from:"morgan.richomme"

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [release][gambia] MS2 - Test case documentation in the test case database - May 25

2018-05-29 Thread morgan.richomme

hi

I think you need to contact Dovetail project.
As far as I know, the token API has been introduced to secure the reporting for 
dovetail.
Serena should have the best view on this topic now.

/Morgan

Le mardi 29 mai 2018 à 10:46 +0200, ollivier.ced...@gmail.com a écrit :
Hello David,

Functest team doesn't maintain the API (we are endusers) and I'm not aware 
about that changes.
This procedure should be maintained by the right devs instead of Functest team.

Morgan and Jose had very well described the procedure as it was.

Cédric

On lun., 2018-05-28 at 21:24 -0700, David McBride wrote:
+Jose, Morgan for background/history

Cedric,

The procedure was documented by Jose Lausuch (previous Functest PTL), so 
presumably, this procedure is owned by Functest. Is that not correct?  If not, 
then who owns the procedure.

David

On Mon, May 28, 2018 at 5:08 AM, 
mailto:ollivier.ced...@gmail.com>> wrote:
David,

It seems that the wiki page is deprecated (the procedure exits on failure).

401: TestAPI id is not provided


We can't add new test cases as proposed by
https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6825128

Cédric

On mer., 2018-05-16 at 08:47 -0700, David McBride wrote:
Team,

Traditional track:  this is a requirement.

CD track:  we are making MS2 optional for the CD track until the new release 
process is further developed. Please send me feedback about:

  *   Does MS2 (test case documentation) make sense for the CD track?
  *   Should the schedule for the milestone be the same as for the traditional 
track (i.e., two weeks after release plans are due)?
  *   How should we define compliance? For the traditional track, we have the 
test case database. Projects show compliance by sending me a link to their test 
cases in the DB.  Is there something equivalent for the CD track?

Milestone 2 - test case documentation - is scheduled for 1 week from Friday on 
May 25.  Once you have documented your test cases in the test case database, 
please send me a link to those test cases so that I can credit your compliance.

See these 
instructions for 
declaring your project and adding your test cases:
https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6825128

To demonstrate compliance, please send me a URL like the one used as an example 
in the instructions:
http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1/projects/fastdatastacks/cases

Please let me know if you have any questions.

--
David McBride
Release Manager, OPNFV
Mobile: +1.805.276.8018
Email/Google Talk: 
dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
Skype: davidjmcbride1
IRC: dmcbride

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss






_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Functest reporting page 404

2018-04-26 Thread morgan.richomme

as far as I can see a new reporting docker has been generated 50 hours ago 
introducing a regression
the menu page functest.html (status / vIMS / Tempest) is not copied in the 
different version directories (fraser/master/..)

all the other pages were still propertly generated
http://testresults.opnfv.org/fraser/functest/status-apex.html

but the http://testresults.opnfv.org/fraser/functest/functest.html was not 
available hence the 404
functest.html was only at the root of the display directory

I just copied the file within the docker to quickly fix the issue
root@920a228d09f6:~/releng-testresults/reporting/display#
 cp functest.html fraser/functest/

minor fix to be done to be sure functest.html is properly copied in the version 
subdirs

/Morgan

Le jeudi 26 avril 2018 à 21:33 -0700, David McBride a écrit :
+Aric, Trevor

Hm... it was working earlier in the week.

On Thu, Apr 26, 2018 at 5:08 PM, Beierl, Mark 
> wrote:
Hello,

All the Functest reports for Master and Fraser are giving 404 from testresults:

http://testresults.opnfv.org/master/functest/functest.html
http://testresults.opnfv.org/fraser/functest/functest.html

Does anyone know why?

Regards,
Mark

Mark Beierl
SW System Sr Principal Developer
Dell EMC | Cloud & Communication Service Provider Solution
mobile +1 613 314 8106
mark.bei...@dell.com


___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss





___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Fraser] Fraser Functest run on Orange ONAP Open lab

2018-04-18 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

I will modify our CI chains in order to alternate check with fraser / master 
and keep on providing feedback.
We may change the config to make the dashboard publically available
After one week of perfect runs (last week), we started getting some errors.. 
api_check / refstack / tempest / rally / patrole (not always the same tests)
but all the errors were linked to volume management
Lots of old test volumes got stuck and it was not possible to delete them.
All the problems were due to cinder operations launched on 1 of the 3 
controllers (HA mode), it explains the random effect (sometimes patrole was OK 
when cinder operations were done on controler 1 or 2 and fails when done on 
controler 3)
It was impossible to delete them properly. There was probably a loss of 
synchronization on this controler.
The decision was taken to reboot this controller

After the reboot, fraser tests are back to nominal this morning.

++--+-+--++
| TEST CASE  | PROJECT  | TIER| 
DURATION | RESULT |
++--+-+--++
|  connection_check  | functest | healthcheck |  
00:07   |  PASS  |
| api_check  | functest | healthcheck |  
09:53   |  PASS  |
| snaps_health_check | functest | healthcheck |  
00:53   |  PASS  |


+--+--+---+--++
|  TEST CASE   | PROJECT  |  TIER | 
DURATION | RESULT |
+--+--+---+--++
|  vping_ssh   | functest | smoke |  00:56  
 |  PASS  |
|vping_userdata| functest | smoke |  00:41  
 |  PASS  |
| tempest_smoke_serial | functest | smoke |  18:43  
 |  PASS  |
| rally_sanity | functest | smoke |  27:11  
 |  PASS  |
|   refstack_defcore   | functest | smoke |  08:11  
 |  PASS  |
|   patrole| functest | smoke |  04:57  
 |  PASS  |
| snaps_smoke  | functest | smoke |  58:07  
 |  PASS  |
| odl  | functest | smoke |  00:00  
 |  SKIP  |
| odl_netvirt  | functest | smoke |  00:00  
 |  SKIP  |
|neutron_trunk | functest | smoke |  00:00  
 |  SKIP  |
+--+--+---+--++
vnf tests in progress

it is interesting and shows clearly the need for long duration tests :)

OK for xtesting update.
I am currently trying to finalize some VNF testing that I planned to integrated 
in an xtesting/onap-vnf, I will share with the integration team when it will be 
more mature
Meanwhile our xtesting/onap-robot is run daily on our Open Lab

/Morgan

Le jeudi 12 avril 2018 à 14:16 +0200, OLLIVIER Cédric IMT/OLN a écrit :
Hello Morgan,

Thank you very much for your help.
All tests done via ONAP OpenLab has been very helpful throughout the F-release 
by providing the quickest feedbacks.
We are checking if Functest testcases have to complete Snaps’ garbage 
collectors for floating ips.
That would explain this remaining resources.

Yes,  we will target live testing for the next release.
http://testresults.opnfv.org/functest/gambiachallenges/

About the reuse of OPNFV in ONAP, Xtesting has been synchronized to Queens this 
morning (opnfv/xtesting:latest).
Onap Healthcheck container could inherit from opnfv/xtesting:fraser if it needs 
requirements synchronized with OpenStack Pike.

Functest (master) could switch to Queens as well in order to get first 
feedbacks before next MS0.
https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/3/

Cédric

De : RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN
Envoyé : mardi 10 avril 2018 09:52
À : dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; OLLIVIER 
Cédric IMT/OLN
Cc : helen.c...@huawei.com; DEBEAU Eric IMT/OLN; gabriel.yuy...@huawei.com
Objet : [OPNFV] [Fraser] Fraser Functest run on Orange ONAP Open lab

Hi

for information, we switched to the fraser version for our daily test on our 
ONAP OpenLab, a communit lab for ONAP users.
Even if the lab is used by ONAP contributors for ONAP testing, we are reusing 
Functest test suites to be sure that the infrastructure supporting ONAP is 
still properly working.

We were using latest tag so far and decided to go to fraser to provide some

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Fraser] Fraser Functest run on Orange ONAP Open lab

2018-04-10 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

for information, we switched to the fraser version for our daily test on our 
ONAP OpenLab, a communit lab for ONAP users.
Even if the lab is used by ONAP contributors for ONAP testing, we are reusing 
Functest test suites to be sure that the infrastructure supporting ONAP is 
still properly working.

We were using latest tag so far and decided to go to fraser to provide some 
feedback for the OPNFV forthcoming release.
The infrastructure has been deployed using XCI/bifrost scripts + Kolla 
installer (currently under integration in XCI) on bare metal.
The scenario corresponds to a basic os-nosdn-nofeature-ha scenario.

the results are perfect :)

++--+-+--++
| TEST CASE  | PROJECT  | TIER| 
DURATION | RESULT |
++--+-+--++
|  connection_check  | functest | healthcheck |  
00:07   |  PASS  |
| api_check  | functest | healthcheck |  
08:26   |  PASS  |
| snaps_health_check | functest | healthcheck |  
00:49   |  PASS  |
++--+-+--++

+--+--+---+--++
|  TEST CASE   | PROJECT  |  TIER | 
DURATION | RESULT |
+--+--+---+--++
|  vping_ssh   | functest | smoke |  00:42  
 |  PASS  |
|vping_userdata| functest | smoke |  00:35  
 |  PASS  |
| tempest_smoke_serial | functest | smoke |  12:23  
 |  PASS  |
| rally_sanity | functest | smoke |  20:46  
 |  PASS  |
|   refstack_defcore   | functest | smoke |  06:53  
 |  PASS  |
|   patrole| functest | smoke |  04:29  
 |  PASS  |
| snaps_smoke  | functest | smoke |  50:18  
 |  PASS  |
| odl  | functest | smoke |  00:00  
 |  SKIP  |
| odl_netvirt  | functest | smoke |  00:00  
 |  SKIP  |
|neutron_trunk | functest | smoke |  00:00  
 |  SKIP  |
+--+--+---+--++

+--+--+--+--++
|  TEST CASE   | PROJECT  | TIER | DURATION |   
  RESULT |
+--+--+--+--++
| cloudify_ims | functest | vnf  |  27:40   |   
   PASS  |
| vyos_vrouter | functest | vnf  |  18:23   |   
   PASS  |
|   juju_epc   | functest | vnf  |  51:17   |   
   PASS  |
+--+--+--+--++

Thanks to the functest and XCI team!
Tests will be run daily so we would report any issue if we are facing some but 
it looks pretty stable.
Unlike the traditionnal approach, we are running daily tests on a up 
infrastructure (we do not reinstall it systematically before launching the 
tests)
so it is connected somehow to the long duration test acctivities coordinated by 
Gabriel

The only issues we faced so far with latest version were due to the cleaning of 
the resources (shortages of floatting IPs)
This issue has been identified and will be addressed as far as I understood in 
Gambia release.
we run now a cleaning script after the tests to free some resources

As a conclusion, the Orange Onap OpenLab validates the Fraser scenario 
os-nosdn-nofeature-ha for XCI/Kolla with functest healthcheck/smoke/vnf 
(duration 3h and 20 minutes)
It could be interesting for us to add Yardstick daily tests...it is in the todo 
list...

Morgan


_

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

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [ONPA] [Integration] test API/Reporting integration chain follow-up (ad-hoc meeting)

2018-02-14 Thread morgan.richomme

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Romance Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T03
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=10
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN:MAILTO:morgan.richo...@orange.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=chenyan.br
 i...@chinatelecom.cn:MAILTO:chenyan@chinatelecom.cn
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=DEBEAU Eri
 c IMT/OLN:MAILTO:eric.deb...@orange.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Helen.Chen
 @huawei.com:MAILTO:helen.c...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Ran.Pollak
 @amdocs.com:MAILTO:ran.pol...@amdocs.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=gary.i.wu@
 huawei.com:MAILTO:gary.i...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=feng.xiaow
 e...@zte.com.cn:MAILTO:feng.xiao...@zte.com.cn
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Roger.Mait
 l...@amdocs.com:MAILTO:roger.maitl...@amdocs.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Tina.Tsou@
 arm.com:MAILTO:tina.t...@arm.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=gildas.lan
 i...@huawei.com:MAILTO:gildas.lani...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=tim.irnich
 @ericsson.com:MAILTO:tim.irn...@ericsson.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=rpaik@linu
 xfoundation.org:MAILTO:rp...@linuxfoundation.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=bryan.sull
 i...@research.att.com:MAILTO:bryan.sulli...@research.att.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=jwagantall
 @linuxfoundation.org:MAILTO:jwagant...@linuxfoundation.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=agardner@l
 inuxfoundation.org:MAILTO:agard...@linuxfoundation.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=onap-discu
 s...@lists.onap.org:MAILTO:onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=OPT-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=opnfv-tech
 -disc...@lists.opnfv.org:MAILTO:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=en-US:When: Wednesday\, February 14\, 2018 2:30 PM-3:3
 0 PM. UTC\nWhere: zoom.us/j/44 2:30 UTC\n\n*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*\n\n
 Hi\n\nplease feel free to join on https://zoom.us/j/44\n\nto conti
 nue the discussions on the demo done yesterday and discuss the next steps 
 if any on this proposal\n\nslide deck: https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpag
 e.action?pageId=6593670=/6593670/25433913/integration_demo_E2E_cha
 in.pdf\n
SUMMARY;LANGUAGE=en-US:[ONPA] [Integration] test API/Reporting integration 
 chain follow-up (ad-hoc meeting)
DTSTART;TZID=Romance Standard Time:20180214T153000
DTEND;TZID=Romance Standard Time:20180214T163000
UID:04008200E00074C5B7101A82E00824084E026FA5D301000
 0100012BBB2F8975A9F4E9BC963840632832F
CLASS:PUBLIC
PRIORITY:5
DTSTAMP:20180214T083712Z
TRANSP:OPAQUE
STATUS:CONFIRMED
SEQUENCE:0
LOCATION;LANGUAGE=en-US:zoom.us/j/44 2:30 UTC
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-APPT-SEQUENCE:0
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-OWNERAPPTID:2116187428
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-BUSYSTATUS:TENTATIVE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INTENDEDSTATUS:BUSY
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-ALLDAYEVENT:FALSE
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-IMPORTANCE:1
X-MICROSOFT-CDO-INSTTYPE:0
X-MICROSOFT-DISALLOW-COUNTER:FALSE
END:VEVENT
END:VCALENDAR
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [onap-discuss] [integration] demo E2E testing & reporting follow-up

2018-02-13 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

I uploaded the slidedeck used for the demo
I added some screenshots 
https://wiki.onap.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6593670=/6593670/25433913/integration_demo_E2E_chain.pdf

I got the action point to organize a follow-up on this topic through another 
meeting

I am not sure I have the rights to book a zoom for an ad-hoc session (my 
personnal account allows only 40 minutes sessions)
I tried to ask the question on the IRC chan but it is not very active and I did 
not find any guideline on the wiki (could make sense to add one page).
@Gildas could you help me to book such slot? I could suggest tomorrow or 
Thursday 2h30 UTC (same time than the integration meeting)

Some open questions need LF helpdesks view (see slide "next steps").
BTW I created a ticket to ONAP heldesk on the 5th of February but did not get 
any feedback so far 
(https://rt.linuxfoundation.org/SelfService/Display.html?id=52001)
Did I miss something on the procedure regarding ONAP helpdesk?
Meanwhile I wondered if it would be possible to mutualize things if OPNFV 
community agrees (+Tim, Gabriel, Ray, Heather and Aric in CC)
The testresults.opnfv.org machine could be shared (everything is already there 
DB, dockers, mechanism to backup the DB) and a testresults.onap.org subdomain 
could be easily created (hopefully) and configured
The VM would not suffer...
[morgan@gce-opnfv-sandbox-fbrockners
 ~]$ df -h
Sys. de fichiers Taille Utilisé Dispo Uti% Monté sur
/dev/sda1   75G 29G   47G  38% /
[morgan@gce-opnfv-sandbox-fbrockners
 ~]$ free -m
  totalusedfree  shared  buff/cache   available
Mem:   74803118 320 36840403451


/Morgan






Le mardi 13 février 2018 à 16:10 +, Tina Tsou a écrit :
Dear Morgan,

This is Tina Tsou, PTL of Auto Project. I was in Integration Project meeting 
just now. We are interested at your option #1 for the test API: integration 
OPNFV - ONAP.

Would you send the meeting invitation to opnfv-tech-discussion too? So Auto 
participants can join and learn from you.


Thank you,
Tina

On Feb 13, 2018, at 6:38 AM, Roger Maitland 
> wrote:

One clarification on OOM – it’s not a just a deployment tool, it manages the 
entire lifecycle of ONAP as shown in our logo.

Cheers,
Roger



From: 
onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org 
[mailto:onap-discuss-boun...@lists.onap.org] On Behalf Of 
morgan.richo...@orange.com
Sent: Tuesday, February 13, 2018 2:41 AM
To: bryan.sulli...@research.att.com; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Cc: feng.xiao...@zte.com.cn; 
onap-disc...@lists.onap.org
Subject: Re: [onap-discuss] [Auto] RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [integration] demo 
E2E testing & reporting next Tuesday?

Hi Bryan,

we can discuss it after the demo or offline
As far as I understand Auto is the equivalent of OOM, i.e. a deployment of ONAP 
based on kubernetes (but Auto is on OPNFV side) - do not hesitate to correct me 
if I am wrong
it would be possible to indicate Auto as 1 of the ONAP installer and collect 
the results of the tests
that is one of the interests to use the test API/Test DB independently from 
jenkins. Several CI chains can push results to provide an aggregate view of E2E 
Functional and later performance testing on ONAP.

and depending on the installer it is possible to customize the test list. For 
example if you have additional test cases through VES or Model projects.
/Morgan

Le vendredi 09 février 2018 à 16:54 +, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) a écrit :
Auto team,

FYI in case you have not seen this. Some of you may be collaborating with 
Morgan on the ONAP lab deployment, if not then perhaps there are some 
deployment tools you can leverage, or other ways that Orange can help the Auto 
project get off the ground with ONAP deployment for Auto use case 
development/testing.

For those cc’d who may not yet be aware of the Auto project: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=12389095
Other OPNFV project focused on functional capability / use case testing which 
will support and leverage the OPNFV-ONAP integration through the Auto project 
include VES (https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/ves/VES+Home) and Models 
(https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/models/Models+Home).

Progress toward ONAP-OPNFV integration will also support the OPNFV Lab As A 
Service (LaaS) use cases shown at 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/INF/Lab+as+a+Service, which will enable ONAP 
developers to access OPNFV deployed VIM/NFVI environments (and vice versa). 
This and other work in the Models project above will help setup a diverse 
VIM/NFVI environment for supporting

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Functest] PTL transfer

2017-11-13 Thread morgan.richomme

<<< text/html; charset="windows-1252": Unrecognized >>>
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [release][euphrates] recommended list of scenarios for release in Euphrates 5.0

2017-10-20 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

I fully support Jose's comments

"I've been told (a) the test frameworks are not sufficiently mature to 
be used for gating release; and (b) the community prefers to leave the 
decision about quality to the scenario owners. So, we are left with (1) 
deploy status; and (2) scenario owner judgment for determining scenario 
release."


for b) I think the scenario owner may decide what kind of tests he/she 
wants to run on his/her scenario to highlight the feature/performance/ 
... no need to run a vIMS onboarding if your scenario is focusing on 
data plane acceleration
However basic tests (for functest healthcheck & smoke) must be PASS to 
validate the scenario, it gives a minimum trust into the scenario...
Without a minimum Trust, I do not see how we could justify any 
certification program.


It is like a constitution, the power shall be balanced...it is not up to 
the scenario owner to declare _and_ validate a scenario.
As release manager, you should be the supreme court and guarantee this 
separation of powers..


for a) could you just elaborate a little bit
As far as I know I never got this feedback, so who told you that? what 
are the rationals behind that? what kind of maturity level do you expect?


Functest is ready since the first official release date - 2 weeks ago
Some scenarios already reached the criteria several weeks before the 
first release date including VNF onboarding testing (which are not part 
of smoke and healthcheck)
the framework is flexible and allows black listing of tests if scenario 
owner can justify any exception (upstream bugs, configuration 
restrictions,..)


The healthcheck tier is very stable since MS3, I do not think the gate 
has been broken once for euphrates..


I remember you send a mail to encourage testing projects for the 
integration phase
It is a bit surprising to see at the end that the release criteria is 
almost declarative


/Morgan




On 19/10/2017 17:41, David McBride wrote:

Hi Jose,

Scenario owners express intent-to-release on the scenario status page 
. 
Scenario owners indicated that they wanted to release each scenario in 
the recommended list.


I would very much like to use test results to gate release of 
scenarios.  That would be my preference.  However, each time this 
issue has come up, I've been told (a) the test frameworks are not 
sufficiently mature to be used for gating release; and (b) the 
community prefers to leave the decision about quality to the scenario 
owners. So, we are left with (1) deploy status; and (2) scenario owner 
judgment for determining scenario release.


We can certainly change this for future releases.  In order to do 
that, I'd like to have a recommendation on test requirements from the 
test working group, including which tests are gating, minimum test 
runs, the number of consecutive iterations that must pass, etc. Once 
we have approval from the TSC, then we can put those requirements in 
place.


David

On Thu, Oct 19, 2017 at 8:01 AM, Jose Lausuch > wrote:


Hi,

I just want to raise a concern the Functest team has been
discussing this morning.

This list is maybe good from a deployment prospective, but it
seems we are lowering the bar the older OPNFV gets… I remember in
the Arno and Brahmaputra days the release criteria was to pass
Functest/Yardstick, then we said that scenario owners can decide
to release or not release according to the results. Now it seems
that a deployable scenario is eligible to be released without
taking into account the quality, which can be acceptable.. but the
community and the users should know that some of these scenarios
do not even pass Healthcheck or vPing whereas others get 100%
success from Functest.

I am not saying we should not release them but if I were an user,
I would like to know some details about the quality of the
scenarios. I would not like to deploy something that cannot even
spawn VMs or do a simple ping between them… Maybe for the next
time, we could have a general release document/report about the
quality of each scenario and mention the known issues for those
which have problems to pass the minimum set of tests. Functest is
doing this by taking a snapshot of the dashboard at the release
date [1], but I do not think we should be the project responsible
for offering that information, it should be more visible and
centralized.

