12870): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12870
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26443378/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

[onap-discuss] Do you know why get this error

[haibin]

Hi Itohan,

I setup rancher in host according to 
onap-on-kubernetes-with-rancher.

When I execute [1], I got the below error. Anyone know how to fix it? Thank you 
very much!

[1] sudo docker run -d --restart=unless-stopped -p 8080:8080 --name 
rancher_server rancher/server:v1.6.14

time="2018-10-08T11:15:33Z" level=error msg="Error looking up token." 
error="HTTP error: 404 Not Found, 404"
time="2018-10-08T11:15:33Z" level=error msg="Error looking up token." 
error="HTTP error: 404 Not Found, 404"
time="2018-10-08T11:15:33Z" level=error msg="Error looking up token." 
error="HTTP error: 404 Not Found, 404"

---
Huang.haibin
11628530
86+18106533356


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12869): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12869
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26873288/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Re: [onap-discuss] [msb] Kong 1.0 released

[Huabing Zhao]

Hi Tal,
Good point!
Sorry for the late, it was the national holiday in China last week.
It definitely worths looking into the
Kong, actually, the ideas behind MSB and Kong are very similar,
we could explore the enhancements borrowed from Kong what can benefit ONAP.
Do you have anything in particular in your mind?

Cheers,
Huabing

On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 12:49 AM Tal Liron  wrote:

> Hi MSB folk,
>
> Kong  1.0 was just released. I see it as
> having some overlap with MSB, and it's used quite a lot in the enterprise.
> Perhaps it's worth looking into it as a supplement or replacement?
> 
>

-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.

View/Reply Online (#12866): https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/message/12866
Mute This Topic: https://lists.onap.org/mt/26443378/21656
Group Owner: onap-discuss+ow...@lists.onap.org
Unsubscribe: https://lists.onap.org/g/onap-discuss/unsub  
[arch...@mail-archive.com]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-