Regards,
Jose

[1] http://testresults.opnfv.org/functest/euphrates/





On 17 Oct 2017, at 22:50, David McBride
> wrote:

Team,

Based on scenario owner intent-to-participate, as well as a
review of deploy results, I'm recommending that the following
scenarios be

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] xci /functest

2017-10-13 Thread morgan.richomme

we made some tests using Functest (opnfv/functest-healthcheck and
functest-smoke - eupĥrates) on xci-baremetal in our labs.

we have reproducible results and would like to discuss with xci group
I did not see xci/functest recent logs on our Jenkins, do I miss something?
As far as I remember, results that look pretty similar to what we show
on xci/virtual

- opnfv/functest-healthcheck: 3 tests PASS

- opnfv/functest-smoke:
* vping_ssh: PASS
* vping_userdata: PASS
* tempest_smoke_serial: FAIL (success rate: 88% / expected 100%)
* raly_sanity: FAIL (success rate: 67% / expected 100%)
* refstack: FAIL (success rate: 92% /expected 100%)
* snaps_smoke: PASS

tempest_smoke_serial & refstack: the issues are mainly dealing with volume

_tempest_sm__oke_
tempest.api.network.*test_**networks.NetworksIpV6Test.**test_external_network_visibility*
... fail [0.232s]
tempest.api.network.*test_networks.NetworksTest.test_external_network_visibility*
... fail [0.240s]

tempest.api.*volume.test_volumes_actions.VolumesV1ActionsTest* ... fail
tempest.api.*volume.test_volumes_actions.VolumesV2ActionsTest* ... fail
tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_get.VolumesV1GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete*
... fail [2.072s]
tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_get.VolumesV1GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete_from_image*
... fail [1.999s]
tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_get.VolumesV2GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete*
... fail [1.927s]
tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_get.VolumesV2GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete_from_image*
... fail [1.857s]

tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_list.VolumesV1ListTestJSON* ... fail
tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_list.VolumesV2ListTestJSON* ... fail
tempest.scenario.*test_network_basic_ops.TestNetworkBasicOps.test_network_basic_ops*
... fail [29.493s]
tempest.scenario.*test_volume_boot_pattern.TestVolumeBootPattern.test_volume_boot_pattern*
... fail [3.325s]
tempest.scenario.*test_volume_boot_pattern.TestVolumeBootPatternV2.test_volume_boot_pattern*
... fail [3.328s]

_refstack_
tempest.api.compute.*volumes.test_attach_volume.AttachVolumeTestJSON.test_list_get_volume_attachments*
[9.194552s] ... FAILED
tempest.api.volume.test_volumes_get.VolumesV2GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete
[2.017406s] ... FAILED
tempest.api.volume.*test_volumes_get.VolumesV2GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete_as_clone*
[1.461944s] ... FAILED
tempest.api.volume.test_volumes_get.VolumesV2GetTest.test_volume_create_get_update_delete_from_image
[2.079463s] ... FAILED

some tests are run in refstack and tempest_smoke_serial and are FAIL in
both cases of course

the errors on network_visibility are surely due to lab configuration

Rally: errors in Cinder (volume again), Nova (Live migration impacted by
volume) and Ceilometer (even if service is here, did not look precisely
at the error)

As Ceph is not supported yet in xci virtual/baremetal but I saw a patch
recently addressing this.
Anyway, I assume the feedback is valuable all the more as it can be
confirmed on xci/virtual

So far, regarding test criteria, all the functest smoke runs will be FAIL

I would be interested by any pointer on functest tests on xci in jenkins
and your view on the test results and the way we manage it (shall we
exclude some cases/suites)

/Morgan

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Releasing OPNFV tools in Euphrates

2017-10-11 Thread morgan.richomme


Agree to extend to mailing list :)

just to summarize, we started the discussion on doc for calipso for 
Euphrates, it triggered discussions more general topics including

- a topic on how to include NFVBench in Euphrates (Operation/testing)
- a discussion on OPNFV release / tooling release decorrelation

we can add a slot for this during the next weekly meeting 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Test+Working+Group+Weekly+Meeting 
(maybe a bit late regarding the release date)
I was not able to attend the APAC slot this morning, according to IRC, I 
was not the only one...


/Morgan

On 10/10/2017 21:02, Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote:


I wish this discussion was brought up on the tech-discuss mailing list ;-)

I had exactly the same questions than Frank at the very bottom and 
asked similar questions to David this morning on the release packaging.


Heather is also right on target to feel like tools should be 
independent of the platform release! This is clearly one of the 
benefits of having an independent versioning for projects vs release 
which I have been trying to push with the release tagging discussion.


For me there is absolutely no question that testing tools developed in 
OPNFV will be used outside of OPNFV release cycle and potentially on 
NFVi platforms that are not even in OPNFV labs and this clearly 
mandates an independent versioning for each tool project.


Trying to version tools in lock step to OPNFV releases was reasonable 
for the early releases but we saw first hand how it became more and 
more difficult to keep this going as we get more tools/projects and 
more dependencies between projects – and now more users of these 
projects. As a matter of fact, functest is the first to break ranks 
with the way they are planning to manage their version tags for 
euphrates. I feel like functest will not even really use the official 
euphrates image (the one tagged with “5.0.0” or now “opnfv-5.0.0”) 
because it is just too static/slow-paced. Instead functest will use a 
“stable” or “euphrates” tagged image (from discussion with Cedric and 
Morgan). Functest is used outside of OPNFV labs so clearly they need 
it versioned properly outside of the OPNFV release cycle.


I’m in the same situation with NFVbench, which is already used outside 
of OPNFV labs.


Having said that, the sky is not falling on us because these are 
actually good problems to have and shows industry adoption of OPNFV 
projects. But we need to adjust the way projects are versioned, from a 
best effort ad-hoc basis to a more focused/streamlined one.


More inline on NFVbench…

*From: *"morgan.richo...@orange.com" 
*Date: *Tuesday, October 10, 2017 at 9:25 AM
*To: *"Frank Brockners (fbrockne)" , Sofia Wallin 

*Cc: *Fatih Degirmenci , Jose Lausuch 
, "Alec Hothan (ahothan)" , 
'Brandon Wick' 

*Subject: *Re: Releasing OPNFV tools in Euphrates

design is done by LF design team
they create icons for the projects and create the global image

the testing catalog page provides interactivity on the image to 
display the different test cases

it is based on the cases descriptions created in the test databases
http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1/projects/yardstick/cases
http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1/projects/vsperf/cases
changing the image => change the processing for the roll over, 
onclick, ...


in a first step, regarding the time frame, we could

1) change the figure in the doc (static)
 => need LF update @Brandon possible to get visual for NFVBench and 
include it on the main picture?
as far as I understand it is not connected to CI, Test API, ..so it 
should be somewhere in the Performance Testing box but without 
connection with Test API or Yardstick


[Alec] I did read emails sent by Morgan regarding that testing landing 
page but was not sure how to position NFVbench.


NFVbench also covers the operational side because it is designed from 
the get go to run in production. Today there is no solution for doing 
data plane performance measurement and monitoring on a production 
cloud because it is just too costly and too complex to do with 
traditional benchmarking methods (HW traffic generators in every cloud 
is just not reasonable). NFVbench fills that gap for practically no 
cost (you just need a NIC card - a tiny fraction of the cost of a pod).


So yes it can be used as a testing tool (to test and measure data 
plane performance) but is also and foremost a tool for production. To 
make it simpler in euphrates we can just put it in the testing group 
for now. To make it even simpler, perhaps we should just add 
“NFVbench” next to vsperf in the diagram since they both tackle the 
data plane performance? No need to add a new logo, we can worry about 
a better arrangement for Fraser



2) reference NFVBench in the testing wiki page

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [testing group] landing page: score and trust indicator

2017-09-15 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi

we initiated the landing page some time ago: 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/testing/#!/landingpage/table


front and back end are now ready
Jack started doing an update for Yardstick
It is now possible to call the Test API to set a score and see/modify 
trust indicator after a CI run.


during the plugfest we saw that we were not fully aligned on what we 
want to show on such landing page
the recent discussion on the reporting pages show also some differences 
on the way we report our results


I think we need to agree on a minimum common view during a Testing 
working meeting to have a consistent page


Concretely we have 2 scenario parameters for this landing page:
- Scenario score
- Scenario Trust Indicator

Scenario score
***
Today there are 2 main views

VSPERF, Yardstick and Bottleneck => report Jenkins status assuming that
- SLA/threshold neither defined (VSPERF) nor taken into account 
(Yardstick) to set test suite criteria to PASS or FAIL
- if test suite deals with lots of tests => only 1 aggregated result 
corresponding to the test suite "runnability" in CI


In Functest we do a calculation based on the sum of all the individual 
cases (https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6828617) that 
is why in reporting page we have score like 14/27, 18/18, 1/9 
The first figure represent the success (18/18 = max score; 1/9 = very 
poor results)
the max score represent the richness of the test suite, i.e. /9 = 3 test 
cases in the suite; / 27 = 9 test cases.
We have a x3 factor due to the criteria of 4 consecutive runs. In the 
evolution I had in mind to report only the scenario status
In Storperf Mark defined and takes into the threshold to set the test to 
PASS or FAIL


So we may have 2 approaches for the landing page
- The Jenkins status (nb run OK / nb attempted over the last N days)
- The testing status (tests are run and results are according to project 
success criteria e.g. for functest we expect the max score, 15/18 will 
be considered as FAIL)


What is your view?
What kind of score would you give to the CI runs currently running?
shall we be all consistent or is it up to each project to define what it 
wants to show in such page?


Trust Indicator
**
this parameter allows to consider the scenario evolution versus time
in previous discussions we considered 3 states:
- Silver (init)
- Gold
- Platinium

this indicator is related to the scenario on which a test project is 
running the test suite


A simple proposal for scenario promotion



/Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Fuel/Armband ODL scenario rename in Functest test results dashboard

2017-09-13 Thread morgan.richomme

functest reporting shows what it is in test DB
if you see odl_l3, it means that odl_l3 scenarios have been triggerred
over the last 10 days in CI

https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-fuel-armband-virtual-daily-master/31/console

if only odl scenario are triggereg, reference to odl_l2 or odl_l3 will
disappear automatically

/Morgan

On 13/09/2017 01:19, Alexandru Avadanii wrote:

Hi,
Fuel and Armband projects renamed the ODL-L3 scenario to simply ODL, and
dropped the ODL-L2 scenarios, as described in [1].
I noticed that the Functest results dashboard pages [2, 3] still use the old
naming scheme, although the new scenario is also listed.
Would it be possible to cleanup obsolete scenarios?

Thank you,
Alex

[1] https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/FUEL-279
[2] http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/master/functest/status-f...@x86.html
[3]
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/master/functest/status-f...@aarch64.html

--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager

tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [announce] Opening nominations for Committers-at-Large TSC & Committer Board elections

2017-09-08 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

thanks Wenjing!

I unfortunately cannot accept the nominations.
There are currently some internal reorganization on my side (as in LF 
networking projects...) preventing me to be fully involved in OPNFV 
after Euphrates, which is a prerequisite to apply for these positions.


/Morgan


On 07/09/2017 23:53, Raymond Paik wrote:

Wenjing, thanks for getting things started on the board as well.

Hongbo & Morgan, do you accept your nominations (for Morgan there are 
actually 2 nominations for TSC & Board)?


Cheers,

Ray

On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 11:48 AM, Wenjing Chu > wrote:


It’s great to see all the high caliber candidates for
 Committers-at-Large TSC members – a good sign for a vibrate
community.

In that spirit, I like to start with the committer board
nomination as well.

I like to nominate Hongbo Tian (Huawei) for committer board
member. Hongbo has been the long time PTL of dovetail dedicating a
lot of hard work to help bring Dovetail to near its first launch.
He’s also a big contributor to and an organizer of each of the
Plugfests. The board can benefit from more voices from the trenches.

I’d also like to nominate Morgan Richomme (Orange) for another
term of committer Board member and committer-at-large TSC member.
Not only that Morgan is uniquely qualified based on his leadership
in Functest (the first and only project graduated from incubation
so far) and test working group, and Pharos, but also that his
collaborative and constructive style brings huge value to a
project – and similarly to the TSC and board. So I hope Morgan can
step forward for both again.

Regards

Wenjing


On 03/09/2017 19:42, Raymond Paik wrote:

All,

I'm kicking off the nomination process for Committers-at-Large
TSC (electing 5 members) plus the Committer Board (electing 1)
elections.

The list of eligible committers who can run for & vote in both
elections are posted here
, and I want
to encourage all eligible committers to nominate community
members who can represent the OPNFV technical community in
both the TSC and the Board.  Self nominations are also
welcome.   As I mentioned earlier in the week, I hope to see a
diverse group of community members represented--in terms of
geography, gender, projects,  service providers/vendors,
etc.--in the nominations.

Nominations should be posted to opnfv-tech-discuss & opnfv-tsc
mailing lists by 5pm Pacific Time on September 8th (Friday). 
You are welcome to reply to this email or if you're sending

out a separate note, please include phrases like "Committer
Board nomination" or "Committer-at-Large TSC nomination" in
email subjects.  In nomination statements, please list the
following information:

  * Which election (TSC vs. Board) the nomination is for
  * Name of the nominee
  * Organization
  * A brief description of nominee's qualifications

As nominations are accepted, I will add them to this page
. 
There will be separate Condorcet ballot for these two

elections, and they will be sent out by September 11th.

Thanks,

Ray




___

opnfv-tsc mailing list

opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org 

https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tsc


-- 


Morgan Richomme

Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

  


Network architect for innovative services

Future of the Network community member

Open source Orange community manager

  

  


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106

mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326

morgan.richo...@orange.com 


_

  


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

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Illustration for landing pages

2017-09-08 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi Brandon

do you think LF design team could create 2 illustrations for 2 landing 
pages where we have OPNFV resources
- one for the testing landing page (submenu: reporting, dashboarding, 
testAPI, test DB,..)

- one for the VNF kanding page (submenu: catalog)

note that we already integrated the icons provided for the project 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/testing/#!/select/visual

but a landing page for the root addresses will be more user friendly
http://testresults.opnfv.org
http://vnf.opnfv.org (DNS config in progress)

and additionnaly if we may have "fun" default error page (404 / 500) it 
will be cool...


at the moment
http://testresults.opnfv.org/ => welcome to Nginx (default)
http://testresults.opnfv.org/sdfdsf => default nginx error page

/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [announce] Opening nominations for Committers-at-Large TSC & Committer Board elections

2017-09-07 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi

I would like to nominate Gabriel Yuyang (Huawei) for the TSC 
Committer-at-Large election.
Gabriel is the Bottlenecks PTL. He is an active member of the Testing 
working group.
He is a leader on on the long duration/stress/robustness/resiliency 
testing activities that will be key in the future.


/Morgan


On 03/09/2017 19:42, Raymond Paik wrote:

All,

I'm kicking off the nomination process for Committers-at-Large TSC 
(electing 5 members) plus the Committer Board (electing 1) elections.


The list of eligible committers who can run for & vote in both 
elections are posted here 
, and I want to 
encourage all eligible committers to nominate community members who 
can represent the OPNFV technical community in both the TSC and the 
Board.  Self nominations are also welcome.   As I mentioned earlier in 
the week, I hope to see a diverse group of community members 
represented--in terms of geography, gender, projects,  service 
providers/vendors, etc.--in the nominations.


Nominations should be posted to opnfv-tech-discuss & opnfv-tsc mailing 
lists by 5pm Pacific Time on September 8th (Friday).  You are welcome 
to reply to this email or if you're sending out a separate note, 
please include phrases like "Committer Board nomination" or 
"Committer-at-Large TSC nomination" in email subjects.  In nomination 
statements, please list the following information:


  * Which election (TSC vs. Board) the nomination is for
  * Name of the nominee
  * Organization
  * A brief description of nominee's qualifications

As nominations are accepted, I will add them to this page 
.  
There will be separate Condorcet ballot for these two elections, and 
they will be sent out by September 11th.


Thanks,

Ray



___
opnfv-tsc mailing list
opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tsc



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] url changes on testing group reporting pages

2017-09-06 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi

for information, we modified the test reporting configuration on 
testresults.opnfv.org.


The target based on docker is now available under 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/ (previously reporting2).


Note that Vsperf has been added recently on master 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/master/vsperf/status-fuel.html


the test case catalogue/landing page are accessible through 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/testing/


the old reporting page is still visible under 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting.old/


/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [FuncTest] Test Database Swagger URI changed?

2017-09-01 Thread morgan.richomme


credentials are no more public
access is for OPNFV PTL

I sent you the info directly


On 31/08/2017 21:18, Bryan Sullivan wrote:
The testresults DB password seems to have changed. The value on the 
wiki @ https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=6828013 
 is not 
working.


Can someone post the new credentials?
Where can I find the documentation on the test API ... 


Quick Search. Help. Online Help Keyboard Shortcuts Feed Builder What’s new
wiki.opnfv.org



Thanks,
Bryan Sullivan

*From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
 on behalf of 
morgan.richo...@orange.com 

*Sent:* Wednesday, January 4, 2017 12:33 AM
*To:* SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
*Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [FuncTest] Test Database Swagger 
URI changed?

Serena fixed the issue
Probably bad config introduced by an update 3 weeks ago (and I am 
probably the one to blame...)


/Morgan


Le 03/01/2017 à 17:45, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L a écrit :


Hi all,

I tried to verify the API URL 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/swagger/spec.html#!/spec/update 
which had been used earlier to update the database, but it appears 
not to be working now, using the credentials as shown on the page 
“Where can I find the documentation on the test API? 
”. Did 
the swagger API URL change?


Thanks,

Bryan Sullivan | AT



___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com
_

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.



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] 2 questions on OPNFV docker repo

2017-08-30 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

2 pending questions regarding the way we are managing our docker files

1) Cedric sent a mail 2 weeks ago ([OPNFV Helpdesk #42909] New Functest 
Docker repositories) in order to create new docker repositories: 
opnfv/functest-features, opnfv/functest-components and opnfv/functest-vnf


As it has not been done yet we are currently using Cedric's private 
docker repo (where he customized the different hook) 
ollivier/functest-components,  ollivier/functest-features and 
ollivier/functest-vnf and we referenced them in releng


But, of course, it would make more sense to rely on official OPNFV 
docker...


José asked Trevor B. to create the first repo (opnfv/functest-core, 
opnfv/functest-healthcheck and opnfv/functest-smoke) before he left in PTO.


Cedric asked for the new repo on this mail thread. Should we create a 
new ticket?


BTW it seems that there is an issue on the hooks used for OPNFV docker 
repos. Builds must be done in a precise order (core must be built prior 
to any other built), which seems not the case on OPNFV docker hub. 
Cedric detailed the issue and the fix (screenshots) in the same mail thread.


Any help will be welcome to reference official sources.

2) At the moment the Docker automated builds are used per gerrit merge 
for all OPNFV projects. As we are using a basic account and the number 
of docker produced within OPNFV is increasing there is a high risk of 
congestion.


Could it be possible to migrate to an account allowing parallel builds 
(https://hub.docker.com/billing-plans/).


The cost is reasonable, we could start with a Medium or Large one.

As docker management is transverse, widely used by testing projects, Who 
should take the lead to ask for such change to the TSC? Releng? Infra 
Group? Testig group?


Any comment welcome

/Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release][euphrates] Milestone 6 - August 25

2017-08-29 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi David

for Functest
- healthcheck/smoke tests running on the master branch for the 5
installers. Still troubleshooting to do of course

http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/display/master/functest/status-apex.html
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/display/master/functest/status-compass.html
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/display/master/functest/status-daisy.html
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/display/master/functest/status-f...@x86.html
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/display/master/functest/status-f...@aarch64.html
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/display/master/functest/status-joid.html

Note that for each scenario the scenario name is an hyperlink
redirecting to the last jenkins log related to the scenario

odl test case is also under discussion (question reported upstream to
ODL community on the choice of the odl suite - the current one will be
failed due to hardcoded value in upstream suites)

troubleshooting on feature/vnf testcases (logs available on jenkins)
- cloudify_ims
- orchestra_openims
- orchestra_clearwaterims
- vyovrouter
- domino

Late integration tasks
* ready from Functest framework perspective but not seen in CI (need
local validation of the first)

- functest/vepc
- sfc
- bgpvpn
- barometer
- promise

* integration to be done/completed from Functest framework perspective
- calipso (instructions shared 2 weeks ago)
- doctor (patch pending since mid July)
- parser (first contact this morning)

First Documentation global update and available in
-
http://docs.opnfv.org/en/latest/submodules/functest/docs/testing/user/userguide/index.html
-
http://docs.opnfv.org/en/latest/submodules/functest/docs/testing/user/configguide/index.html
-
http://docs.opnfv.org/en/latest/submodules/functest/docs/testing/developer/devguide/index.html

Testing group documentation (transverse to testing projects) also initiated

/Morgan (Proxy Jose)

On 28/08/2017 17:52, Julien wrote:

Hi David,

Here is Pharos project update,
Pharos infra features won't be tested through yardstick or functest.
PDF is the new added feature while stored in secoredlab repo.

1. Here are the CI output:
https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/validate-jinja2-templates-master/77/console
2. document: newly build document link is
http://artifacts.opnfv.org/pharos/docs/index.html, and the compliance
page updated.

David McBride >于2017年8月25日周五 上午6:49写道：

Team,

As you know, MS6 is scheduled for tomorrow, August 25. MS6 has
two requirements:

1. Complete test case implementation for test cases documented in
the test case database for MS2.
2. Complete preliminary documentation. This means, at a minimum,
committing the directory structure to your repo and adding
placeholder files for the documents that you intend to deliver.

Compliance verification:

1. Please send me a link to the console output of your test cases
running under Jenkins in OPNFV CI.
2. Please complete the documentation compliance page for MS6 for
your project.

Let me know if you have questions. Thanks.

David

--
*David McBride*

Release Manager, OPNFV
Mobile: +1.805.276.8018
Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org

Skype: davidjmcbride1
IRC: dmcbride
___
opnfv-project-leads mailing list
opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org

https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-project-leads

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager

tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [yardstick] Yardstick Testresult Report???

2017-08-28 Thread morgan.richomme

the trend line can cover a long period, it is based on the local file 
storing all the results
but a trend line is associated with a scenario and the list of scenarios 
is built based on the results over the last 10 days

that is why if there is no run since 10 days, we have an empty page

In deed we have fortunately results for all the installers

[morgan@gce-opnfv-sandbox-fbrockners danube]$ cat scenario_history.txt 
|grep compass |wc -L

57
[morgan@gce-opnfv-sandbox-fbrockners danube]$ cat scenario_history.txt 
|grep fuel |wc -L

63
[morgan@gce-opnfv-sandbox-fbrockners danube]$ cat scenario_history.txt 
|grep apex |wc -L

53
[morgan@gce-opnfv-sandbox-fbrockners danube]$ cat scenario_history.txt 
|grep joid |wc -L

54

but
last run on
- compass: 28/8
- fuel: 11/8
- apex: 20/5
- joid: 3/8

The reporting page really reflects the CI activity, we could amend the 
reporting to consider all the scenarios stored in the local file rather 
than considering the scneario over the last 10 days...but empty pages 
mean something (no CI activity)


In Euphrates we introduced the scenario in the test API. It is not used 
yet but it should replace the local file


/Morgan

On 28/08/2017 09:33, Gaoliang (kubi) wrote:

"In functest we save the status after each release (Danube 1.0, Danube2.0, Danube 
3.0) in our repo"

That's a best practice for reporting.  We should followed that at E release :)

By the way, Is it possible to show the Trend picture even if there is  no data 
in last 10 days.  we may don't need to see the score and status which are 
calculated by last 10 day's result but a trend from one or two month result  
for each scenario.

Such as compass page, we can see the trend from April to August
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/yardstick/release/danube/index-status-compass.html

Regards,

Kubi


-邮件原件-
发件人: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] 代表 
morgan.richo...@orange.com
发送时间: 2017年8月28日 14:47
收件人: vven...@codeaurora.org; Lvjing (Jing Lu) ; 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-us...@lists.opnfv.org
主题: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [yardstick] Yardstick Testresult Report???

regarding the reporting link, it always deals with a sliding windows processing the 
results from the last 10 days if no results since 10 days for the given version => 
no results so currently no Danube results, some runs on master => 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/yardstick/release/master/index-status-fuel.html

In functest we save the status after each release (Danube 1.0, Danube2.0, 
Danube 3.0) in our repo

it is possible to rebuild the status assuming that we save the scores in a local files 
but it will be just a "release status" and it will not be as detailed as the 
first link you mentioned.

/Morgan

On 26/08/2017 09:46, vven...@codeaurora.org wrote:

And on the other hand, If I go to the below link it is showing empty,
How can I get the result of each Yardstick result performnace numbers
. Please help
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/yardstick/release/danube/index-
status-fuel.html

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [yardstick] Yardstick Testresult Report???

2017-08-28 Thread morgan.richomme

regarding the reporting link, it always deals with a sliding windows 
processing the results from the last 10 days

if no results since 10 days for the given version => no results
so currently no Danube results, some runs on master => 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/yardstick/release/master/index-status-fuel.html


In functest we save the status after each release (Danube 1.0, 
Danube2.0, Danube 3.0) in our repo


it is possible to rebuild the status assuming that we save the scores in 
a local files but it will be just a "release status" and it will not be 
as detailed as the first link you mentioned.


/Morgan

On 26/08/2017 09:46, vven...@codeaurora.org wrote:
And on the other hand, If I go to the below link it is showing empty, 
How can I get the result of each Yardstick result performnace numbers 
. Please help 
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/yardstick/release/danube/index-status-fuel.html


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] testing group - testing ecosystem for Euphrates

2017-08-24 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi

The testing group started discussions on documentation for Euphrates.

One of the key asset is the graph of the ecosystem: 
http://docs.opnfv.org/en/stable-danube/_images/OPNFV_testing_working_group1.png
This figure provides a synthetic view of the test projects involved in a 
release and has been widely used for the Summit presentations and/or 
external communications.


Projects mentioned in the graphs are participating to the weekly meeting 
of the testing group but it does not mean that other projects could not 
be added in the Testing ecosystem figure and/or the description table 
http://docs.opnfv.org/en/stable-danube/testing/ecosystem/overview.html#introduction


As a conclusion, I you think your project shall be added to the 
figure/table, please contact the testing group, either by mail and/or by 
joining one of the weekly meeting.


/Morgan







_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [testing group] feedback on automation of stress test on OPNFV vIMS Functets test case

2017-08-23 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

during the 31st of August OPNFV weekly Testing group meeting  (3PM UTC, 
https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/819733085, #opnfv-testperf), we 
planned to share our feedback on the automation of vIMS stress test on 
OPNFV solution.


This work has been initiated during the last OPNFV plugfest in Paris 
(stress test) and has been finalized end of July (automation of the 
stress test for CI).


Based on the existing cloudify_ims test case (automation of 
cloudify/clearwater + signaling testing) developed by Valentin and 
automated since Brahmaputra, we are now able to generate realistic 
signaling load (more than 100.000 calls within 10 minutes) using Ixia 
loader.


Please note that tests have been executed on Orange OPNFV community lab 
including power consumption monitoring also introduced during last plugfest


The presentation will deal with:
- reminder on cloudify_ims test case
- Introduction of the new stress test
- Automation of this test
- Conclusions
- Q

Feel free to invite whom it may concern
Testing group meeting are open

/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Interested in joining the opnfv community

2017-08-22 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

OPNFV is an open community, everybody is welcome to contribute
The only prerequisites is the Linux Foundation account

see
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Developer+Getting+Started
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/Developer+On-boarding

/Morgan

On 22/08/2017 11:03, Sreeramachandra Murthy Panchireddy wrote:

Hi,
I am interested in contributing to opnfv. I am not an employee of
OPNFV member companies. Am i eligible to do so?If yes, What is the
procedure to join any project?
Regards,
psm


___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] follow-up vIMS load test automation initiated during last plugfest

2017-08-17 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

End of July, Valentin (Orange) and Arturo (Ixia) finalized the 
automation of load test using Ixia loader based on cloudify_ims testcase.


This work was initiated during the Plugfest in Paris.

So far, the cloudify_ims was dealing with 3 steps

 -   deployement of cloudify (orchestrator part)
 -   deployment of clearwater ims
 -   run functional signaling suite based on metaswitch ruby suite

This has been integrated by Valentin and released since Brahmaputra (see 
description in the OPNFV book)


During the plugfest Arturo and Valentin were able to generate realistic 
load through the ixia loader on such system (see Plugfest report)
Most of the additional operations (installation of the loader, 
generation of the load, ..) were done manually.


During the summer session we were able to generate more than 130.000 
calls within 10 minutes.
you can see the effects on the power consumption through the POD 
monitoring (2 load tests visible on the figure below)




this part has been automated
Valentin submitted a patch to create the testcase => 
https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/38767/4


This new test case is raising 2 questions

-integration of proprietary loader (already raised in vsperf)
In the configuration file there is a link towards Ixia licence server in 
order to enable loader.
within open source community context it can be discussed with Ixia. it 
could make sense to create an url such as opnfv.ixia.org for the license 
server with referencing the OPNFV community PODs (filtering on the IPs 
of the community PODs on Ixia side).


-testing organization on VNF performance tests
The test case is in Functest because it requires the cloud_ims as 
prerequisites.
However Functest is not aiming to perform performance test...the pseudo 
micro service approach we already discussed a little bit could make sense
- a performance project is able to ask functest to deploy the vIMS 
through an API (patch under review) then perform the performance part.
For Euphrates it will be too short...we then intend to merge the case in 
Functest with a status disabled (people could run it manually but not 
integrated in CI).
But we will probably need to discuss how to manage VNF performance 
testing in the future.

what do you think?

I suggest a 20' presentation on the work done during a testing working 
group meeting (on the 23rd or 31st of August?)
I could also invite people from the EUAG that may be interested by the 
topic and/or people from ONAP?


any comment welcome

/Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [ONOSFW] Functest CI on ARM pods

2017-08-11 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

as far as I understand, what you want is an onos scenario on ARM in CI.
Functest tests are triggered according to the installer and the scenario
today ONOS specific tests are defined as

|case_name: onos project_name: functest criteria: 100 blocking: true 
description: >- Test Suite for the ONOS SDN Controller. It integrates 
some test suites from upstream using TestON as the test framework. 
dependencies: installer: '' scenario: 'onos' run: module: 
'functest.opnfv_tests.sdn.onos.onos' class: 'Onos'|



so if there is "onos" in the scenario name, Functest will try to run 
such tests

You may contact armband project for that.

/Morgan

On 11/08/2017 14:00, Mohan Kumar wrote:

Hi  ,

 I was able to make ONOS controller up and run on ARM boards (AARCH64) 
with OpenStack as NBI also working on to run OPNFV Functest to 
validate basic ONOSFW use-cases [1]  .


 After Successful porting ,  I'd like to enable daily ONOSFW Functest 
CI on ARM Pods as well . Could you share your thoughts on this ?


[1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/onosfw/Onos+Test+Suite 




Thanks.,
Mohankumar.N



___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] Copper, Opera (and Multisite, Netready) status for Euphrates (Functest integration)

2017-08-09 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

as Functest is currently integrating the feature projects - see several 
pending patches including a better control of the requirements, I had 
questions on the status of some feature projects that used to be 
integrated in Functest in previous versions


according to 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Projects+Intending+to+Participate+in+the+Euphrates+Release 
(not fully up to date..some PTLs changes and some projects do not exist 
anymore), Copper and Opera (open-O/ vIMS) will not be part of Euphrates


@Aimee: does copper skip the release and intend to be back in future 
releases, or does it mean that the project may deal with the termination 
process?


@Yingjun: same question for Opera

@Joe: same question for multisite (TSC vote for termination of the 
project yesterday)


Concretely shall we spend effort in integration?

Note Netready is identified as part of the release, but as far as I 
remember a mail from Georg, it was not the case (no activity since Q2 
https://git.opnfv.org/netready/stats/?period=q=10)


Regards

/Morgan





_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] ODL target Release for Euphrates

2017-08-08 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

I did not find the list of the target versions for the main components 
integrated in Euphrates version.
it would make sense to explicitely reference them on one of the wiki 
pages dedicated to the release 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates


In functest, we need to know it.
Cedric consolidated Functest in order to manage properly the upstream 
dependencies (including clients/tooling/lib needed for testing 
relatively to upstream components) and introduced a clean packetization, 
which is key for an integration project.


At the moment, the only ODL version reference we found was 
beryllium-sr4, which is pretty old.


According to https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Euphrates+Scenario+Status
scenario owners dealing with ODL are:
- Frank (Apex ∩ Fdio)
- Tim Inrich (Apex ∩ bgpvpn)
- Brady (not sure the page is up to date) / Manuel (Apex ∩ Sfc)
- Georg (not sure it is up to date) Apex ∩ gluon
- Tim Rozet (Other Apex scenarios)
- Ruan He (Compass ∩ moon)
- Justin (Other Compass scenarios)
- Zhiang (Daisy ∩ moon)
- Michael (Fuel/MCP)

could you confirm the target version for ODL?


/Morgan

note: no scenario ODL with joid referenced in the page.



_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [test-wg] docker container versioning

2017-07-12 Thread morgan.richomme


I will be in PTO too :)

Unfortunately the weekly meeting was today at 8 UTC (APAC slot)
we will use the slot of tomorrow to organize an ad-hoc meeting with 
Bitergia on result vizualization

not sure we will have 15 minutes for another topic

It is maybe possible to organize an ad-hoc meeting on this topic after 
the point with Bitergia?


Do not hesitate to modify directly the agenda at your convenience 
(https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Test+Working+Group+Weekly+Meeting)


/Morgan



On 12/07/2017 17:43, Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote:

Morgan,

Unfortunately, I won’t be able to attend next week (on PTO).
Can this be squeezed into tomorrow’s meeting (July 13)? We could shorten it and 
follow up with a separate meeting or on email/IRC.

Thanks

   Alec



On 7/12/17, 8:32 AM, "morgan.richo...@orange.com"  
wrote:

 topic added for the next meeting (20th of July)
 https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Test+Working+Group+Weekly+Meeting
 
 Mark and Jose are already involved in several activities dealing with

 docker.
 Cedric has a good view on this topic.
 
 /Morgan
 
 On 12/07/2017 17:27, Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote:

 > I’d like to add this topic to the next weekly meeting of the test-wg and 
would like to know if anybody else from test-wg would be interested to help redact 
a proposal for enhancing the docker container versioning and build workflow in 
OPNFV. As I understand this will only concern a subset of test projects for now at 
least.
 >
 > To the agenda:
 > - Problem statement for those who have not followed the email thread
 > - General goals
 > - Get feedback from current projects wrt current container versioning 
scheme, Q
 > - Who would like to participate and how to proceed
 > We might need about 15’ to go over these points (no question we will 
need more detailed discussion which can be better done through email or IRC after 
that meeting).
 >
 > What would be great is for those concerned project owners to think about 
how the requirements of their respective project wrt to their container versioning:
 > - How often do you think you need to build your containers
 > - Any hurdles experienced while building/managing container images
 > - How do your container images relate to OPNFV releases (e.g. do you 
have a 1 container version per release of do you prefer to have 1 version that 
tackles all supported releases)
 > - How do you “bundle” your containers to OPNFV releases (or how do your 
users know what version of container to use for a given release)
 >
 > We can also use email to get a head start or for those who cannot attend 
the meeting.
 > I hope we can get a draft proposal by early August.
 >
 > Thanks
 >
 >Alec
 >
 >
 > On 7/11/17, 8:29 AM, "Fatih Degirmenci"  wrote:
 >
 >  +1 to "Can we work on a proposal and get every project that deals with 
containers involved?"
 >
 >  It is mainly test projects who use containers so I again let 
testing community to take the lead and point you to where/how the conversation 
started.
 >
 >  We can then try to generalize it later on.
 >
 >  /Fatih
 >
 >  On 11 Jul 2017, at 17:16, Alec Hothan (ahothan)  
wrote:
 >
 >  Can we work on a proposal and get every project that deals with 
containers involved?
 >
 > ___
 > test-wg mailing list
 > test...@lists.opnfv.org
 > https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/test-wg
 
 
 --

 Morgan Richomme
 Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA
 
 Network architect for innovative services

 Future of the Network community member
 Open source Orange community manager
 
 
 tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106

 mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
 morgan.richo...@orange.com
 
 
 _
 
 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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [test-wg] docker container versioning

2017-07-12 Thread morgan.richomme

topic added for the next meeting (20th of July)
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Test+Working+Group+Weekly+Meeting

Mark and Jose are already involved in several activities dealing with
docker.

Cedric has a good view on this topic.

/Morgan

On 12/07/2017 17:27, Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote:

I’d like to add this topic to the next weekly meeting of the test-wg and would
like to know if anybody else from test-wg would be interested to help redact a
proposal for enhancing the docker container versioning and build workflow in
OPNFV. As I understand this will only concern a subset of test projects for now
at least.

To the agenda:
- Problem statement for those who have not followed the email thread
- General goals
- Get feedback from current projects wrt current container versioning scheme,
Q
- Who would like to participate and how to proceed
We might need about 15’ to go over these points (no question we will need more
detailed discussion which can be better done through email or IRC after that
meeting).

What would be great is for those concerned project owners to think about how
the requirements of their respective project wrt to their container versioning:
- How often do you think you need to build your containers
- Any hurdles experienced while building/managing container images
- How do your container images relate to OPNFV releases (e.g. do you have a 1
container version per release of do you prefer to have 1 version that tackles
all supported releases)
- How do you “bundle” your containers to OPNFV releases (or how do your users
know what version of container to use for a given release)

We can also use email to get a head start or for those who cannot attend the
meeting.
I hope we can get a draft proposal by early August.

Thanks

Alec

On 7/11/17, 8:29 AM, "Fatih Degirmenci" wrote:

+1 to "Can we work on a proposal and get every project that deals with
containers involved?"

It is mainly test projects who use containers so I again let testing community to take the lead and point you to where/how the conversation started.

We can then try to generalize it later on.

/Fatih

On 11 Jul 2017, at 17:16, Alec Hothan (ahothan) wrote:

Can we work on a proposal and get every project that deals with containers involved?

___
test-wg mailing list
test...@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/test-wg

--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager

tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Infra] [Testing) Stress/resiliency Testing evolution in OPNFV (draft)

2017-07-11 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi Infra group,

I got an action point this afternoon during the TSC meeting after the 
presentation on the behalf of the testing working group on our vizion of 
test evolution 
(https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/9568526/testing%20evolution%20v1_3.pptx?version=2=1499788745000=v2)


We would like to run more stress/resiliency tests on "stable" releases.

This raises several questions:

 * POD/resources
 * capability to manage OPNFV releases

TSC would like to get a_concrete proposal it can vote on_ regarding this 
topic.


We will discuss it tomorrow during the testing group meeting tomorrow 
(APAC slot)


I imagine something like that (just a proposal), feel free to 
comment/amend/modify



--


*Need*: be able to run stress/robustness/resiliency testing on OPNFV

People observed that unstability may occur on OPNFV releases after some 
days or due to the repetition of basic tests.


Stress tests developed for Danube showed also that OPNFV solutions can 
be crashed relatively easily...


These problems cannot be found when running systematically test suite 
only once after on a fresh installation


Regarding current release pipeline, it is not possible to plan such 
testing on OPNFV candidate release (stable solution ready for such tests 
shortly before the release date)


*Benefit for the community*: Address EUAG pain point, contribute to 
improve  "Telco Grade" aspects, consolidate the confidence in the release



_*short term proposal (Danube/Euphrates transition)*_

once Danube 3.0 is over, use existing resources to reinstall an 
os-nosdn-nofeature-ha scenario on


 * lf-pod1  / apex
 * huawei-pod2 / compass
 * ericsson-pod1 / fuel
 * intel-pod5 / joid

Use these pods for stress/robusteness tests until resources are 
realocated for Euphrates: 14th of July to mid August ~ 1 month?


 * main goal: run bottlenecks 2 scenarios developed for Danube
 * optional (if time): planned slots for Storperf, VSPERF, qtip,
   yardstick, functest

_Benefit:_

 * get official feedback on the stress tests done for Danube (part of
   Danube priorities) on what we really released
 * almost no impact on resources (just stop re-installing + grant
   access  for troubleshooting on existing resources)
 * Possibility to perform resiliency/stress on any "released" scenario
   (even if it is theoretical as no test suites on K8s today)

_Drawback_

 * if bug detected...bug will be reported to the installers but not
   sure it could be fixed
 * need lots of resources: PODs and people (at least 1 POD per installer)

_*mid term proposal (beyond Euphrates)*_

Allocate 1 pod for such activity based on OSA tagged version

 * Intel-18 / OSA os-nosdn-nofeature-ha (tagged Pike)

The mid term solution will allow the testing community to work closed to 
upstream independantly from the installers

detected bugs will be reported (and hopefully fixed) upstream

_Benefit:_

 * bugs reported upstream
 * 1 single source / no dependencies towards installers
 * Need only 1 POD (Testing group shall self-organize the timeslot
   allocation)
 * Keep aligned on the target version (no real // testing, release
   validation and stress tests done on the target release)
 * Possibility to leverage test promotion

_Drawback:_

 * Stress/resiliency test not directly related to
   scenarios/installer..what we are releasing
 * OpenStack centric

Note if you think mid term is achievable  now (installation of an OSA 
tagged Ocata on Intel-18) and people are fine with the approach we can 
probably skip the short term


/Morgan



_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] Testing group weekly meeting

2017-07-11 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi

reminder: this week => APAC meeting on Wednesday

we keep however the Thursday slot for an adhoc meeting with Bitergia

see agenda 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/Test+Working+Group+Weekly+Meeting


/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Including externally licensed code

2017-07-07 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi,

chartjs is under MIT license so no compatibility issue with the default 
apache 2.0


I think both options are possible but if you clone it in your repo, I 
would suggest to create a 3rd-party directory to separate internal code 
from 3rd party code (e.g. 
https://git.opnfv.org/releng/tree/utils/test/reporting)


visualization js lib is also a good topic for the testing group... :)

/Morgan

On 07/07/2017 02:31, Beierl, Mark wrote:

Hello,

Quick question.  I have an intern project that is taking advantage of 
chartjs.org  code [1].  Should this be included in 
the docker container as a git clone, or is it acceptable to clone and 
include it as part of the storperf.git repo with the appropriate license?


[1] 
https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/37021/1/reporting/docker/src/static/js/Chart.min.js


Regards,
Mark

*Mark Beierl*
SW System Sr Principal Engineer
*Dell **EMC* | Office of the CTO
mobile+1 613 314 8106 
mark.bei...@dell.com 



___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [dovetail] TSC and DoveTail meeting to discuss scope and needs for CVP testing

2017-06-27 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

my view is that the difficulty we have to converge to a clear consensus 
is directly linked to what we are producing

I fully agree with Fatih's comment on the mail 
https://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2017-June/016799.html
Second release had probably the best quality in term of release, since 
the second release we deal with a wild rush forward "more everything" 
and releases are somehow snapshots of current scenarios more or less 
(usely less) tested - that is one of the reasons why the testing group 
is proposing a new way for resiliency/stress testing - discussion 
planned during the TSC meeting today -

So it is not surprising to see several interpretations of what 
certification should be.

If we were able to say clearly "an OPNFV release is X, Y and Z" it would 
be much easier.
But we are dealing with a composite object with lots of possible 
combinations, features (even mature ones) have installer/scenario 
constraints.

The second difficult point I see then is that due to the complexity of 
the combinations, we reduced the initial scope, which is fine, but then 
the question of the delta compared to OpenStack can be raised.
Adding features that are supported only by a subset of 
installers/scenarios is a way to differentiate but as it is only a 
subset, does it make sense to consider it for an OPNFV certification?

CVP WG and Dovetail projects have been working hard for a long time and 
the last proposal is surely the best we can have regarding the context 
if we consider OPNFV as a product but is it a product?

If we consider OPNFV as a framework and want to focus on NFVI/VIM, 
running yardstick and be sure that the NFVI reached all the defined SLAs 
makes sense for me.
In Brahmaputra we were able to successfully test the deployment of a 
vIMS on several scenarios/installers (more than 1000 CI run done), this 
test case was complete to test VIM/NFVI and went far beyond a check of 
the OpenStack API/Interface.
Since Colorado due to the problem mentioned earlier it is unfortunately 
not so stable and it was poorly tested in Danube (wait for a weekly job 
we were not able to reach / test/scenario promotion, trust indicator,...)

/Morgan

On 27/06/2017 01:46, Wenjing Chu wrote:

I updated the document wiki page with the scope summarized in this 
email and the latest test spec documents: 
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/dovetail/Dovetail+Documentation+for+Review.

Is there any other feedback from tsc members?

Tapio,
I'll be on the tsc call tomorrow to answer any questions about the 
proposal. Can we have some time on the agenda? Thanks.

Wenjing

On Fri, Jun 23, 2017 at 2:50 AM, Tim Irnich > wrote:

Hi Dave, all,

Sorry for misunderstanding your point. In that case, is there any
other feedback from other TSC members on the proposal?

Tapio & Ray, I think we should reserve some time in next week's
TSC to go over the suggested test scope (both mandatory and
optional parts) for Danube compliance testing once more so that
the Dovetail team can be confident about focusing on the right things.

Regards, Tim

-Original Message-
From: Dave Neary [mailto:dne...@redhat.com ]
Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2017 01:53
To: Tim Irnich >; Wenjing Chu
>;
Christopher Price >; Tianhongbo
>; Tallgren, Tapio
>; Georg
Kunz >
Cc: TSC OPNFV >; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
>
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] [dovetail] TSC and
DoveTail meeting to discuss scope and needs for CVP testing

Hi Tim,

On 06/20/2017 09:02 PM, Tim Irnich wrote:
>> I would like to see us document some of the NFV related
requirements
>> which are common across all RFCs from telcos, and which are
available
>> in all viable VIM products.
>
> This is exactly the intention of the proposal, under the side
> constraint of drawing from already existing tests. The question
to the
> TSC was if this is enough for an initial release. I think your
answer is no.

On the contrary - the initial release scope is fine, my comment
was on the "future plans" piece.

Thanks,
Dave.

--
Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
Ph: +1-978-399-2182  / Cell:
+1-978-799-3338

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] TSC vote requested for security fix

2017-06-21 Thread morgan.richomme


+1
no preference

Morgan

On 21/06/2017 06:54, Stuart Mackie wrote:


+1 - Either

Stuart

-914 886 2534

*From: * on behalf of 
Raymond Paik 

*Date: *Tuesday, June 20, 2017 at 3:07 PM
*To: *"opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org" 
*Cc: *"opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org" 


*Subject: *[opnfv-tech-discuss] TSC vote requested for security fix

OPNFV TSC Members:

Sorry for the short notice, but earlier today the Linux Foundation IT 
team has been made aware of a high priority security issue (see 
https://access.redhat.com/security/vulnerabilities/stackguard) and 
need to apply package errata and perform systems reboot as soon as 
possible.  We tentatively scheduled 1-hour window on June 24th @01:00 
- 02:00 UTC for this work, but if the TSC agrees, we'd like fix this 
sooner.


I realize the timing is not ideal as people are working on Danube 3.0, 
but two options I'd like to propose are 22:00 - 23:00 UTC on June 21st 
or June 22nd.


Could I ask the TSC members to send your votes on the following as 
soon as possible?


·Do you approve an earlier security fix window? (Y/N)

·If you answered Y above, are you OK with June 21st, June 22nd, or are 
you OK with either?


Thanks,

Ray



___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [vsperf] Survey of VSPERF Users and Contributors

2017-06-20 Thread morgan.richomme


Hi

see answers below

/Morgan

On 19/06/2017 18:22, Cooper, Trevor wrote:


I am collecting feedback about VSPERF from users and contributors … 
the main purpose is to help me motivate for our ongoing investment in 
the project. I already approached a few people … even if you have 
already given feedback feel free to add anything else.


1.How do you use VSPERF or plan to use VSPERF?


plan to use VSPERF to qualify vswitch in Orange Integration Center


2.Why do you think VSPERF is an important project in OPNFV, what are 
the main benefits of the project that you foresee?


vswitch is a key element of NFV and somehow a potential Achilles heel of 
such infrastructure.
It is us critical to qualify the performance of such component and to 
get reference on testing on other PODs.


3.What are major gaps or features that you would like to see in VSPERF 
that are not there today?


I would like to see a deeper integration with yardstick/test reporting 
in order to trigger vsperf as part of yardstick scenario and integrate 
vsperf figures as other infrastructure figures (sla, comparison with 
community results,..)
It should also be possible to use free software traffic generator (TRex) 
in order to ease the integratio in CI chains


4.Anything else?

Thanks

/Trevor



___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss



--
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] RE : SFC functionality test

2017-06-10 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

BuildTag is used to push the result in the test DB in CI mode.
The info that it is missing is printed as INFO so there is no problem on this 
side

Regarding the logs I would suggest to have a look at the logs in 
/home/opnfv/functest/results/sfc.log

Morgan




Envoyé de mon Galaxy Note 4 d'Orange


 Message d'origine 
De : Manuel Buil 
Date : 10/06/2017 23:40 (GMT+08:00)
À : Igor Jochem Sanz , Jose Lausuch 

Cc : opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Objet : Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] SFC functionality test

HI Igor,

That is strange. @Jose: Do you know what might be happening?

Could you check if you have the variable $creds? If you do "source
$creds", what do you get?

I will be busy this week in the OPNFV summit but could you try to
execute the test directly without functest?

To do so, inside the functest container, go to:

/home/opnfv/repos/sfc/sfc/tests/functest

And there, execute:

source $cerds
python run_tests.py

That should execute the SFC tests

Regards,
Manuel

On Fri, 2017-06-09 at 15:28 -0300, Igor Jochem Sanz wrote:
> Hi Manuel.
>
> We ran everything as instructed, solved some issues but then we
> stumbled
> upon the messages below. It looks like we need a Jenkins build tag
> to
> proceed. Do you have any info on this?
>
> Thanks in advance.
> Igor
>
>
> root@c98fcb0eb6ae:~/repos/sfc/docs/release/scenarios# functest
> testcase
> run odl-sfc
> 2017-06-09 18:17:27,034 - run_tests - INFO -
>
> 2017-06-09 18:17:27,034 - run_tests - INFO -
> 
> 2017-06-09 18:17:27,034 - run_tests - INFO - Running test case
> 'odl-sfc'...
> 2017-06-09 18:17:27,034 - run_tests - INFO -
> 
> 2017-06-09 18:17:27,035 - openstack_snapshot - INFO - Generating
> OpenStack snapshot...
> 2017-06-09 18:17:27,642 - openstack_utils - INFO -
> OS_IDENTITY_API_VERSION is set in env as '3'
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,183 - functest_utils - ERROR - The command 'cd
> /home/opnfv/repos/sfc/sfc/tests/functest && python ./run_tests.py'
> failed.
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,184 - sfc - INFO - sfc FAILED
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,184 - functest_utils - INFO - Impossible to
> retrieve
> the build tag
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,184 - functest_utils - INFO - Impossible to
> retrieve
> the build tag
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,220 - functest_utils - INFO -
> 
> sfc/functest-odl-sfc results
>
> 
> DB:   http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1
> pod:  localhost
> version:  unknown
> scenario: os-odl_l2-sfc-noha
> status:   FAIL
> build tag:none
> details:  {}
>
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,220 - sfc - INFO - Test result is stored in
> '/home/opnfv/functest/results/sfc.log'
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,220 - openstack_clean - INFO - Cleaning
> OpenStack
> resources...
> 2017-06-09 18:18:30,223 - openstack_utils - INFO -
> OS_IDENTITY_API_VERSION is set in env as '3'
> 2017-06-09 18:18:36,956 - run_tests - INFO - Test execution time:
> 01:09
> 2017-06-09 18:18:36,957 - run_tests - ERROR - The test case 'odl-
> sfc'
> failed.
> 2017-06-09 18:18:36,957 - run_tests - INFO - Execution exit value:
> Result.EX_ERROR
> 2017-06-09 18:18:37,010 - functest_utils - ERROR - The command
> 'python
> /home/opnfv/repos/functest/functest/ci/run_tests.py  -t odl-sfc'
> failed.
>
>
>
> Em 2017-06-05 04:35, Manuel Buil escreveu:
> >
> > HI Igor,
> >
> > Interesting... it seems the guys from functest are changing stuff.
> > While I investigate this, can you try with the Danube1.0 image
> > please?
> >
> > That means executing this as the first step:
> >
> > docker pull opnfv/functest:danube.1.0
> >
> > Instead of "docker pull opnfv/functest" which points to the master
> > branch.
> >
> > And then when creating the container with "docker run..." point to
> > the
> > danube.1.0 image.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Manuel
> >
> > On Sat, 2017-06-03 at 13:39 -0300, Igor Jochem Sanz wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Manuel,
> > >
> > > At the moment I'm trying to understand how things work and
> > > checking
> > > its
> > > stability in a baremetal deployment. I have plans for testing
> > > some
> > > VNFs
> > > chains in different scenarios later for academic purposes.
> > >
> > > I've tried the functest you suggested. I've got an error when
> > > running
> > > the testcase on step 6.
> > >
> > > functest.ci.run_tests - ERROR - Unknown test case or tier 'odl-
> > > sfc',
> > > or
> > > not supported by the given scenario 'os-odl_l2-sfc-ha'.
> > > functest.utils.functest_utils - ERROR - The command 'python
> > > /home/opnfv/repos/functest/functest/ci/run_tests.py  -t odl-sfc'
> > > failed.
> > >
> > > I checked for the tier list and there is no testcase 'odl-sfc' in
> > > the
> > > given docker image.
> > >
> > > functest tier list
> > >  - 0. healthcheck:
> > > ['connection_check', 'api_check', 'snaps_health_check']
> > >  - 1. smoke:
> > >

[opnfv-tech-discuss] RE : Vote for the new Danube 3.0 release date

2017-06-07 Thread morgan.richomme

+1



Envoyé de mon Galaxy Note 4 d'Orange


 Message d'origine 
De : Raymond Paik 
Date : 08/06/2017 09:05 (GMT+08:00)
À : opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
Cc : opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Objet : [opnfv-tech-discuss] Vote for the new Danube 3.0 release date

TSC members,

Apologies for a little delay on this.

As David 
communicated 
yesterday, he is recommending postponing the Danube 3.0 release date to June 
23rd (2-week delay) as community members experienced technical issues over the 
weekend.

I'd like to start an email vote among the TSC members on the following:

"Does the TSC approve changing the Danube 3.0 release date to June 23, 2017?  
(+1, 0, -1)"

Could you send me your vote by 6pm Pacific Time on June 8th (Thursday)?

Thanks,

Ray

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] RE : proposed delay to Danube 3.0 release

2017-06-07 Thread morgan.richomme

No objection from my side

Morgan



Envoyé de mon Galaxy Note 4 d'Orange


 Message d'origine 
De : "HU, BIN" 
Date : 07/06/2017 11:38 (GMT+08:00)
À : Ray Paik , David McBride 

Cc : TSC OPNFV , TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 

Objet : Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] proposed delay to Danube 3.0 release

+1 for email vote.

Bin


 Original Message 
From: Raymond Paik 
Date: 8:27PM, Tue, Jun 6, 2017
To: David McBride 
CC: TSC OPNFV , TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 

Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] proposed delay to Danube 3.0 release

TSC members:

Change in the release date requires a TSC vote.  I think the most efficient way 
to do this is via email (vs. waiting until the next TSC meeting on the 13th).  
Could you let me know if you have any objections to doing an email vote by Noon 
Pacific Time on June 7th?

If there are no objections, I can start the email vote before 5pm Pacific Time 
tomorrow.  If you'd like to nominate a proxy for the vote, please let me know 
as well.

Thanks,

Ray

On Tue, Jun 6, 2017 at 5:53 PM, David McBride 
> wrote:
Team,

Due to issues with Jenkins over the weekend, we currently have limited test 
data, particularly for Apex and Joid, with which to make a decision about the 
release.  In addition, one of our projects has announced that they will be 
unable to release due to a separate issue with the lab.

Since I am unaware of any end users that have a time critical need for this 
release, I am proposing that we move the release date out to June 23.  This 
will provide time for projects to collect sufficient data, as well as to avoid 
a collision with next week's Summit.

Proposed schedule:

  *   June 21 ==> complete testing
  *   June 22 ==> update documentation / JIRA cleanup
  *   June 23 ==> tag project repos / complete release
  *   June 26 ==> download page goes live

David

--
David McBride
Release Manager, OPNFV
Mobile: +1.805.276.8018
Email/Google Talk: 
dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
Skype: davidjmcbride1
IRC: dmcbride


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV Helpdesk #41190] [linuxfoundation.org #41190] Re: [opnfv-tsc][test-wg][yardstick] Yardstick New PTL Election Done

2017-05-31 Thread morgan.richomme

congratulations to Kubi and Ross!
Great work, Yardstick is a key project for telco Cloud.

All the best for Euphrates and the next rivers...

/Morgan


De : opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] de la part de Ross Brattain via RT 
[opnfv-helpd...@rt.linuxfoundation.org]
Envoyé : mardi 30 mai 2017 22:14
À : jean.gaoli...@huawei.com
Cc : opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Objet : [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV Helpdesk #41190] [linuxfoundation.org   
#41190] Re: [opnfv-tsc][test-wg][yardstick] Yardstick New PTL   Election Done

Thank you, Kubi, for all your hard work as PTL and for your continuing work as 
a Yardstick committer.

Thank you to the Yardstick team for your hard work and support.  I am excited 
to lead such a wonderful team.

I look forward to a delivering a good robust Yardstick Euphrates release, and 
to working with all the Yardstick users and related projects.

Cheers,
Ross



On 05/27/2017 12:03 AM, Gaoliang (kubi) wrote:

Hi TSC and community,



According to Yardstick PTL Election Process[1], we started the Yardstick PTL 
election at three weeks ago, we spend two weeks to nomination and one week to 
vote[2].  (All committers +2 ) .



Now, we have the new PTL of Yardstick! He is Ross Brattain 
(ross.b.bratt...@intel.com 
)
 . Congratulation to Ross !



Ross who is the most active committer in last four months made yardstick 
support python3 and introduced the NSB into Yardstick with Deepak.

As a excellent committer, He brings lots of valuable comments for code review 
and new energy to Yardstick team. [3]

I do believe that Ross will lead the Yardstick and the team better and better.



I will step down as PTL and still keep active in testing working group as a 
yardstick committer. I would like to extend our sincere thanks to yardstick 
team and community for your kindly support and help.

@ helpdesk, please help to deal with the admin rights for new PTL. Thanks





[1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/yardstick/Yardstick+PTL+Election

[2] https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/35141/

[3] https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/q/owner:ross.b.brattain%2540intel.com



Regards,

Kubi




___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Fun] [DIY] OPNFV trender / IoT to get Jenkins status

2017-05-12 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

I documented the procedure to create little objects (called Trender in
our Fablab) to visualize OPNFV Jenkins status

Trender-opnfv.png

You will find the laser cutter rld file as well as the code

http://wiki.fablab-lannion.org/index.php?title=Trender_OPNFV

enjoy

/Morgan



_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] testing working group - test case domain definition

2017-05-11 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

I refactored the testing working group page (update figures, logos,
unreference old discussions from the main pages)

feel free to give your feedback and modify/correct/complete


We discussed during the plugfest on the fact that we should update the
description of our test cases in the Database for the catalogue

A recent patch (https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/34495) created a
field catalog_description, it should be soon available

this field will be used for catalog and should be explicit for humane
name = for machines/ automation
description = long description displayed when rolling over the test case

Additional fields must also be updated
- tags: whatever you want..
- domains

for domains, I initiated a table on the wiki in the domain section
If we could agree on a domain list it would be great
we could post process the test cases and create a representation per domain

Please note that domains are not tiers that we previously defined
tiers/categories indicate the type of testing (healthcheck, smoke,
performance, ...)
domains the topic of the test (compute, storage, networking, ...)
In some case we may have the same name for a tier and a domain.. (e.g. vnf)

feel free to complete the table
I added a 10 minutes slot to discuss this new table during next testing
group weekly meeting

/Morgan





_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [test-wg] [yardstick] Yardstick PTL Election

2017-05-09 Thread morgan.richomme

"Be a yardstick of quality. Some people aren't used to an environment
where excellence is expected" S.Jobs

Thanks to you and the yardstick team, more and more people are used to it.

Thanks for everything: great job from a great PTL!

Morgan

Le 05/05/2017 à 14:43, Gaoliang (kubi) a écrit :
>
> Hi All ,
>
>  
>
> To keep the team diversity, bring new ideas and energy, we have
> finalized the Yardstick PTL election process[1] with team(similar with
> Functest’s process).
>
>  
>
> We will start the Yardstick PTL election Process today, As the process
> described, “Calls for nomination will be open for a 2 weeks process”,
>  so we will end the nomination at May 19th
>
>  
>
> Election would be open to any Yardstick committer[2] (+2/-2) , Then we
> will have one week to vote with http://civs.cs.cornell.edu/
>
>  
>
> As I have been yardstick PTL for 2 release(C, D), I will step down
> once new PTL has been elected.  All nomination are warmly welcome,
> let’s make yardstick better and better
>
>  
>
> So Please feel free to nominate yourself and other committers before
> May 19th with this email thread.  Thanks J
>
>  
>
>  
>
> [1] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/yardstick/Yardstick+PTL+Election
>
> [2] https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/yardstick/People
> 
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Kubi
>
>
>
> ___
> test-wg mailing list
> test...@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/test-wg


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] Split of releng repo?

2017-05-05 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

I think we already initiated this discussion some times ago
but would it make sense to split releng repo into releng-jjb and
releng-utils
as there are at least 2 very different areas (jenkins and Xproject
tooling/lib)

/Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [test-wg] Notes from OPNFV Plugfest meeting - "Testing group Euphrates collaborative work"

2017-05-02 Thread morgan.richomme

Thnaks Trevor

I added some points that reflect the notes for the next test weekly
meeting planned on the 4th of May:
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf
feel free to add additional points
I will not be able to join this time, could you chair the meeting?

/Morgan


Le 28/04/2017 à 16:36, Cooper, Trevor a écrit :
>
> Status of Danube and what improved
>
>  
>
> 1. landing page
>
> -
> http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/reporting/index.html
>
> -
> http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/reporting/index.html#!/landingpage/table
>
> § Meaning of info displayed? Test
> ran, test passed … agree for consistency … TBD
>
>
>
> 2. catalogue - diagram with roll-over
>
> -
> http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting2/reporting/index.html#!/select/visual
>
> - All PTLs to review if test cases are valid
> and if not remove
>
> - Add short description that is human readable
> (add API field)
>
> ○ Define test domain categories - start by
> using labels on test ecosystem diagram
>
>
>
> 3. Stress tests - video of presentation is available -
> simultaneous vPING which increases until system fails
>
>
>
> 4. Documentation
>
> ○ Ecosystem diagram
>
> ○ Testing guide
>
> ○ Add agenda item to TWG in June (2 sessions
> on how to improve)
>
> ○ New test projects … add to common docs
>
> ○ Developer guide - move to docs
>
>
>
> 5. Reporting status / dashboard
>
> ○ Bottlenecks TBD?
>
>
>
> 6. Bitergia
>
> ○ Morgan meeting 10th May
>
> ○
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testing/Result+alignment+for+ELK+post-processing
>
> ○ Add to TWG agenda next week to revisit
>
>
>
> Wish list for Infra group
>
>  
>
> - One POD dedicated to long duration tests (with
> reservation mechanism)
>
>
>
> - Per installer
>
> ○ Stable of previous release
>
> ○ Master
>
>  
>
> - OPNFV POD on demand for tester (before merging)
>
> ○ Per installer if possible
>
> ○ Infra group working on it
>
> ○ Today can fill a ticket to ask if there is a
> free resource
>
>  
>
> Micro services
>
> - Deploy VNF
>
> ○ Retrieve image
>
> ○ Deploy
>
> ○ Prebuild image with tools - standardise on a
> framework
>
> ○ Take image and copy over tools - Ansible
> (infra doing this with Open Stack Ansible)
>
> ○ Catalog of roles for Ansible?
>
> § Ansible Galaxy is a tool for
> deploying and managing roles
>
> □ e.g. Install TREX TG
>
> □ Turn on live
> migration in Nova
>
>
>
> - Test generator?
>
>
>
> - Collect / display results
>
> ○ Test API and DB
>
> ○ Reuse collectd lib for VNF KPIs
>
>
>
> - Analytics of results
>
>  
>
> - What APIs to expose to other test projects?
>
> ○ Functest
>
> § Deploy orchestrator VNF
>
> § Use Traffic gen and generate load
>
>  
>
>  
>
> /Trevor
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest] Security Scanning

2017-04-04 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi Luke

let's discuss it during the plugfest

/Morgan

Le 03/04/2017 à 18:35, Luke Hinds a écrit :
> Hi Functest'ers,
>
> I am aware I have not been as active on security scanning as I
> originally hoped, largely due to being v-busy working on upstream. I
> have also not seen much uptake in contributions from others or any
> requests for support or enhancements to make from operators / users of
> OPNFV.
>
> With the above snippet in mind, would you like to revisit the projects
> use in functest? I am not saying I wish to decommission, as I put
> quite a good number of hours into the code, but at the same time I am
> aware my contributions have not been very active and I am not sure if
> that will change in the foreseeable future. You might see otherwise
> and like to enhance it further, so it seems a discussion could be
> worthwhile.
>
> If you would like we could have this as a topic on a functest meeting
> or alternately I will be at the plugfest too. 
>
> Cheers,
>
> Luke 
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [FUNCTEST] [SNAPS-OO] Danube release

2017-03-10 Thread morgan.richomme

for Danube, it could somehow be considered as a part of Functest (it is
documented in Functest)
it fully make sense to branch it
if it would have been a cable labs external lib, we would have probably
used a git commit id to fix the version, keep it simple and branch...

for the next releases, other projects could use SNAPS as middleware,
then SNAPS_OO will have to follow release process (documentation,
meeting, ..)

/Morgan

Le 10/03/2017 à 21:13, David McBride a écrit :
> +Aric
>
> Let's branch to ensure functionality, but defer "official" inclusion
> of SNAPS-OO until the Euphrates release.  Thanks.
>
> David 
>
> On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Steven Pisarski
> > wrote:
>
> Hi Morgan and Jose,
>
>  
>
> As SNAPS-OO is not officially part of the Danube release but is
> pointed to by the Functest Dockerfile and the BRANCH variable. So
> my question to you and the overall community is whether or not
> SNAPS-OO should have a stable/danube branch cut or should FUNCTEST
> remove the $BRANCH from the git clone command? I believe a branch
> should be cut but wanted raise the potential issue before things
> start breaking.
>
>  
>
> Best,
>
> Steve
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
> 
>
>
>
>
> -- 
> *David McBride*
> Release Manager, OPNFV
> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 
> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
> 
> Skype: davidjmcbride1
> IRC: dmcbride
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager

tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] minutes weekly meeting 410/03

2017-03-10 Thread morgan.richomme

http://irc.opnfv.fr/opnfv-orange/2017/opnfv-orange.2017-03-10-10.01.html

- Note 1: etherpad available to collect ideas/sync proposals for the
Beijing Summit (deadline March 27th)
http://etherpad.rd.francetelecom.fr/p/CfpBeijing

@Eric I put your proposals here

@Ruan => your demo will be in the PoC area?
any other possible PoCs?

We planned a discussion next friday and last submits on the 24th
feel free to join Friday weekly meeting if you have any question

- Note 2: lots of people in copy this week (involved in the CFP
Beijing), if you want to receive the weekly meeting minutes and you are
note part of opnfv-tech, please tell me I will add you to the mailing list

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario debugging

2017-03-08 Thread morgan.richomme

I do confirm most of the Fuel scenarios seem OK from a Doctor point of
view now :)

However Doctor is still FAIL on Apex and Joid scenarios and is not run
on Compass
for Danube do you plan any restrictions on some installers?

/Morgan

Le 06/03/2017 à 15:11, Ryota Mibu a écrit :
> Morgan,
>
>
> Thanks! Now, we got "OK" for doctor test in functest daily job.
>
> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-fuel-baremetal-daily-master/1251/consoleFull
>
>
> BR,
> Ryota
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: morgan.richo...@orange.com [mailto:morgan.richo...@orange.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 4:59 PM
>> To: Mibu Ryota(壬生 亮太) ; Jose Lausuch 
>> (jose.laus...@ericsson.com) ;
>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario 
>> debugging
>>
>> Hi Ryota,
>>
>> when we produce Functest docker, we are currently cloning the Doctor master 
>> repo the last Functest docker has been successfully
>> produced 1 h ago (started at at 6:10 - Jenkins Time) - previous one was 
>> produced on the 3rd of March so I assume your
>> changes are taken into account since this time
>>
>> Last CI run I found was on fuel started at 6:19 jenkins and should not 
>> include the change but next run should include
>> it, wait and see...
>>
>> /Morgan
>>
>> Le 06/03/2017 à 01:16, Ryota Mibu a écrit :
>>> Jose, Functest team,
>>>
>>>
>>> Quick report: We've fixed bugs in doctor test script [1,2] and got OK in 
>>> doctor's verify job [3].
>>>
>>> However, functest daily job is using old code even in the latest job [4]. 
>>> Maybe we should wait next daily job set. But,
>> I'll be happy if you can check whether the functest jobs use the latest 
>> codes of included repos or not.
>>> [1]
>>> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=doctor.git;a=commit;h=8f72e69
>>> 5538c2281f923bdbf7a6d7b1d1763c70c [2]
>>> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=doctor.git;a=commit;h=7c34d9e
>>> cbd17053ca9d14cc518b11e501b66cbeb [3]
>>> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/doctor-verify-fuel-sample-master/93/
>>> [4]
>>> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-fuel-baremetal-d
>>> aily-master/1247/
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ryota
>>>
 -Original Message-
 From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of
 Ryota Mibu
 Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 12:34 AM
 To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
 Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario
 debugging

 Hi,


 As we discussed in doctor meeting today, I created JIRA tickets for
 tracking status of our debug in each installer. We need to get green
 lights in doctor scenario test in functest report. As we may need to track 
 different bugs for each installer, I created
>> three tickets for each.
   Fuel --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-95
   Apex --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-96
   Joid --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-97

 One of barriers is lack of info due to no access to CI pod. In order
 to ease our debug, I propose to print logs of forked processes in
 doctor scenario if the test failed, so that we can see log messages in 
 doctor.log . I believe it won't bother functest
>> main log (Jenkins console).
   https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/29489


 BR,
 Ryota


 ___
 opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
 opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
 https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>>> ___
>>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>>
>> --
>> Morgan Richomme
>> Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA
>>
>> Network architect for innovative services Future of the Network community 
>> member Open source Orange community manager
>>
>>
>> tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
>> mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
>> morgan.richo...@orange.com
>>
>>
>> 
>> _
>>
>> 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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario debugging

2017-03-06 Thread morgan.richomme

cool
wait for CI to work, the weather shall become sunny in many scenarios

/Morgan

Le 06/03/2017 à 15:11, Ryota Mibu a écrit :
> Morgan,
>
>
> Thanks! Now, we got "OK" for doctor test in functest daily job.
>
> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-fuel-baremetal-daily-master/1251/consoleFull
>
>
> BR,
> Ryota
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: morgan.richo...@orange.com [mailto:morgan.richo...@orange.com]
>> Sent: Monday, March 06, 2017 4:59 PM
>> To: Mibu Ryota(壬生 亮太) ; Jose Lausuch 
>> (jose.laus...@ericsson.com) ;
>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario 
>> debugging
>>
>> Hi Ryota,
>>
>> when we produce Functest docker, we are currently cloning the Doctor master 
>> repo the last Functest docker has been successfully
>> produced 1 h ago (started at at 6:10 - Jenkins Time) - previous one was 
>> produced on the 3rd of March so I assume your
>> changes are taken into account since this time
>>
>> Last CI run I found was on fuel started at 6:19 jenkins and should not 
>> include the change but next run should include
>> it, wait and see...
>>
>> /Morgan
>>
>> Le 06/03/2017 à 01:16, Ryota Mibu a écrit :
>>> Jose, Functest team,
>>>
>>>
>>> Quick report: We've fixed bugs in doctor test script [1,2] and got OK in 
>>> doctor's verify job [3].
>>>
>>> However, functest daily job is using old code even in the latest job [4]. 
>>> Maybe we should wait next daily job set. But,
>> I'll be happy if you can check whether the functest jobs use the latest 
>> codes of included repos or not.
>>> [1]
>>> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=doctor.git;a=commit;h=8f72e69
>>> 5538c2281f923bdbf7a6d7b1d1763c70c [2]
>>> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=doctor.git;a=commit;h=7c34d9e
>>> cbd17053ca9d14cc518b11e501b66cbeb [3]
>>> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/doctor-verify-fuel-sample-master/93/
>>> [4]
>>> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-fuel-baremetal-d
>>> aily-master/1247/
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Ryota
>>>
 -Original Message-
 From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of
 Ryota Mibu
 Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 12:34 AM
 To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
 Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario
 debugging

 Hi,


 As we discussed in doctor meeting today, I created JIRA tickets for
 tracking status of our debug in each installer. We need to get green
 lights in doctor scenario test in functest report. As we may need to track 
 different bugs for each installer, I created
>> three tickets for each.
   Fuel --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-95
   Apex --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-96
   Joid --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-97

 One of barriers is lack of info due to no access to CI pod. In order
 to ease our debug, I propose to print logs of forked processes in
 doctor scenario if the test failed, so that we can see log messages in 
 doctor.log . I believe it won't bother functest
>> main log (Jenkins console).
   https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/29489


 BR,
 Ryota


 ___
 opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
 opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
 https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>>> ___
>>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>>
>> --
>> Morgan Richomme
>> Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA
>>
>> Network architect for innovative services Future of the Network community 
>> member Open source Orange community manager
>>
>>
>> tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
>> mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
>> morgan.richo...@orange.com
>>
>>
>> 
>> _
>>
>> 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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario debugging

2017-03-05 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi Ryota,

when we produce Functest docker, we are currently cloning the Doctor
master repo
the last Functest docker has been successfully produced 1 h ago (started
at at 6:10 - Jenkins Time) - previous one was produced on the 3rd of March
so I assume your changes are taken into account since this time

Last CI run I found was on fuel started at 6:19 jenkins and should not
include the change but next run should include it, wait and see...

/Morgan

Le 06/03/2017 à 01:16, Ryota Mibu a écrit :
> Jose, Functest team,
>
>
> Quick report: We've fixed bugs in doctor test script [1,2] and got OK in 
> doctor's verify job [3].
>
> However, functest daily job is using old code even in the latest job [4]. 
> Maybe we should wait next daily job set. But, I'll be happy if you can check 
> whether the functest jobs use the latest codes of included repos or not.
>
> [1] 
> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=doctor.git;a=commit;h=8f72e695538c2281f923bdbf7a6d7b1d1763c70c
> [2] 
> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/gitweb?p=doctor.git;a=commit;h=7c34d9ecbd17053ca9d14cc518b11e501b66cbeb
> [3] https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/doctor-verify-fuel-sample-master/93/
> [4] 
> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-fuel-baremetal-daily-master/1247/
>
>
> Thanks,
> Ryota
>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
>> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Ryota
>> Mibu
>> Sent: Wednesday, March 01, 2017 12:34 AM
>> To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [doctor][functest] doctor scenario debugging
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>
>> As we discussed in doctor meeting today, I created JIRA tickets for tracking 
>> status of our debug in each installer. We
>> need to get green lights in doctor scenario test in functest report. As we 
>> may need to track different bugs for each installer,
>> I created three tickets for each.
>>
>>   Fuel --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-95
>>   Apex --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-96
>>   Joid --> https://jira.opnfv.org/browse/DOCTOR-97
>>
>> One of barriers is lack of info due to no access to CI pod. In order to ease 
>> our debug, I propose to print logs of forked
>> processes in doctor scenario if the test failed, so that we can see log 
>> messages in doctor.log . I believe it won't bother
>> functest main log (Jenkins console).
>>
>>   https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/29489
>>
>>
>> BR,
>> Ryota
>>
>>
>> ___
>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of testing section

2017-03-02 Thread morgan.richomme

yes

see minutes
http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-testperf/2017/opnfv-testperf.2017-03-02-15.00.html
docs
├── release
│   └── release-notes
└── testing
├── developer
└── user

see https://git.opnfv.org/functest/tree/docs as an illustration

and for the title (not written in the minutes) we agree to try to find
consistant and descriptive titles
we can precise the name of the project, but the title must be
understandable by a new comer

e.g.
Functional testing User Guide (Functest)

so I assume for Qtip it should be something like
Benchmarking as a Service (Qtip)
but we could review that during the cross review period


Le 03/03/2017 à 02:11, Yujun Zhang (ZTE) a écrit :
> Have we get an agreement on the document structure now?
>
> Sorry that I missed yesterday's meeting. 
>
> --
> Yujun
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 9:54 PM  > wrote:
>
> And just to precise - the last table from my first mail could be
> mlisleading (we will exchange tomorrow during the weekly meeting)
> you shall now create a docs/testing directory reflecting the
> target view and put your docs there (as shown in Jose's patch)
>
> in your repo
> docs
> ├── release
> │   └── release-notes
> └── testing
> ├── developer
> └── user
>
> on docs.opnfv.org 
> we will get
>
>
> Testing Documentation
>
>   * Overview
>   * User
>   * Developper
>
> In Overview we will have our umbrella document
>
> in User, all the documents generated from  repo>/docs/testing/user
>
>   * OPNFV FUNCTEST user guide
> 
> 
>   * Bottlenecks - user guide
> 
> 
>   * Yardstick Overview
> 
> 
>   * VSPERF
> 
> 
>   * .
>
>
> in Developer, all the documents generated from  repo>/docs/testing/developer
>
> we probably should also adopt some conventions for the title to be
> as consistant as possible...
>
>   user guide
>
>  configuration guide
>
>  developer guide
>
> to be agreed tomorrow
>
> /Morgan
>
>
>  Le 01/03/2017 à 14:38, Jose Lausuch a écrit :
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>>  
>>
>> Functest already following this approach:
>> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/29151/
>>
>>  
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Jose
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:*Sofia Wallin
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2017 14:11 PM
>> *To:* morgan.richo...@orange.com
>> ; David McBride
>> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> ; Yujun Zhang;
>> mark.bei...@emc.com ; Jose Lausuch;
>> Cooper, Trevor; Yuyang (Gabriel); Gaoliang (D)
>> *Subject:* RE: [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of
>> testing section
>>
>>  
>>
>> Hi Morgan,
>>
>> Yes – This is consistent with what we decided yesterday.
>>
>>  
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Sofia
>>
>>  
>>
>> *From:*morgan.richo...@orange.com
>> 
>> [mailto:morgan.richo...@orange.com]
>> *Sent:* den 1 mars 2017 08:27
>> *To:* Sofia Wallin > >; David McBride
>> >
>> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> ; Yujun Zhang
>> >;
>> mark.bei...@emc.com ; Jose Lausuch
>> >;
>> Cooper, Trevor > >; Yuyang (Gabriel)
>> >;
>> Gaoliang (D) > >
>> *Subject:* [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of
>> testing section
>>
>>  
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> during the last release meeting we had a discussion on the
>> structure of the testing documentation for Danube
>>
>> we suggest to adopt the following approach for the test projects
>>
>> |/docs|
>>
>> ||_ release|
>>
>> |...|
>> |   |_ release-notes // release note of the projects involved in
>> the release|
>> | reference
>> http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting snapshot of the status at
>> the release date|
>> |...|
>> ||_ testing|
>>
>> |testing overview

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Quick follow-up from the Plugfest planning call

2017-03-02 Thread morgan.richomme

Gabriel and Kubi made an update recently on 2 stress tests that should
be defined/available/documented for Danube

https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf?preview=/2926539/9568872/Stress%20Testing%20Update.pptx
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf?preview=/2926539/9569090/stress.mp4

I think we could imagine to run such tests during the plugfest
for E we should elaborate a stress / robustness tests (with long
duration tests) on the test working group

/Morgan




Le 02/03/2017 à 00:16, Cooper, Trevor a écrit :
>
> I support Al’s suggestion. As a goal for the Danube Plugfest I think
> we should define at least one performance oriented test that we run
> using different deployments / configurations … with an objective to
> define a range of good vs bad performance in order to get started with
> performance as a dimension of CVP. Plugfest is a good opportunity for
> accelerating this IMO … we can discuss it in the Test Working Group
> and try to make an initial proposal.
>
>  
>
> /Trevor
>
>  
>
>  
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Raymond Paik
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2017 1:36 PM
> *To:* MORTON, ALFRED C (AL) 
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Quick follow-up from the Plugfest
> planning call
>
>  
>
> Al, 
>
>  
>
> I'm not sure if performance testing has been specifically excluded in
> OPNFV Plugfests.  A number of projects like Storperf participated in
> past two Plugfests.  Of course we can't get into things like Storperf
> results were better on X vs. Y discussions, but there's no reason why
> performance testing can't be done during the Plugfest.
>
>  
>
> Thanks, 
>
>  
>
> Ray
>
>  
>
> On Wed, Mar 1, 2017 at 5:24 AM, MORTON, ALFRED C (AL)
> > wrote:
>
> Hi Ray and Plugtesters,
>
>  
>
> Apologies for missing Monday’s meeting
>
> (Jury Duty is a Civic responsibility,
>
> but makes attending some meetings impossible).
>
>  
>
> Regarding test cases, I wonder if the Scope of
>
> testing has been decided, and whether a
>
> **performance-oriented** test case might be entertained
>
> this time?  This topic has been out of scope in the
>
> previous Plugfests and ETSI CTI’s Plugtest™, AFAIK.
>
>  
>
> It may still be too soon, but it’s worth asking now.
>
>  
>
> regards,
>
> Al
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> ] *On Behalf Of
> *Raymond Paik
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2017 1:21 AM
> *To:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] Quick follow-up from the Plugfest
> planning call
>
>  
>
> All, 
>
>  
>
> A few things after our call on Monday
>
>  
>
> First, I realized that I had sent out a recurring weekly meeting
> for Plugfest planning when this is supposed to be a bi-weekly
> meeting.  I will go ahead and cancel the current series and start
> a new one that starts on March 13th.  (so the upcoming meetings
> are March 13/27 plus April 10th).  Apologies for the thrash, but
> you can also find the upcoming meeting info.
> at 
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/EVNT/Plugfest+-+Danube+Release#Plugfest-DanubeRelease-PlugfestPlanningMeetings
> 
> 
>
>  
>
> Second, I started a test cases page
> at https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/EVNT/Danube+Plugfest+Test+Cases
> 
> .
>  
> I followed the template from the last Plugfest, but as you can see
> it's just a skeleton.  I encourage everyone (esp. those who were
> on the call yesterday) to contribute ideas/suggestions for what we
> should focus on for the upcoming Plugfest.
>
>  
>
> Finally, a reminder that the Plugfest is open to both members &
> non-members of OPNFV.  You can register
> at https://www.regonline.com/OPNFVPlugfestApril2017
> 
>

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of testing section

2017-03-01 Thread morgan.richomme

And just to precise - the last table from my first mail could be
mlisleading (we will exchange tomorrow during the weekly meeting)
you shall now create a docs/testing directory reflecting the target view
and put your docs there (as shown in Jose's patch)

in your repo
docs
├── release
│   └── release-notes
└── testing
├── developer
└── user

on docs.opnfv.org
we will get


Testing Documentation

  * Overview
  * User
  * Developper

In Overview we will have our umbrella document

in User, all the documents generated from /docs/testing/user

  * OPNFV FUNCTEST user guide


  * Bottlenecks - user guide


  * Yardstick Overview


  * VSPERF

  * .


in Developer, all the documents generated from /docs/testing/developer

we probably should also adopt some conventions for the title to be as
consistant as possible...

  user guide

 configuration guide

 developer guide

to be agreed tomorrow

/Morgan


 Le 01/03/2017 à 14:38, Jose Lausuch a écrit :
>
> Hi,
>
>  
>
> Functest already following this approach:
> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/29151/
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jose
>
>  
>
> *From:*Sofia Wallin
> *Sent:* Wednesday, March 01, 2017 14:11 PM
> *To:* morgan.richo...@orange.com; David McBride
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; Yujun Zhang;
> mark.bei...@emc.com; Jose Lausuch; Cooper, Trevor; Yuyang (Gabriel);
> Gaoliang (D)
> *Subject:* RE: [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of
> testing section
>
>  
>
> Hi Morgan,
>
> Yes – This is consistent with what we decided yesterday.
>
>  
>
> Thank you,
>
> Sofia
>
>  
>
> *From:*morgan.richo...@orange.com 
> [mailto:morgan.richo...@orange.com]
> *Sent:* den 1 mars 2017 08:27
> *To:* Sofia Wallin  >; David McBride
> >
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> ; Yujun Zhang
> >;
> mark.bei...@emc.com ; Jose Lausuch
> >;
> Cooper, Trevor  >; Yuyang (Gabriel)
> >;
> Gaoliang (D) >
> *Subject:* [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of testing
> section
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> during the last release meeting we had a discussion on the structure
> of the testing documentation for Danube
>
> we suggest to adopt the following approach for the test projects
>
> |/docs|
>
> ||_ release|
>
> |...|
> |   |_ release-notes // release note of the projects involved in the
> release|
> | reference
> http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting snapshot of the status at the
> release date|
> |...|
> ||_ testing|
>
> |testing overview // umbrella document => figure, description of
> the testing ecosystem, pointers to project documentation|
> ||__ user // will collect the documentation of the test
> projects allowing the end user to perform testing towards a OPNFV SUT|
> | e.g.
> Functest/Yardstick/Vsperf/Storperf/Bottlenecks/Qtip
> installation/config & user guides|
> ||__ developer// will collect documentation to explain how to
> create your own test case and leverage existing testing frameworks|
> | e.g. devloper guides|
>
>
>
> the umbrella testing documentation "testing overview" is under
> opnfvdocs => will be put into /testing
>
> the other documents are in the project repos under
> /docs
> /installation guide
> /config guide
> /user guide
> /release note
> /development
> /development guide
> / interships
>
> --
> |  Test Project Repo   |   Target in
> docs.opnfv.org  |   
> --
> | installation, config, user guide| 
> testing/user  |
> | development guide |  testing/developer |
> | release note| 
> release-notes/testing   |
> --
>
> @Sofia, David:

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [Danube] [Documentation] Organization of testing section

2017-02-28 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

during the last release meeting we had a discussion on the structure of
the testing documentation for Danube

we suggest to adopt the following approach for the test projects

|/docs|

||_ release|

|...|
|   |_ release-notes // release note of the projects involved in the
release|
| reference
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting snapshot of the status at the
release date|
|...|
||_ testing|

|testing overview // umbrella document => figure, description of the
testing ecosystem, pointers to project documentation|
||__ user // will collect the documentation of the test
projects allowing the end user to perform testing towards a OPNFV SUT|
| e.g.
Functest/Yardstick/Vsperf/Storperf/Bottlenecks/Qtip installation/config
& user guides|
||__ developer// will collect documentation to explain how to
create your own test case and leverage existing testing frameworks|
| e.g. devloper guides|



the umbrella testing documentation "testing overview" is under opnfvdocs
=> will be put into /testing

the other documents are in the project repos under
/docs
/installation guide
/config guide
/user guide
/release note
/development
/development guide
/ interships

--
|  Test Project Repo   |   Target in docs.opnfv.org 
|   
--
| installation, config, user guide|  testing/user  |
| development guide |  testing/developer |
| release note| 
release-notes/testing   |
--

@Sofia, David: is it OK for you?

Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfvdocs] Documentation update for Danube release

2017-02-07 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi Sofia

For Danube, the testing group initiated an umbrella doc, currently
hosted in opnfvdocs/docs/testing/ecosystem
is it OK?

Morgan



Le 07/02/2017 à 15:49, Sofia Wallin a écrit :
>
> Hi Gerald,
>
> The documentation is divided into 3 different entry points/areas so
> the structure will look as following,
>
>  
>
> */docs/**release*
>
>  /configguide
>
>  /installation
>
>  /release-notes
>
> /scenarios
>
>   └── scenario.name
>
> /userguide
>
> 
>
> */docs/developer*
>
> /design
>
> /overview
>
> /requirements
>
> 
>
> */docs/testing*
>
>  
>
> So one more layer is added under /docs/ which will steer to
> where the documents will be generated and presented.
>
>  
>
> Also, on the ML there had been the question on references in OPNFV
> documents? Was there any decision/solution on it?
>
> Please see answer from Chris on this. We have a docs meeting tomorrow
> where we could have a discussion about this.
>
>  
>
> BR,
>
> Sofia
>
>  
>
> *From:*Kunzmann, Gerald [mailto:kunzm...@docomolab-euro.com]
> *Sent:* den 7 februari 2017 14:35
> *To:* Sofia Wallin ; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
> (opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org)
> ; opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfvdocs] Documentation update
> for Danube release
>
>  
>
> Hi Sofia,
>
>  
>
> Could you please highlight the “structural changes” that we should
> implement?
>
>  
>
> Also, on the ML there had been the question on references in OPNFV
> documents? Was there any decision/solution on it?
>
>  
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gerald
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Sofia Wallin
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 7. Februar 2017 14:26
> *To:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV (opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> )
>  >;
> opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfvdocs] Documentation update for
> Danube release
>
>  
>
> *To all projects that plans to contribute with documentation to the
> Danube release.***
>
>  
>
> Hi,
>
> As a reminder that documentation is part of the release even this
> time, following email contains some useful information and links.
>
>  
>
> Since we are moving to read the docs
>  (NOTE: this page is still
> work in progress) for the Danube release some structural changes has
> been made. Please have a look at the wiki page linked below to make
> sure that you store your documentation according to directives.
>
>  
>
> _Wiki_
>
> Information on general documentation handling can be found here
> 
>
>  
>
> _Milestones relevant for documentation is MS6 and MS10._
>
> MS6 17/2 – Preliminary documentation completed
>
> Documentation outlines or placeholders committed to repo for all
> project and release documentation
>
> MS10 24/3 – Documentation completed
>
> All project and release documentation reviewed and approved.
>
>  
>
> Since we still haven’t manage to establish or communicate a review
> process for release related documentation it is important to always
> add one or two members from the docs project as reviewer on
> documentation related additions or changes.
>
>  
>
> Everyone is welcome to join the docs meeting
>  held every second
> week.
>
>  
>
> Regards,
>
> Sofia
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest][apex] functest container not updating

2017-02-03 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi Tim

in theory no...it is done automatically

the docker integrating your patch has been successfully produced
https://build.opnfv.org/ci/view/functest/job/functest-docker-build-push-master/883/

several latest Functest docker have been produced meanwhile
https://hub.docker.com/r/opnfv/functest/tags/ (last one 1 hour ago)

so the functest:latest shoudl include your patch...
I just pulled the last version, I can see that your patch is included in
healthcheck.sh

so it seems that the docker on LF POD1 is not up to date

Morgan



Le 03/02/2017 à 17:22, Tim Rozet a écrit :
> Hi Jose, Morgan,
> I see in 
> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/functest-apex-apex-daily-master-suite-master/3/console
> that the patch to fix glance is not there, but in the job diff I see:
>
> Changes:
>  Migrates glance commands to OSCLI (detail)
>
> Do we need to trigger the container to be rebuilt?
>
> On the host:
> [root@lf_pod1 ~]# docker ps
> CONTAINER IDIMAGE   COMMAND CREATED   
>   STATUS  PORTS   NAMES
> 5081db2edcb7opnfv/functest:latest   "/bin/bash" 9 minutes ago 
>   Up 9 minutesdistracted_mestorf
>
> [root@lf_pod1 ~]# docker images
> REPOSITORY  TAG IMAGE IDCREATED   
>   SIZE
> opnfv/functest  latest  d88385eb4340About an hour ago 
>   1.32 GB
> opnfv/functesta1ca28f947472 days ago
>   1.339 GB
> opnfv/yardstick latest  98c6ec405cf08 days ago
>   970.2 MB
> hello-world latest  c54a2cc56cbb7 months ago  
>   1.848 kB
> tutum/influxdb  latest  5d606dc1468011 months ago 
>   275.2 MB
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Rozet
> Red Hat SDN Team
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] Infra/testing group crossover

2017-02-02 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

during past testing weekly meeting, several topics involving infra and
testing were discussed

- bitergia/dashboard: bitergia is already dealing with infra group
(jenkins tab) and will soon also be involved with testing community
(producing graph by consuming existing test API) - feedback/best
practices from infra will be cool

- analytics results from testing: see
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testing/R+post-processing+of+the+Yardstick+results#Rpost-processingoftheYardstickresults-Visualizeeffectofeachcontextvariable
where R analytics provide valuable information on the POD based on one
of the yardstick test case that could be used to give feedback to lab owner

- scenario promotion linked to CI evolution - things initiated in Danube
but effort to be continued.

- testing gating - things also initiated

- need for stable PODs for long duration testing for E release (not
possible today through CI POD or Community PODs): that is a new need but
we believe that long duration tests can help us to give more trust on
the SUT

- extension of OPNFVaaS initiated by infra group

- 

I think we will be very busy (and we are no so many at the end) with
Danube in the weeks to come but we should plan some common meetings
(even if some people already participate to both working groups) to see
what we can do for E

F2F meeting during the summit or the plugfest would be helpful

for Danube, we plan to re do a cross review of the documentation
(Yardstick reviewing Functest documentation and vice versa, it could
make sense to include infra project in this cross review)

/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]L3VPN for dovetail area

2017-01-30 Thread morgan.richomme

Le 27/01/2017 à 18:49, Wenjing Chu a écrit :
>
> I agree more information is better, however it is not obvious where
> that information will come from.
>
>  
>
> -Test case run result history
>
> Do we keep records of old runs in Colorado for functest & yardsticks?
> If we do, let’s link them up.
>
> If not, we can always re-run these tests on the frozen Colorado
> release and produce these results. Are we regularly running them now?
>
> Also note, the Colorado release is frozen, test cases are frozen, so
> this spot info may not be as relevant as it appears. However I agree
> it’ll become more informational and valuable with longer history.
>
>  
>
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/functest/release/colorado/index-status-apex.html
no run on colorado since more than 10 days
ressources allocated to Danube/Master

all previous tests stored in the DB
http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1/results?project=yardstick=10=colorado
http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1/results?case=tempest_smoke_serial=10=colorado



> -Source code of test cases
>
> Do we have a link to source code repos in openstack, ODL/ONOS, etc
> upstreams?
>
> Can someone involved in CI/CD pitch in?
>
??
for Functest we may find such links in the build of the docker file
https://git.opnfv.org/functest/tree/docker/Dockerfile?h=stable/colorado

you wil find the reference to OPNFV repos and upstream repos used for
the tests

|# OpenStack repositories RUN git clone --depth 1 -b $OPENSTACK_TAG
https://github.com/openstack/networking-bgpvpn ${repos_dir}/bgpvpn RUN
git clone --depth 1 -b $KINGBIRD_TAG
https://github.com/openstack/kingbird.git ${repos_dir}/kingbird RUN git
clone --depth 1 -b $RALLY_TAG https://github.com/openstack/rally.git
${repos_dir}/rally RUN git clone --depth 1 -b $TEMPEST_TAG
https://github.com/openstack/tempest.git ${repos_dir}/tempest |

Note that a catalog web site is planned for Danube

/Morgan

>  
>
> Wenjing
>
>  
>
> *From:*SULLIVAN, BRYAN L [mailto:bs3...@att.com]
> *Sent:* Friday, January 27, 2017 6:20 AM
> *To:* Wenjing Chu ; Pierre Lynch
> ; Jose Lausuch 
> *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV 
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]L3VPN for dovetail area
>
>  
>
> More inline.
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bryan Sullivan | AT
>
>  
>
> *From:*Wenjing Chu [mailto:wenjing@huawei.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 26, 2017 12:30 PM
> *To:* SULLIVAN, BRYAN L >;
> Pierre Lynch >; Jose
> Lausuch >
> *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV  >
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]L3VPN for dovetail area
>
>  
>
> Hi Bryan
>
>  
>
> Hope my inline responses are still readable …
>
> Thanks.
>
>  
>
> Wenjing
>
>  
>
> *From:*SULLIVAN, BRYAN L [mailto:bs3...@att.com]
> *Sent:* Thursday, January 26, 2017 8:29 AM
> *To:* Wenjing Chu  >; Pierre Lynch  >; Jose Lausuch  >
> *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV  >
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]L3VPN for dovetail area
>
>  
>
> More comments inline.
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bryan Sullivan | AT
>
>  
>
> *From:*Wenjing Chu [mailto:wenjing@huawei.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 3:00 PM
> *To:* SULLIVAN, BRYAN L >;
> Pierre Lynch >; Jose
> Lausuch >
> *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV  >
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]L3VPN for dovetail area
>
>  
>
> Thanks Bryan. See my response inline below.
>
>  
>
> Wenjing
>
>  
>
> *From:*SULLIVAN, BRYAN L [mailto:bs3...@att.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 25, 2017 11:32 AM
> *To:* Wenjing Chu  >; Pierre Lynch  >; Jose Lausuch  >
> *Cc:* TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV  >
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]L3VPN for dovetail area
>
>  
>
> I posted some comments in gerrit. Here are the main points I think we
> need alignment on:
>
> 1)  All proposed dovetail included tests will be added one-by-one,
> in a separate commit.
>
>  
>
> Please follow the gerrit tickets below and see if you can follow
> through. Test cases are organized into two levels for convenience:
>

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] Danube community priorities

2017-01-27 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

please find attached the pdf discussed on community priorities for
Danube by the TSC: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Danube+priorities

In the first part we tried to indicate the main achievements of the
first OPNFV versions and indicate some metrics.

In the second part we tried to identify some problems and tasks/Commons
needed by the "community" to support the sustainable growth of the
scenarios/installers/projects.

A "community" priority is neither a project priority nor a ranking of
expected features.

It is just some work impacting several projects, not always well
identified, because at the interface of several projects but valuable to
give consistency especially for end users or use our resources more
efficiently.

That is why you will not find the future killing features of Danube here
:)...it is more probably in the projects...

These priorities are informative and there is no associated commitments
for Danube.

Finally we started this discussion after the Openstack Summit in
Barcelona, which was too late regarding the Danube version.

For the E release, we would like to start earlier, in order to finalize
this document on first release milestones (not on MS5)

As inputs we already have the EUAG pain points.
A wiki page has been initiated
https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8688472
An etherpad is also available to collect community views:
https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/E-Release_Community_priorities

Doing the exercise earlier could motivate the creation of projects on
priorities that would be uncovered or poorly covered by the existing
projects.

/Morgan


_

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.



TSC_Danube_Community_priorities.pdf
Description: Adobe PDF document
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]if the l3vpn feature is completed fully in C release

2017-01-18 Thread morgan.richomme

Le 18/01/2017 à 11:07, Tapio Tallgren a écrit :
> Good topic, I also felt that the criteria were not too clear.
>
> My interpretation was that if we are testing a feature that should be
> in all OPNFV platforms and which is generally available in the
> industry, and which does not require a specific installation tool,
> then many OPNFV installers would support it. Perhaps even all of them.
part of the feature alignment for "mature" features evoked in the
discussion on priorities
not realistic for Danube, but could be for E and somehow linked to the
discussion on scenario refactoring
it is a richness to have several installers
until a feature is not mature, it makes fully sense to focus on only 1
installer in specific scenario(s)
but when the integration is done and available since 1 or 2 OPNFV
versions, the feature should be adopted by most of/all the installers in
generic scenario(s)

it will be useful for certification (and we are back to an old thread...
when we say we cannot certify a feature that is not supported by 80% of
the scenarios we are releasing...today that is the case of lots of
features that are installer dependant)

/Morgan

>
> -Tapio
>
>
> On 01/18/2017 11:38 AM, Jose Lausuch wrote:
>> Me neither. If that were the case, that feature Was tested only in
>> Fuel during Colorado.
>>
>> Let's follow up on Friday.
>>
>> - Jose -
>>
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
>> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of
>> Christopher Price
>> Sent: Wednesday, January 18, 2017 9:32 AM
>> To: Tapio Tallgren; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail]if the l3vpn feature is
>> completed fully in C release
>>
>> Hmm,
>>
>> I was not aware that “all installers must support” a feature for
>> there to be a dovetail suite to validate it.
>> Maybe we should review the “qualification criteria” again on Friday’s
>> call.
>>
>> Completely agree that we need to do this in Gerrit.
>>
>> / chris
>>
>> On 2017-01-18, 08:59, "Tapio Tallgren"
>> > tapio.tallg...@nokia.com> wrote:
>>
>>  On 01/18/2017 12:53 AM, Dave Neary wrote:
>>  > Hi Hongbo, Jose,
>>  >
>>  > As I was saying on the Dovetail calls, I have some concerns
>> about moving
>>  > tests into the Dovetail test suite too early.
>>  >
>>  > In the Dovetail test requirements, we have:
>>  >
>>  > "* Test cases must pass on OPNFV reference deployments
>>  >* Tests must not require a specific NFVi platform
>> composition or
>>  > installation tool
>>  >* Tests must not require unmerged patches to the relevant
>> upstream
>>  > projects"
>>  >
>>  > And in the CVP requirements, we have the following section:
>>  >
>>  > "The overall CVP compliance verification scope tied to an
>> OPNFV release
>>  > is determined by the Committee. The OPNFV TSC defines and
>> maintains the
>>  > compliance verification procedures and associated tools. The
>> scope is
>>  > constrained to features, capabilities, components, and interfaces
>>  > included in an OPNFV release that are generally available in the
>>  > industry (e.g., through adoption by an upstream community)."
>>  >
>>  >
>>  > I wonder if this functionality is sufficiently widely adopted in
>>  > commercial NFVi and VIM solutions to pass this bar.
>>  >
>>  > Thanks,
>>  > Dave.
>>   I have no opinion about L3VPN as such, but I read this to
>> mean that the
>>  code should be part of a released upstream projects and that OPNFV
>>  installers should all support it.
>>   What would be the best way to discuss these? Currently, the
>> test cases
>>  are on a wiki page which makes it a little difficult to comment
>> them.
>>  Would it make sense to copy the whole test areas and test cases
>> wiki
>>  page to an Etherpad? Or should the whole page be put to gerrit for
>>  commenting?
>>   -Tapio
>>   ___
>>  opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>>  opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>>  https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>> 
>>
>> ___
>> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
>> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] VNF on boarding: Q Functest versus orchestrator projects

2017-01-10 Thread morgan.richomme

BEGIN:VCALENDAR
METHOD:REQUEST
PRODID:Microsoft Exchange Server 2010
VERSION:2.0
BEGIN:VTIMEZONE
TZID:Romance Standard Time
BEGIN:STANDARD
DTSTART:16010101T03
TZOFFSETFROM:+0200
TZOFFSETTO:+0100
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=10
END:STANDARD
BEGIN:DAYLIGHT
DTSTART:16010101T02
TZOFFSETFROM:+0100
TZOFFSETTO:+0200
RRULE:FREQ=YEARLY;INTERVAL=1;BYDAY=-1SU;BYMONTH=3
END:DAYLIGHT
END:VTIMEZONE
BEGIN:VEVENT
ORGANIZER;CN=RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN:MAILTO:morgan.richo...@orange.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=zhao.huabi
 n...@zte.com.cn:MAILTO:zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=meng.zhaox
 i...@zte.com.cn:MAILTO:meng.zhaoxi...@zte.com.cn
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=bylee@etri
 .re.kr:MAILTO:by...@etri.re.kr
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=navid.nika
 e...@eurecom.fr:MAILTO:navid.nika...@eurecom.fr
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=wluhan@bup
 t.edu.cn:MAILTO:wlu...@bupt.edu.cn
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=cs15mtech0
 1...@iith.ac.in:MAILTO:cs15mtech01...@iith.ac.in
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=cs15mtech0
 1...@iith.ac.in:MAILTO:cs15mtech01...@iith.ac.in
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=opnfv-tech
 -disc...@lists.opnfv.org:MAILTO:opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Prakash.Ra
 mchand...@huawei.com:MAILTO:prakash.ramchand...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=giuseppe.c
 are...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:MAILTO:giuseppe.care...@fokus.fraunhofer.de
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=narinder.g
 u...@canonical.com:MAILTO:narinder.gu...@canonical.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=boucherv@l
 ive.fr:MAILTO:bouch...@live.fr
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=olga.havel
 @huawei.com:MAILTO:olga.ha...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=dmcbride@l
 inuxfoundation.org:MAILTO:dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=bs3131@att
 .com:MAILTO:bs3...@att.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=jose.lausu
 c...@ericsson.com:MAILTO:jose.laus...@ericsson.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=michael.pa
 u...@tu-berlin.de:MAILTO:michael.pa...@tu-berlin.de
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=lorenzo.to
 mas...@fokus.fraunhofer.de:MAILTO:lorenzo.tomas...@fokus.fraunhofer.de
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Helen.Chen
 @huawei.com:MAILTO:helen.c...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=huang.leib
 o...@zte.com.cn:MAILTO:huang.leib...@zte.com.cn
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=thajudheen
 .ra...@huawei.com:MAILTO:thajudheen.ra...@huawei.com
ATTENDEE;ROLE=REQ-PARTICIPANT;PARTSTAT=NEEDS-ACTION;RSVP=TRUE;CN=Yang.Xu3@h
 uawei.com:MAILTO:yang@huawei.com
DESCRIPTION;LANGUAGE=fr-FR:Quand : mercredi 11 janvier 2017 17:00-18:00. (U
 TC+01:00) Bruxelles\, Copenhague\, Madrid\, Paris\nOù : Conf Bridge (see 
 details in the mails)\n\n*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*~*\n\nHi\n\nbased of first discu
 ssions during functest weekly meeting (http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.or
 g/meetings/opnfv-functest/2017/opnfv-functest.2017-01-10-08.00.html)\n1h t
 o discuss Q and VNF on boarding in Functest\nmeet on #opnfv-functest\, s
 ee details below for the audio bridge\n\nfeel free to forward to whom it m
 ay concern\n\n/Morgan\n\nsee details below\n\nConf bridge\nNamePasswor
 dBridge no.  Date (-MM-DD)   Start time  Time zone
 \nOPNFV   123456789   +33 4 37 21 95 48   2017-01-10  17:00   
 (UTC+01:00) Brussels\, Copenhagen\, Madrid\, Paris\n\n\nINTERNET : htt
 ps://coopnet.multimedia-conference.orange-business.com/?c=YoFlYSq3Yr\n\n\n
 Note: for your participants abroad\, please give them the number to dial f
 rom their country and the participant code to join the audio bridge.\ncoun
 tries   number to dial from countries   participant code\nAlgeria +213
  98 320 20 82   437219548#\nArgentina   +54 11 5984-191243
 7219548#\nAustralia   +61 2 8278 4149 437219548#\nAustria +43 1 360277
 4662437219548#\nBahrain +973 1619 6694  437219548#\nBelgium +32 2 
 620 02 78 437219548#\nBrazil  +55 11 3878-8226437219548#\nBulgaria
 +359 2 935 8227 437219548#\nCanada  +1 418-478-0963 437219548#\nCh
 ile   +56 2 2618 8329 437219548#\nChina   +86 400 819 869543721954
 8#\nCyprus  +357 22 007320  437219548#\nCzech Republic  +420 225 439 794  
   437219548#\nDenmark +45 35 15 80 66 437219548#\nDominican

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [FUNCTEST] [Danube] VNF OnBoarding

2017-01-09 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi Guiseppe

I think I got your point
As you mentioned we should differentiate 2 things
- VNF onboarding: testing the capability to deploy a VNF with or without
an orchestrator and test the VNF
- Mano stack validation see as a feature available in scenario(s)

the proposal was related to the first topic only
the idea of the abstraction is to try to harmonize the way we deploy the
VNFs, it is also a guide for VNF and/or MANO providers for the intergation
and it shall encourage VNF providers to integrate the test suite as part
as the VNF to ease an integration in OPNFV scenario(s)
for Danube we can see that we should have several orchestrators
deploying the vIMS

for the second point, I agree with you, it could be considered as a
"feature" assuming that a scenario includes an orchestrator
then we can define a specific constraint and run any test suites to the
MANO stacks related to the scenario as any feature
as a feature, functest can triggers the test then the MANO stack testing
will be automatically integrated in the reporting page and used to
calculate the Functest scenario scoring
(http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/functest/release/master/index-status-fuel.html)


Let's continue discussing it tomorrow

/Morgan

Le 09/01/2017 à 12:23, Carella, Giuseppe a écrit :
> Hi Morgan, 
>
> during the last days we have done a review (not fully complete yet)
> about the approach you proposed for integrating our test scenario with
> functest, and we internally agreed that this approach should be enough
> for us to test the vIMS scenario running on Orchestra. We already have
> some code which we plan to commit during this week, however it would
> be good to discuss with you all about some doubts we are having during
> tomorrow’s call.
>
> In the wiki page you sent it is mentioned also that "Functest does not
> test any MANO stack”. In general, in Orchestra we would be interested
> in having some integration scenarios which could be useful for
> covering test cases for MANO frameworks. We have already an upstream
> project [1] doing something similar, and our initial plan was to
> integrate this project within OPNFV functest, as already mentioned
> earlier to Jose. With the approach taken in your abstraction I see
> that this integration won’t be really easily doable. Main reason is
> that our integration-test framework already splits the test cases in
> different steps, while you cover at the moment mainly two steps
> (deploy VNF and test VNF)
> * registration of a VIM instance 
> * on boarding a NSD
> * deployment a NSR using the on boarded NSD from previous step
> * testing that the NS is really deployed (optional in case of negative
> testing)
> * deletion of the NSR
> * deletion of the NSD
> * unregistration of the VIM
>
> With our framework, it is possible to define a scenario (and the steps
> which needs to be executed) directly using a configuration file. An
> example of a scenario can be found here [2], deploying an iperf server
> and client network service and testing that the client connected
> effectively with the server (therefore testing that dependencies were
> correctly configured between VNFs). 
>
> Although I see that your approach can be further extended to include
> those additional steps, I would suggest not to have them as part of
> VNF testing, rather starting creating a new set of test cases which
> can be part of a MANO group (or maybe including them in the feature
> tests group?). Nevertheless, coding the test steps in a specific
> programming language will also limit the integration of existing
> external frameworks (like the one we already have) MANO providers may
> already have implemented. 
>
> In summary, talking about the Orchestra project, we will provide soon
> the code for testing the deployment of a VNF (vIMS based on
> OpenIMSCore) implementing the abstract class you provided and
> following the approach taken for cloudify. However, as we assume that
> in the future the Orchestra project will be directly integrated with
> at least one installer, we would like to include some more
> comprehensive use cases that can execute several (positive and
> negative) test cases, possibly using already existing frameworks (like
> the one I mentioned). Would that be feasible within functest? 
>
> PS: I added myself as reviewer in gerrit ;-) 
>
> [1] https://github.com/openbaton/integration-tests
> [2] 
> https://github.com/openbaton/integration-tests/blob/master/src/main/resources/integration-test-scenarios/scenario-real-iperf.ini
>
> Cheers,
> Giuseppe
>
> Download Open Baton already today: http://openbaton.org
>
>> On 06 Jan 2017, at 17:27, morgan.richo...@orange.com
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Dear Orchestra, Opera, OAI teams
>>
>> I would like to know the status on VNF onboarding for Danube.
>>
>> My last view was that you all were candidates to integrate a testcase
>> integrating an orchestrator (respectivelly Openbaton, Open-O,  Juju for
>> OAI) to deploy a VNF

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [FUNCTEST] [Danube] VNF OnBoarding

2017-01-09 Thread morgan.richomme

Thaj & Leibo added to patch review (@Yang Yu, I did not find you in gerrit)

do not hesitate to comment the review and/or contact us if you have any
quesiton

/Morgan

Le 06/01/2017 à 19:53, Yingjun Li a écrit :
> Add Thaj, Yang Xu and Leibo from OPERA team to the list. They are preparing 
> vIMS test case integration with FUNCTEST.
>
> Thanks
> Yingjun
>
> -Original Message-
> From: morgan.richo...@orange.com [mailto:morgan.richo...@orange.com] 
> Sent: Friday, January 06, 2017 8:27 AM
> To: Yingjun Li; zhao.huab...@zte.com.cn; meng.zhaoxi...@zte.com.cn; 
> by...@etri.re.kr; narinder.gu...@canonical.com; Yunxia Chen; Olga Havel; 
> giuseppe.care...@fokus.fraunhofer.de; lorenzo.tomas...@fokus.fraunhofer.de; 
> michael.pa...@tu-berlin.de; rohit.gu...@eurecom.fr; navid.nika...@eurecom.fr; 
> wlu...@bupt.edu.cn; cs15mtech01...@iith.ac.in; cs15mtech01...@iith.ac.in
> Cc: Prakash Ramchandran; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L; Jose Lausuch; David McBride; 
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; valentin boucher
> Subject: [OPNFV] [FUNCTEST] [Danube] VNF OnBoarding
>
> Dear Orchestra, Opera, OAI teams
>
> I would like to know the status on VNF onboarding for Danube.
>
> My last view was that you all were candidates to integrate a testcase
> integrating an orchestrator (respectivelly Openbaton, Open-O,  Juju for
> OAI) to deploy a VNF (respectively ??, vIMS, vEPC(OAI)).
>
> I created a wiki page to explain how to do it with Functest
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=8687767
> a patch is currently pending (including  some preconfiguration for you)
> https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/26769/
> I was only able to add Open-O team for review (other contributors not
> found from gerrit)
>
> Valentin who created the cloudify_vims showed in Berlin adapted his code
> to the VNF abstraction we are suggesting (we also provide an abstraction
> for feature project).
> This abstraction and more globally the integration in Functest should
> harmonize the way we are testing VNF from Functest perspective and allow
> an integration in CI process including test result collection and
> scenario reporting.
>
> Do you want to use Functest framework for Danube?
> As we are now entering the integration phase, it is important to get
> your feedback on your plan for Danube.
> Any comment welcome: framework, abstraction, needs,...
> We have a weekly meeting on IRC avery Tuesday 8 UTC, I added a slot for
> next week.
>
> Thanks & regards
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [FuncTest] Test Database Swagger URI changed?

2017-01-04 Thread morgan.richomme

Serena fixed the issue
Probably bad config introduced by an update 3 weeks ago (and I am
probably the one to blame...)

/Morgan


Le 03/01/2017 à 17:45, SULLIVAN, BRYAN L a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
>  
>
> I tried to verify the API URL
> http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/swagger/spec.html#!/spec/update
> 
> which had been used earlier to update the database, but it appears not
> to be working now, using the credentials as shown on the page “Where
> can I find the documentation on the test API?
> ”. Did
> the swagger API URL change?
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bryan Sullivan | AT
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] RE : Help - First Patch - Gerrit Upload Denied Error

2016-12-17 Thread morgan.richomme

If it is a first patch, you needed to be declared in a DB (even if you already 
signed the CLA)
You may ask Copper or Releng PTL or contact the help desk (in copy)
Once done you will be able to commit patches in a any project

/Morgan



Envoyé de mon Galaxy Note 4 d'Orange


 Message d'origine 
De : Aimee Ukasick 
Date : 16/12/2016 20:58 (GMT+01:00)
À : opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Objet : [opnfv-tech-discuss] Help - First Patch - Gerrit Upload Denied Error

Hi all - I have code changes for Copper and Releng that I am trying to
push to Gerrit but am getting the following error returned from git review:

--

fatal: Upload denied for project 'copper'
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
--

fatal: Upload denied for project 'releng'
fatal: Could not read from remote repository.

Please make sure you have the correct access rights
and the repository exists.
--

I accepted the invitation to commit on 13 Dec. Both my Linux Foundation
account and Gerrit indicate that I am a member of
opnfv-gerrit-copper-contributors. Gerrit/Groups has 3 additional
entries: Anonymous Users, CLA Accepted - Individual, and Registered Users.

My SSH key in Gerrit matches my local id_rsa.pub.

I am cloning the repos using
git clone ssh://@gerrit.openf.org:29418/ as detailed
here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/git+tutorial

After I cloned the repo and checked out my branch, I ran git review -s
and got this response:
Could not connect to gerrit.
Enter your gerrit username: aimeeu
Trying again with ssh://aim...@gerrit.opnfv.org:29418/copper.git

We don't know where your gerrit is. Please manually create a remote
named "gerrit" and try again.
Could not connect to gerrit at
ssh://aim...@gerrit.opnfv.org:29418/copper.git
Traceback (most recent call last):
  File "/usr/bin/git-review", line 10, in 
sys.exit(main())
  File "/usr/lib/python2.7/dist-packages/git_review/cmd.py", line 1534,
in main
sys.exit(e.EXIT_CODE)
AttributeError: 'GitReviewException' object has no attribute 'EXIT_CODE'

so I then had to create a remote gerrit:
git remote add gerrit ssh://aim...@gerrit.opnfv.org:29418/copper.git

When I ran git review, I received the "Upload denied" error.

Complete terminal output:  http://paste.openstack.org/show/592673/

NOTE: I *am* able to clone the sandbox repo, checkout a branch, execute
git review -s with no error, make a change,  and push that change to gerrit.


git-review version 1.25.0
git version 2.9.3


Any ideas on what I'm doing wrong?

Thanks in advance!

--
Aimee Ukasick, AT


___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [test-wg] [all] TestPerf EcoSystem diagram now editable

2016-12-15 Thread morgan.richomme

cool
thanks Yujun

Le 15/12/2016 à 14:05, Yujun Zhang a écrit :
> Hi testers,
>
> I have replaced the previous image of TestPerf EcoSystem with an
> editable diagram in the overview section of testperf wiki page[1].
> Please review and amend if something is missing.
>
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/testing/TestPerf 
>
>
> ___
> test-wg mailing list
> test...@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/test-wg


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] committer list maintainance

2016-12-14 Thread morgan.richomme

in line with Yujun
no need to attend TSC to remove non active committers
usually we can do it through a patch of INFO file

the only case I can see a need to attend TSC is in case of conflict but
I never saw that so far

during OpenStack Barcelona, we mentioned that it would be also nice to
implement something to automatically remove 6 months non active
contributors.
the idea is not to blame but to clean the repo and reflect the reality
of the project activity
I agree that there are no commitments, people can move from one project
to another
however it is better to have a good idea of the project activity and
then keeping long list of non active contributors is misleading

So I would suggest to implement a job that will automatically remove a
contributor Y of a project X if no activitiy has been reported since
more than 6 months
If the project has no commitor anymore or only the PTL or empty repo
since x months => raise an alarm to TSC to clean also the project

/Morgan


Le 14/12/2016 à 08:31, joehuang a écrit :
> +1000 for this "I never think it is a shame to leave a project,  since
> it is normal that people move on to a new target and didn't have time
> to say goodbye"
>
> Best Regards
> Chaoyi Huang (joehuang)
> 
> *From:* Yujun Zhang [zhangyujun+...@gmail.com]
> *Sent:* 14 December 2016 15:10
> *To:* joehuang; Raymond Paik
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] committer list maintainance
>
> I think there is no mandatory rule for PTL to attend TSC meeting in
> order to complete the removal process. At least, I never did that before.
>
> On my side, I have tried to contact several inactive committers to ask
> for their willingness and most of them replies politely to explain
> why. And we have a happy ending by putting them in retired list[1].
>
> I did encounter the situation that losing contact to some committer.
> And we just ask TSC to approve the removal and that's it.
>
> After all, I never think it is a shame to leave a project, since it is
> normal that people move on to a new target and didn't have time to say
> goodbye.
>
> [1]:
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/qtip/Platform+Performance+Benchmarking#PlatformPerformanceBenchmarking-RetiredCommitters
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 2:17 PM joehuang  > wrote:
>
> In OPNFV we "assume bad faith"? This is not a good assumption.
>
> The less meeting, the better, and usually a TSC meeting will be in
> the night or early morning for me to join. If even need to go to
> TSC meeting for 5 minutes for approval, I would prefer to retain
> the inactive committer there, just let it be.
>
>
> Best Regards
> Chaoyi Huang (joehuang)
> 
> *From:* Raymond Paik [rp...@linuxfoundation.org
> ]
> *Sent:* 14 December 2016 13:33
>
> *To:* joehuang
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] committer list maintainance
> Joe, 
>
> On the first point, I'm not sure why you are saying you need to be
> committer to submit a patch in OPNFV.  There are plenty of regular
> contributors who submit code/patches to OPNFV.  Let me know if I'm
> not understanding your point.
>
> On your second point, I can recall a few committers who
> voluntarily stepped down in the past few of months.  One of them
> was your Board member Wenjing who stepped down as a committer for
> QTIP.  One of the reasons why TSC approval is desired for revoking
> committer status is to prevent PTLs from potentially acting in bad
> faith.  I don't know if there are any PTLs in OPNFV who would act
> in bad faith, but it's good to have checks & balances.  Is it
> really that difficult to send an email to the TSC mailing list and
> then come to the TSC meeting for 5 minutes to get an approval?
>
> Others in the community are welcome to weigh in on this...
>
> Thanks, 
>
> Ray
>
> On Tue, Dec 13, 2016 at 9:10 PM, joehuang  > wrote:
>
> Hello, Raymond,
>
> My suggestion is to update the TSC Charter. Compared to
> OpenStack core reviewer/contributor maintenance, often feel
> that OPNFV governance brings lots of inconvenience:
>
> For example, if one wants to submit a patch, he/she usually
> has to be a committer in OPNFV before he submit a patch. But
> in OpenStack, anyone is able to submit a patch, and core
> reviewers will make sure this patch should be approved or not.
> If one is nominated as committer to be a core reviewer, and
> pass the voting, then any other core reviewer can add the new
> one to core reviewer list, but in OPNFV, you have to submit a
> patch or ask

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest][apex] New smoke tests in master verify

2016-12-13 Thread morgan.richomme

Le 13/12/2016 à 02:30, Tim Rozet a écrit :
> Hi Morgan,
> Thanks for the patch to move those tests.  Also it is great to see the 
> integration of Steve's framework!
>
> On our latest verify we see that it is still running those tests.  Is that 
> because we have to wait for a new functest container to be built?  If so, 
> when does that get built?
in theory some minutes after the merge...so it should be included now..
but we may have change the way we build the docker...(I can see onlu
latest one day ago and master 15 days ago)
Jose any idea?

strange in
https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/functest-apex-apex-verify-master-suite-master/736/console
I can see that it is still run
however this run is post merge
https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/functest-apex-apex-verify-master-suite-master/736/



>
> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/apex-verify-master/2033/
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Rozet
> Red Hat SDN Team
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "morgan richomme" 
> To: "Tim Rozet" , "Jose Lausuch" 
> 
> Cc: "OPNFV Tech Discussion" , "Steven 
> Pisarski" 
> Sent: Monday, December 12, 2016 4:07:59 AM
> Subject: Re: [functest][apex] New smoke tests in master verify
>
> Hi Tim,
>
> api_check is part of new SNAPS tests (framework developed by Steve and
> integrated in Danube)
> - 2 in healthcheck: connection_check and api_check
> - 1 in smoke: snaps_smoke
> we integrated them end of next week, it seems that we need to
> troubleshoot a little bit :)
> we had a discussion on the category (healtcheck versus smoke)
>
> As the 2 first test suites were short - healthcheck is as you mentioned
> mainly for gating so it should be reliable and not block installer CI -
> we put them in healthcheck (they could eventually replace the old one
> written in bash)
>
> but as you say, negative tests must not be in healthcheck (good point,
> we should include that in our rule for category selection..), I move
> api_check to smoke (as Tempest)
> patch => https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/25783/1
>
> + Steve in copy
>
> /Morgan
>
> Le 12/12/2016 à 03:07, Tim Rozet a écrit :
>> Hi Jose, Morgan,
>> I noticed in our latest verifies there are some new test cases added called 
>> 'api_check' that are running as part of the healthcheck:
>>
>> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/functest-apex-apex-verify-master-suite-master/734/console
>>
>> Most of these test cases pass, but the negative tests seem to fail like:
>> test_create_subnet_empty_cidr 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>> test_create_subnet_empty_name 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>> test_create_subnet_null_cidr 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>> test_create_subnet_null_name 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>>
>> Should those be running as part of the healthcheck?  If so, can we remove 
>> the negative test cases?  I feel like the smoke tests should just be for 
>> valdidating basic functionality of what is deployed works, rather than 
>> negative tests.  We still need to figure out why these are failing, but I 
>> don't want it to block our verify CI (maybe turn on in daily?).
>>
>> There are a few positive tests that failed:
>> test_create_network 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsNetworkTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>> test_create_subnet 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>> test_create_port 
>> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsRouterTests) 
>> ... FAIL
>> test_create_router_private_network 
>> (snaps.openstack.tests.create_router_tests.CreateRouterSuccessTests) ... 
>> ERROR
>>
>> I don't know why those failed, but creating networks, subnets, etc all 
>> passed in the previous healtcheck tests.
>>
>> Thanks,
>>
>> Tim Rozet
>> Red Hat SDN Team
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [functest][apex] New smoke tests in master verify

2016-12-12 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi Tim,

api_check is part of new SNAPS tests (framework developed by Steve and
integrated in Danube)
- 2 in healthcheck: connection_check and api_check
- 1 in smoke: snaps_smoke
we integrated them end of next week, it seems that we need to
troubleshoot a little bit :)
we had a discussion on the category (healtcheck versus smoke)

As the 2 first test suites were short - healthcheck is as you mentioned
mainly for gating so it should be reliable and not block installer CI -
we put them in healthcheck (they could eventually replace the old one
written in bash)

but as you say, negative tests must not be in healthcheck (good point,
we should include that in our rule for category selection..), I move
api_check to smoke (as Tempest)
patch => https://gerrit.opnfv.org/gerrit/#/c/25783/1

+ Steve in copy

/Morgan

Le 12/12/2016 à 03:07, Tim Rozet a écrit :
> Hi Jose, Morgan,
> I noticed in our latest verifies there are some new test cases added called 
> 'api_check' that are running as part of the healthcheck:
>
> https://build.opnfv.org/ci/job/functest-apex-apex-verify-master-suite-master/734/console
>
> Most of these test cases pass, but the negative tests seem to fail like:
> test_create_subnet_empty_cidr 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) ... 
> FAIL
> test_create_subnet_empty_name 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) ... 
> FAIL
> test_create_subnet_null_cidr 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) ... 
> FAIL
> test_create_subnet_null_name 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) ... 
> FAIL
>
> Should those be running as part of the healthcheck?  If so, can we remove the 
> negative test cases?  I feel like the smoke tests should just be for 
> valdidating basic functionality of what is deployed works, rather than 
> negative tests.  We still need to figure out why these are failing, but I 
> don't want it to block our verify CI (maybe turn on in daily?).
>
> There are a few positive tests that failed:
> test_create_network 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsNetworkTests) 
> ... FAIL
> test_create_subnet 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsSubnetTests) ... 
> FAIL
> test_create_port 
> (snaps.openstack.utils.tests.neutron_utils_tests.NeutronUtilsRouterTests) ... 
> FAIL
> test_create_router_private_network 
> (snaps.openstack.tests.create_router_tests.CreateRouterSuccessTests) ... ERROR
>
> I don't know why those failed, but creating networks, subnets, etc all passed 
> in the previous healtcheck tests.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tim Rozet
> Red Hat SDN Team


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Yardstick] Agenda for Yardstick meeting 13 Dec

2016-12-07 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

Ok let's discuss it during next meeting
we have already something in Functest so we should take care not
bringing confusion here
an earlier discussion said that VNF onboarding could be done in Functest
(as we have the vIMS and should have additional ones for Danube)

based on that, Yardstick could be called to perform
performance/qualification tests towards the deployed VNF

We should avoid doing the same tests in different projects
We agree last week on categories, and as far as I can see vnf (category
5) was related to Functest. Of course everything can evolve...

Morgan


 Le 07/12/2016 à 21:10, Cooper, Trevor a écrit :
>
> Hi Kubi
>
>  
>
> We have had some good discussions here at Plugfest with Rex and others
> regarding adding VNF test features to Yardstick. Can we add this as an
> agenda topic to next meeting (13/12 (0:03 UTC)(US time slot)? I have
> added this to the agenda as a **proposed** topic.
>
>  
>
> Trevor
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Discussion on UTC vs. Pacific Time

2016-12-05 Thread morgan.richomme

+1 for UTC

/Morgan

Le 05/12/2016 à 10:11, Kunzmann, Gerald a écrit :
>
> Hi everyone,
>
>  
>
> Independent on which timezone we use, this will result in conflicts in
> some regions. I agree with Bob that for US/EU this would mean a shift
> in meeting time for months and might lead to meeting clashes with
> other non-OPNFV meetings. However, at the moment this problem is with
> Asia as they don’t have daylight saving times. So, this will mean pain
> for a large group of people in the one and the other case.
>
>  
>
> The benefit I see for using UTC times is that it would be easier to
> calculate the meeting times for the individual time zones. You don’t
> have to worry about PST/PDT etc… Furthermore, I guess everyone knows
> that his timezone is UTC+X so he can easily figure out the meeting
> time in his zone, whereas I have to be more careful to remember what
> is the delta between PST/PDT and CET/CEST.
>
>  
>
> If we plan to go to UTC times and adapt meeting times to daylight
> saving, then, which daylight saving schedule to take into account?
> Note that US and Europe start/end daylight saving at different weeks,
> which has in the past often caused some confusion for some OPNFV meetings.
>
>  
>
> Best regards,
>
> Gerald
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *Bob
> Monkman
> *Sent:* Sonntag, 4. Dezember 2016 23:44
> *To:* Raymond Paik ;
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Discussion on UTC vs. Pacific Time
>
>  
>
> Ray,
>
> I am flexible if folks in the majority wish to switch to UTC. Like
> others have mentioned, all of my company meetings are pretty much set
> to US time. When my Armband call is set to PST, there is confusion and
> shift 1-3 weeks at DST times- the UTC would shift times for months and
> cause us to request other meetings to shift for the same period. I
> would prefer therefore to _/not/_ change.
>
>  
>
> Bob
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Raymond Paik
> *Sent:* Friday, December 2, 2016 10:33 AM
> *To:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] Discussion on UTC vs. Pacific Time
>
>  
>
> All, 
>
>  
>
> Another follow-up from the TSC...
>
>  
>
> Over the past couple of years, we've had discussions on whether
> meetings like TSC or Release call times should be based on Pacific
> Time (as has been the tradition since OPNFV started) or if the
> community should move to UTC.
>
>  
>
> UTC obviously has the benefit of not changing with Daylight
> Savings/Summer time switches twice a year in North America/Europe. 
> When we last had the discussion, a large number of people preferred
> staying with Pacific Time as most of their work meetings (esp. outside
> of OPNFV) are based on their local timezones and not UTC. 
>
>  
>
> If we're to move to UTC here's how the meeting times will change for
> the TSC call in Pacific and Central European Timezones.
>
>  
>
> Standard Time (now)
>
>   * PT: 07:00
>   * CET: 16:00
>   * UTC: 15:00
>   * China: 23:00
>
> Daylight Savings/Summer Time (March-November in 2017)
>
>   * PT: 08:00
>   * CET: 17:00
>   * UTC: 15:00
>   * China: 23:00
>
> Can you reply to the email with your comments/preference on UTC. vs
> Pacific Time?
>
>  
>
> Thanks, 
>
>  
>
> Ray
>
> IMPORTANT NOTICE: The contents of this email and any attachments are
> confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended
> recipient, please notify the sender immediately and do not disclose
> the contents to any other person, use it for any purpose, or store or
> copy the information in any medium. Thank you.
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

[opnfv-tech-discuss] RE : [Functest] [Yardstick] Test Results API (testresults.opnfv.org/test/api) Documentation

2016-11-22 Thread morgan.richomme

Do not hesitate to use the swagger interface described in 
http://artifacts.opnfv.org/functest/docs/devguide/index.html

There are discussions on the etherpad on the evolution of the data model, feel 
free to contribute

/Morgan

Envoyé de mon Galaxy Note 4 d'Orange

 Message d'origine 
De : Jose Lausuch 
Date : 22/11/2016 23:59 (GMT+01:00)
À : Mark Beierl 
Cc : opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Objet : Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [Functest] [Yardstick] Test Results API 
(testresults.opnfv.org/test/api) Documentation

Hi Mark,

If you want to post results you need:

1) Project declarated in the DB. Done for Storperf: 
http://testresults.opnfv.org:80/test/api/v1/projects/storperf
2) Declare test cases under the project. Currently 1 test for Storperf: 
http://testresults.opnfv.org:80/test/api/v1/projects/storperf/cases

Once that is done, you need to do a call to the test api from your code. This 
is an example using python:
https://git.opnfv.org/functest/tree/functest/utils/functest_utils.py#n185

The api is on http://testresults.opnfv.org/test/api/v1 and this is the model 
schema you need to post a result:

{
  "project_name": "",
  "scenario": "",
  "stop_date": “",
  "case_name": "",
  "build_tag": "",
  "version": "",
  "pod_name": "",
  "criteria": "",
  "installer": "",
  "start_date": "",
  "details": ""
}

Serena can help out since she is in charge of the API/DB.

Regards,
Jose

> On 22 Nov 2016, at 22:36, Beierl, Mark  wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> Sorry for misplacing the email, but I know someone sent out information on 
> the test results API being refactored quite a number of months ago.  Where 
> can I find the latest documentation on how to post results?
>
> Regards,
> Mark
>
> Mark Beierl
> Advisory Solutions Architect
> Dell EMC | Office of the CTO
> mobile +1 613 314 8106
> mark.bei...@dell.com
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] Danube ( and beyond) community priorities

2016-11-18 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

There is a discussion at the TSC on the need to define community
priorities for the next versions.

An etherpad has been created to collect community views:
https://etherpad.opnfv.org/p/CommunityGoals

As mentioned in the pad the goal is not to create artificial competition
between projects but to identify "OPNFV Commons" needed to ensure the
sustainable growth and the success of the community (which usually
requires harmonization/coordination between different projects - not
always easy when you are fully focusing on your own project).

The TSC will initiate a wiki page to try to build a community vision
before mid of January.

Feel free to participate, just keep in mind that we are targeting the
community (not the project) priorities.

Thanks

/Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfvdocs] documentation landing page

2016-11-09 Thread morgan.richomme

+2

short way: redirection docs.opnfv.org to
http://artifacts.opnfv.org/opnfvdocs/colorado/docs/documentation/index.html
to be done, I think we can send a ticket to helpdesk but then only
colorado will be referenced

mid way: we can also reuse the structure done for test reporting
http://testresults.opnfv.org/reporting/ (the code is on releng:
https://git.opnfv.org/cgit/releng/tree/utils/test/reporting, it is based
on a free HTML5 template) and adapt if for docs.opnfv.org (i.e. add
links to the colorado/brahmaputra docs)
it is easy to do

ideally we should have something like OpenStack

it is up to opnfvdocs to decide

/Morgan



Le 10/11/2016 à 02:58, Yujun Zhang a écrit :
> Folks,
>
> @Morgan mentioned a landing page for test results during yesterdays
> weekly meeting. I wonder if there is any similar plan for documentation.
>
> Currently the published documents are available on artifacts site. But
> it seems there is no landing page giving an table of all available
> contents and we lack a friendly navigation page.
>
> I think it would be nice to have one like http://docs.openstack.org/ 
>
> What do you think?
> --
> Yujun
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Kicking off nominations for Q3'2016 OPNFV Quarterly Awards

2016-10-14 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

  * Code development: Serena Feng (ZTE) for her work on the refactoring
ot the test api. She consolidated the code, developped the swagger
documentation part for Tornado (the python web server we are using),
dockerize it, add function for upgrade of the mongo DB, backup, add
unit tests. This API is used to store the results, build reporting.
It was also used for the plugfest and thanks to the dockerization it
is easy to deploy such framework on demand.


  * Collaboration (e.g. across different OPNFV projects or with other
upstream communities): Cedric Ollivier (Orange) for his work on ODL
test refactoring and his effort to upstream as much as possible.
Working upstream is agreed by most of us but it is not always
concretely easy to do. Cedric succeeded in moving code from OPNFV to
ODL using it for the Functest ODL test suite. Moreover he
contributed with josé to the git page in OPNFV to help newcomers and
share best practice. he is an active, relevant and benevolent reviewer.


  * Documentation & User support: Colum Gaynor and Juha Haapavirta
(Nokia), the quality of Functest documentation has been greatly
improved thanks to them. They accepted to initiate documentation
early in time and spent lots of time in order to reach a "Telco
grade" quality


  * Integration: Alexandru Avadanii (ENEA) according to git and gerrit
statistics one of the most active contributors (other ones got
already awards...). ENEA is very active since Colorado on Armband
but also on testing projects. Integration is challenging and they
did a great job.


  * Testing: Valentin Boucher (Orange) - I wanted to nominate him last
time but it was too late. Valentin is still a student but his work
on automating a vIMS solution within Functest had a real influence
on the community. His work was showed in OPNFV summit in Berlin and
a presentation with Cloudify was also selected for openStack Summit
Barcelona. His work was also reused by vendors for some demos during
several summits and/or guidelines for vIMS deployments. According to
the mailing list threads, vIMS test case was a driver for non OPNFV
member to install OPNFV. New projects such as models also reused
what he did. As he is still student, he clearly deserved a recognition.



e 14/10/2016 à 02:52, Raymond Paik a écrit :
> All, 
>
> It's time for the Q3 Awards.  As a reminder, this is to recognize
> contributions from OPNFV community members in the following categories.
>
>   * Code development
>   * Collaboration (e.g. across different OPNFV projects or with other
> upstream communities)
>   * Documentation & User support
>   * Integration
>   * Testing
>
> In order to give new people opportunities for recognition, the award
> winners from the previous quarter will not be eligible to win the same
> category 2 quarters in a row. As a reminder, below are the winners
> from Q2'2016.
>
>   * Code development: Jose Lausuch & Ulas Kozat
>   * Collaboration: Bryan Sullivan
>   * Documentation & User Support: Mark Beierl
>   * Integration: Dan Radez & Hongbo Tian
>   * Testing: Maryam Tahhan
>
> (So for example, Jose will not be eligible to win the Code development
> category again in Q3. However, he can be a winner for other categories)
> If you'd like to nominate someone for any of the 5 areas above, please
> send me the following information by 5pm Pacific Time on October 21st
> (Friday).
>
>   * Name/Company
>   * Award category
>   * Brief description of her/his contribution
>
> Once nomination statements are collected, voting will be done by TSC
> members (e.g. on SurveyMonkey). Thanks and let me know if you have any
> questions.
> Ray
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Interpretation of yardstick test results

2016-10-06 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

I think the question was already asked in Brahmaputra :)

We got an update on grafana last week but it was more on the
capabilities of the tools than on the interpretation of the results.
I think we should clearly have a discussion on this topic.
It is probably complex to define thresholds = f(pod, hardware, network
config,..) but it would be helpful.
Is there any activity on standardization side on this area?

I put several possible future discussions on the Testing community page
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf
Please note that I postponed all the today agenda to next week as the
quoraum was not reached.
I put the catalog mentioned by Myriam last week, but also the question
of test coverage (discussions initiated months ago but could be
interesting to reinitiate for Danube)  and performance/stress tests.
I was recently asked about the stress tests done in OPNFV and as far as
I know we do not really try to stress the system (except vsperf and
storperf).
We have the tools and the framework (Yardstick, Rally,..and some
proprietary loaders)  to do it but not a real strategy on
performance/stress tests
Danube is maybe a good time to try to elaborate something
I think we need also to organize a sync with CVS group to avoid any
misunderstanding

/Morgan
 


Le 06/10/2016 à 09:59, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) a écrit :
>
> Hi folks,
>
>  
>
> is there anyone around who can help with interpreting Yardstick’s test
> results? I.e. what do all the numbers that we see created and
> submitted into the InfluxDB mean – i.e. how do I know whether a number
> is “good”, “good enough”, “not good”? In Grafana you see some nice
> graphs – but how do you interpret them? I scanned the user-guide but
> did not find any guidance – and from talking to other folks, I don’t
> seem to be alone in struggling to understand the results.
>
>  
>
> Would greatly appreciate if someone could either explain the results
> (see e.g. Juraj’s email below) or point us to a document that does so.
>
>  
>
> Many thanks!
>
>
> Frank
>
>  
>
> *From:*Juraj Linkes -X (jlinkes - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES at Cisco)
> *Sent:* Dienstag, 4. Oktober 2016 16:23
> *To:* Gaoliang (kubi) ; limingjiang
> 
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; Frank Brockners (fbrockne)
> ; Andrej Vanko -X (avanko - PANTHEON TECHNOLOGIES
> at Cisco) 
> *Subject:* Interpretation of yardstick test results
>
>  
>
> Hi Kubi,
>
>  
>
> Can you help us with interpreting yardstick results? I've attached
> data from four runs produced by yardstick, but I have no idea what
> they mean – how do I know what is a good result and what is not?
>
>  
>
> Thanks,
>
> Juraj
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OpenStack Summit] [OPNFV] Functest@OpenStack Summit Barcelona

2016-09-28 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

I started looking at Barcelona planning.

I already planned

- 25/10 2-5PM: Functest meetup - draw Danube roadmap  (note: another
meetup is planned in Lannion (France) on the 14th to prepare this one)

- 26/10 3.05PM-3:45: presentation on OPNFV/Functest/vIMS with gigaspace

- 27/10 2-4PM: Bitergia synchro for testing/dashboarding

there is also a TSC/Board meeting on the 28/10 19-12h

@Boris: would it make sense to plan a sync meeting in Barcelona (during
design Summit on the 28th after noon?) to see how we could provide a
better feedback to Rally? @juhak @viktor would you be in Barcelona?

@Kubi: if you are in Barcelona, it would also make sense to have a
dedicated meeting Functest/Yardstick

any additional stuff/comment/remark/concern/

feel free to forward to whom it may concern

/Morgan



_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Notice of intent to participate in OPNFV Danube release

2016-09-27 Thread morgan.richomme

by these presents you are notified that the Functest project intends to
participate in the Danube release.

/Morgan

_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OPNFV] [functest] [D release]

2016-09-23 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

based on the discussion initiated during last Functest weekly meeting, I
created the Danube page for the project.

https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Functest+Danube

as mentioned in the beginning of the page, this page is a draft

The goal is to collect element to prepare the D release.

Functest evolutions are expected in

- the Functest framework (reflexion on the relations between the test
projects (API), dockerization, CI evolution, reporting, dashboard)

- new tools and libs

- the new tests (unit, functional, VNF onboarding,...)

If you want to participate to Functest D release feel free to modify the
page and/or create new pages referenced from this one

You can also obviously use the mailing list or meet us during the weekly
meeting (Every Tuesday 8 AM UTC #opnfv-functest)

/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Labelling your Colorado repo for the release.

2016-09-22 Thread morgan.richomme

Done for Functest

Le 22/09/2016 à 14:11, Gray, Mark D a écrit :
>
> Done for ovsnfv.
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of
> *Christopher Price
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 21, 2016 6:24 PM
> *To:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org;
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* [opnfv-tech-discuss] Labelling your Colorado repo for the
> release.
>
>  
>
> Hi Project leads,
>
>  
>
> If you have not already done it, now is the right time to make sure
> you have the Colorado 1.0 label correctly applied to your repo. 
>
> Please follow the instructions here: 
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/SWREL/Git+Tagging+Instructions+for+Colorado+Release
>
>
>  
>
> / Chris
>
>  
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [Functest] Project organization

2016-09-20 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

as discussed quickly this morning during our weekly meeting, I would
like to plan the next Functest PTL election.

My idea for Functest is to call for PTL election every 2 releases.

The PTL will thus be legitimate by the core developpers, it should help
reflecting the diversity within the project, ease the transition between
PTL generations and bring new energy and creativity.

I think it makes also sense to put a limit in term of relections => 1
possible re-election =  2 mandates = 4 releases = 2 years max per PTL

If no objection from the core developers, I would like to plan the first
election on the 11th of October 2016 correspoding to Colorado release.
The vote will be done by IRC durung the weekly meeting (8 UTC).
All Functest core devs can vote and if they cannot be present they can
delegate their vote.

For this election I will be candidate to my reelection :) but other
candidatures are more than welcome.

/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule

2016-09-14 Thread morgan.richomme

OK but in this case we need to have CI for the release and CI for the
master, which is not the case today for all the installers

As said, the only argument for me to branch is to be able to break
master before going to release gate and then secure the release
but today, in some cases we do not have the choice as there is only 1
gate, so if we want to test we need to cherry pick .. and hope it will
not break the gate

We should in the future clearly distinguish CI integration (master) and
CI production (release) and have both up

Le 13/09/2016 à 21:06, Christopher Price a écrit :
>
> I would suggest a simple rule is that a release candidate can only be
> produced from the release branch.
>
>  
>
> *From: *David McBride 
> *Date: *Tuesday 13 September 2016 at 20:57
> *To: *Christopher Price 
> *Cc: *Dave Neary , "Frank Brockners (fbrockne)"
> , opnfv-project-leads
> , TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
> 
> *Subject: *Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release]
> D-release schedule
>
>  
>
> I think that we've reduced the branch-related overhead in 'Danube' by
> closing the stable branch window just 10 days before the release, as
> opposed to about a month with Colorado.  My concern about individual
> projects deciding whether to branch is that I think that it creates
> some confusion about the location of the candidate release.  I think
> it's simpler and more predictable if we have a common process for all
> projects participating in the release.
>
>  
>
> David
>
>  
>
> On Tue, Sep 13, 2016 at 8:21 AM, Christopher Price
> > wrote:
>
> We are making some progress.
>
> While I do agree with this: “I think projects should have autonomy
> over when branches are created.”.
> I also think it is up to the release project to set the projects
> with the latest date to do it if they want to participate in any
> given release.  I think that’s essentially what we are trying to
> tune and optimize for everyone in this dialog.
>
> / Chris
>
>
> On 13/09/16 16:10, "Dave Neary"
>   on behalf of
> dne...@redhat.com > wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> On 09/13/2016 06:42 AM, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) wrote:
> > one thing that we’ve not closed on in the discussion last
> Tuesday is the
> > stable-branching milestone. Per what Morgan and I elaborated on:
> > Branching occurs a lot of unnecessary overhead for projects
> which have a
> > single development stream only. Hence I’d like to propose that
> >
> > ·   the branching milestones **prior** to the release should
> > **only** be applied to projects which do parallel development.
> >
> > ·   All other projects would branch on the release date
> – so that we
> > have a proper maintenance branch.
> >
> > Thoughts?
>
> I'm in favour of anything that removes process overhead from
> projects -
> I think projects should have autonomy over when branches are
> created.
>
> Thanks,
> Dave.
>
> --
> Dave Neary - NFV/SDN Community Strategy
> Open Source and Standards, Red Hat - http://community.redhat.com
> Ph: +1-978-399-2182  / Cell:
> +1-978-799-3338 
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> 
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>
> -- 
>
> *David McBride*
>
> Release Manager, OPNFV
>
> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 
>
> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
> 
>
> Skype: davidjmcbride1
>
> IRC: dmcbride
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

[opnfv-tech-discuss] Functest meetup poll

2016-09-13 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

I would like to organize a Functest meetup Europe.

For Colorado, the event was kindly hosted by Nokia in Finland, Orange
will be very happy to welcome the participants in Lannion (Brittany) -
1h flight from Paris, 15 minutes from the coast
(https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Tr%C3%A9gastel,_Phare_de_Mean_Ruz_(2).jpg).

The goal of this meetup is to prepare the roadmap For Danube (framework,
new cases, vnf onbaording, reporting/dashboarding).

Please note that another meeting will be organized during the OpenStack
summit with people who will attend this event.

Do not hesitate to complete the poll https://framadate.org/sK56myIDT6KGeRNv

/Morgan


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Does any one have updates for OPNFV VNFs avilable for on-boarding and testing

2016-09-13 Thread morgan.richomme

ok I move to the 29
no problem

Morgan

Le 13/09/2016 à 15:37, Carella, Giuseppe a écrit :
> Hi Morgan,
>
> next week I’ll be at NFV#15, the week after would be better for me.
>
> Cheers,
> Giuseppe
>
> Join us at the IEEE 5G Week in November in
> Berlin (http://www.berlin5gweek.org/)
>
>> On 13 Sep 2016, at 15:19, morgan.richo...@orange.com
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi
>>
>> I put this point to the agenda of the meeting planned on the 22nd of
>> September (2PM UTC) https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf
>> I planned 20 minutes, is it OK?
>>
>>   * *IRC channel:* |#opnfv-testperf| @ Freenode
>> 
>>
>>   * Join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone
>>   o Standard time: Thursday
>> GTM: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/305553637
>>   + Access Code: 305-553-637
>>   + Phone
>> numbers: 
>> https://global.gotomeeting.com/305553637/numbersdisplay.html
>>
>>
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>> Morgan
>>
>> Le 09/09/2016 à 18:19, Carella, Giuseppe a écrit :
>>> Hi Morgan,
>>>
>>> yes, I and/or Christian should have time to make a short
>>> introduction to this activity in one of the next calls..we can also
>>> use that occasion for discussing further about the integration of
>>> Open Baton and Functest. Now that the summer period is over we are
>>> also going to revive the discussions with Bryan about the work
>>> planned in the Models project with similar objectives. Btw we also
>>> plan to start soon the activities in the context of the Orchestra
>>> project which you are also invited to join. 
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Giuseppe
>>>
>>> Join us at the IEEE 5G Week in November in
>>> Berlin (http://www.berlin5gweek.org/)
>>>
 On 09 Sep 2016, at 17:54, morgan.richo...@orange.com
  wrote:

 Hi Guiseppe

 do you know if it would be possible to make a 20 minutes
 presentation of this initiative during a future weekly test meeting?

 The scope of the internship proposal published on OPNFV page is not
 as wide as the IEEE SDN initiative.
 We just want to collect the Open Souce VNF candidates for
 onboarding/testing in Functest as we want to increase the vnf
 category for D release.

 But I am pretty sure it make sense to contribute and cross our
 references to get a view as consistant as possible
 We know that wiki lists are difficult to maintain, I am pretty sure
 there is place for synergies here...

 /Morgan

 NB for D release we still have in mind a possible integration of a
 case with OpenBaton/vWhatever/Test ...


 Le 09/09/2016 à 15:49, Carella, Giuseppe a écrit :
> Hi Morgan, all,
>
> regarding VNF catalogues, I saw that you also placed on the wiki a
> link to the google spreadsheet [1] which was circulated by
> Christian on other lists. On this spreadsheet we are collecting
> all open source toolkits which could be used for SDN/NFV
> experimentation. This content will be soon migrated into a
> dedicated Wiki hosted by the IEEE SDN initiative. This is an
> activity currently led by us (Fraunhofer FOKUS/TU Berlin)
> and University of Campinas and supported by a large number of
> other entities. More info here [2].
>
> Please let us know if you (or anybody else in this list) would
> like to actively contribute. 
>
> [1] 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NHI4MZZWVDpxF_Rs7OOSTUa_aHL2ACUVA_Ov-YQs1DA/edit#gid=0
> [2] http://www.sdn-os-toolkits.org/
>
> Cheers,
> Giuseppe
>
> Join us at the IEEE 5G Week in November in
> Berlin (http://www.berlin5gweek.org/)
>
>> On 09 Sep 2016, at 08:34, morgan.richo...@orange.com
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> it is a task identified in Functest for D
>> I created an internship proposal (see Title: Open Source VNF
>> catalog inhttps://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Functextnexttaks )
>> on this topic
>> Bertand got the green light to be a co-mentor so we will publish
>> it soon (this morning)
>>
>> One of of our goal for D is to have more VNFs following the rules
>> we setup when we integrated cloudify/vIMS clearwater/Signaling
>> test suite as shared during the summit.
>> We will try to learn VNF onboarding and MANO by doing
>> Yesterday during the Test working group meeting there was a
>> presentation of Open Air Interface (see presentation
>> here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf), we hope
>> we could integrate their vEPC in Functest for D (using Juju as
>> VNFM as they already did the integration).
>>
>> /Morgan
>>
>>
>> Le 09/09/2016 à 01:16, Prakash Ramchandran a écrit :
>>> Hi all,
>>>  
>>> We in   OPNFV Dovetail  as well opnfv-mano-wg

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Does any one have updates for OPNFV VNFs avilable for on-boarding and testing

2016-09-13 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

I put this point to the agenda of the meeting planned on the 22nd of
September (2PM UTC) https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf
I planned 20 minutes, is it OK?

  * *IRC channel:* |#opnfv-testperf| @ Freenode


  * Join the meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone
  o Standard time: Thursday
GTM: https://global.gotomeeting.com/join/305553637
  + Access Code: 305-553-637
  + Phone
numbers: 
https://global.gotomeeting.com/305553637/numbersdisplay.html


Cheers

Morgan

Le 09/09/2016 à 18:19, Carella, Giuseppe a écrit :
> Hi Morgan,
>
> yes, I and/or Christian should have time to make a short introduction
> to this activity in one of the next calls..we can also use that
> occasion for discussing further about the integration of Open Baton
> and Functest. Now that the summer period is over we are also going to
> revive the discussions with Bryan about the work planned in the Models
> project with similar objectives. Btw we also plan to start soon the
> activities in the context of the Orchestra project which you are also
> invited to join. 
>
> Cheers,
> Giuseppe
>
> Join us at the IEEE 5G Week in November in
> Berlin (http://www.berlin5gweek.org/)
>
>> On 09 Sep 2016, at 17:54, morgan.richo...@orange.com
>>  wrote:
>>
>> Hi Guiseppe
>>
>> do you know if it would be possible to make a 20 minutes presentation
>> of this initiative during a future weekly test meeting?
>>
>> The scope of the internship proposal published on OPNFV page is not
>> as wide as the IEEE SDN initiative.
>> We just want to collect the Open Souce VNF candidates for
>> onboarding/testing in Functest as we want to increase the vnf
>> category for D release.
>>
>> But I am pretty sure it make sense to contribute and cross our
>> references to get a view as consistant as possible
>> We know that wiki lists are difficult to maintain, I am pretty sure
>> there is place for synergies here...
>>
>> /Morgan
>>
>> NB for D release we still have in mind a possible integration of a
>> case with OpenBaton/vWhatever/Test ...
>>
>>
>> Le 09/09/2016 à 15:49, Carella, Giuseppe a écrit :
>>> Hi Morgan, all,
>>>
>>> regarding VNF catalogues, I saw that you also placed on the wiki a
>>> link to the google spreadsheet [1] which was circulated by Christian
>>> on other lists. On this spreadsheet we are collecting all open
>>> source toolkits which could be used for SDN/NFV experimentation.
>>> This content will be soon migrated into a dedicated Wiki hosted by
>>> the IEEE SDN initiative. This is an activity currently led by us
>>> (Fraunhofer FOKUS/TU Berlin) and University of Campinas and
>>> supported by a large number of other entities. More info here [2].
>>>
>>> Please let us know if you (or anybody else in this list) would like
>>> to actively contribute. 
>>>
>>> [1] 
>>> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1NHI4MZZWVDpxF_Rs7OOSTUa_aHL2ACUVA_Ov-YQs1DA/edit#gid=0
>>> [2] http://www.sdn-os-toolkits.org/
>>>
>>> Cheers,
>>> Giuseppe
>>>
>>> Join us at the IEEE 5G Week in November in
>>> Berlin (http://www.berlin5gweek.org/)
>>>
 On 09 Sep 2016, at 08:34, morgan.richo...@orange.com
  wrote:

 Hi,

 it is a task identified in Functest for D
 I created an internship proposal (see Title: Open Source VNF
 catalog inhttps://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Functextnexttaks )
 on this topic
 Bertand got the green light to be a co-mentor so we will publish it
 soon (this morning)

 One of of our goal for D is to have more VNFs following the rules
 we setup when we integrated cloudify/vIMS clearwater/Signaling test
 suite as shared during the summit.
 We will try to learn VNF onboarding and MANO by doing
 Yesterday during the Test working group meeting there was a
 presentation of Open Air Interface (see presentation
 here: https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf), we hope we
 could integrate their vEPC in Functest for D (using Juju as VNFM as
 they already did the integration).

 /Morgan


 Le 09/09/2016 à 01:16, Prakash Ramchandran a écrit :
> Hi all,
>  
> We in   OPNFV Dovetail  as well opnfv-mano-wg ,would like to
> revisit and see what VNFs are available mainly  through Open
> Source and may be  through Licensing by OPNFV members.
>  
> This will help compliance use case testing and   newer projects
> Opera, Orchestra, Domino as well multi-release Parser, Copper and
> Model to build their use case to test around what is available.
>  
> Please update with what you have or know to enable us helping
> define what descriptors / image formats are available for us to
> help zero on what we can use or leverage in Release D and later.
>  
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/List+Of+VNFs
>  
>

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule

2016-09-13 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi

+1 / Frank
branching make sense for // development and probably for feature development
but for integration/testing, we saw in Brahmaputra and in Colorado that
we systematically cherry pick
the only argument could be that we cherry pick with delay (1-2 days), so
we check first on master then merge on colorado to avoid breaking the
colorado gate
but the effort in term of conflict merging is high and the gating
problematic should be solved  through resources allocation: CI
production POD / CI integration POD/ Community POD, we could manage
production/integration with tags which will be less painful than with
branches

planning completion is also a bit early...I planned to organize a
functest Meetup after the C release to validate Functest D roadmap
3 weeks is very short all the more as I planned a Face to face meeting
during OpenStack Summit (end of October) on this topic
moreover if the planning is complete, i assume the scenarios are
defined..so at least align the 2

did you define success criteria per milestones?

/Morgan

Le 13/09/2016 à 12:42, Frank Brockners (fbrockne) a écrit :
>
> David,
>
>  
>
> one thing that we’ve not closed on in the discussion last Tuesday is
> the stable-branching milestone. Per what Morgan and I elaborated on:
> Branching occurs a lot of unnecessary overhead for projects which have
> a single development stream only. Hence I’d like to propose that
>
> ·   the branching milestones **prior** to the release should
> **only** be applied to projects which do parallel development.
>
> ·   All other projects would branch on the release date – so that
> we have a proper maintenance branch.
>
>  
>
> Thoughts?
>
>  
>
> Thanks, Frank
>
>  
>
> *From:*opnfv-project-leads-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> [mailto:opnfv-project-leads-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of
> *David McBride
> *Sent:* Montag, 12. September 2016 23:52
> *To:* opnfv-project-le...@lists.opnfv.org; TECH-DISCUSS OPNFV
> 
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-project-leads] [release] D-release schedule
>
>  
>
> Reminder... if you haven't yet reviewed the schedule, please do so
> before the TSC and release meetings on Tuesday, where it will likely
> be discussed.
>
>  
>
> David
>
>  
>
> On Thu, Sep 8, 2016 at 3:45 PM, David McBride
> >
> wrote:
>
> Team,
>
>  
>
> I've posted an update to the schedule
> 
> .
>  
> Please review and provide feedback.  
>
>  
>
> Note:  during the release meeting on Tuesday, we discussed
> removing the JIRA milestone, since it was not considered release
> gating.  Since then, I've changed my mind.  For the D-release, I
> expect that we will have implemented our JIRA processes
> sufficiently that we will be able to rely on JIRA to understand
> project status.  Therefore, it is appropriate to believe that if
> we still have unresolved JIRA issues assigned to the release, then
> the release is not complete.  We will be discussing exactly how
> this will be accomplished in the coming weeks.
>
>  
>
> David
>
>
>  
>
> -- 
>
> *David McBride*
>
> Release Manager, OPNFV
>
> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 
>
> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
> 
>
> Skype: davidjmcbride1
>
> IRC: dmcbride
>
>
>
>  
>
> -- 
>
> *David McBride*
>
> Release Manager, OPNFV
>
> Mobile: +1.805.276.8018 
>
> Email/Google Talk: dmcbr...@linuxfoundation.org
> 
>
> Skype: davidjmcbride1
>
> IRC: dmcbride
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Nomations for the 2016 OPNFV Committer Board Election

2016-09-13 Thread morgan.richomme

Uli, Tapio thank you very much for the nomination.
It is with regret I must decline due to new commitments in TSC
I would like to back the nominations for Chris Price even if I would
like to convince him to stay as TSC chair...

/Morgan


Le 13/09/2016 à 10:32, Tallgren, Tapio (Nokia - FI/Espoo) a écrit :
> +1 to Morgan.
>
> -Tapio
>
> 
> From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
>  on behalf of Ulrich Kleber 
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2016 9:49:15 AM
> To: Raymond Paik; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; 
> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
> Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Nomations for the 2016 OPNFV 
> Committer Board Election
>
> Hi,
> I like to nominate Morgan Richomme, Orange for the Committer Board member. He 
> has done good work in the past year in this position and I hope he will 
> continue.
> Cheers,
> Uli
>
> From: opnfv-tsc-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
> [mailto:opnfv-tsc-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Raymond Paik
> Sent: Tuesday, 13 September, 2016 06:21
> To: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org; opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
> Subject: [opnfv-tsc] Nomations for the 2016 OPNFV Committer Board Election
>
> All,
>
> I'd like to start the nomination period for the OPNFV Committer Board 
> election.  OPNFV Committers as listed on 
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/DEV/2016+Committer+Board+Election+-+Committers+List
>  will be eligible to run for and vote in the Committer Board election.
>
> If you'd like to nominate yourself or other committers, please either reply 
> to this email or send an email to opnfv-tech-discuss with "Committer Board 
> Nomination" in the subject like.  In case a committer is nominated by someone 
> else, the nominee must accept the nomination in writing.  I'll skip setting 
> up the "self-nomination" wiki page as that wasn't used for the recent TSC 
> election.
>
> The nomination period will close at 5pm Pacific Time on September 23rd 
> (Friday).
>
> Thanks,
>
> Ray
> ___
> opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
> opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [opnfv-tsc] Does any one have updates for OPNFV VNFs avilable for on-boarding and testing

2016-09-09 Thread morgan.richomme

Hi,

it is a task identified in Functest for D
I created an internship proposal (see Title: Open Source VNF catalog
inhttps://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/Functextnexttaks ) on this topic
Bertand got the green light to be a co-mentor so we will publish it soon
(this morning)

One of of our goal for D is to have more VNFs following the rules we
setup when we integrated cloudify/vIMS clearwater/Signaling test suite
as shared during the summit.
We will try to learn VNF onboarding and MANO by doing
Yesterday during the Test working group meeting there was a presentation
of Open Air Interface (see presentation here:
https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/meetings/TestPerf), we hope we could
integrate their vEPC in Functest for D (using Juju as VNFM as they
already did the integration).

/Morgan


Le 09/09/2016 à 01:16, Prakash Ramchandran a écrit :
>
> Hi all,
>
>  
>
> We in   OPNFV Dovetail  as well opnfv-mano-wg ,would like to revisit
> and see what VNFs are available mainly  through Open Source and may be
>  through Licensing by OPNFV members.
>
>  
>
> This will help compliance use case testing and   newer projects Opera,
> Orchestra, Domino as well multi-release Parser, Copper and Model to
> build their use case to test around what is available.
>
>  
>
> Please update with what you have or know to enable us helping define
> what descriptors / image formats are available for us to help zero on
> what we can use or leverage in Release D and later.
>
>  
>
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/functest/List+Of+VNFs
>
>  
>
>  
>
> Thanks
>
> Prakash
>
>  
>
> * *
>
> * *
>
> *Prakash Ramchandran*
>
> logo_huawei* R USA*
>
> *FutureWei Technologies, Inc*
>
> Email:prakash.ramchand...@huawei.com 
>
> Work:  +1 (408) 330-5489
>
> Mobile:+1 (408) 406-5810
>
> 2330 Central Expy, Santa Clara, CA 95050, USA
>
>
>   
>
> / /
>
> / /
>
>  
>
>  
>
>
>
> ___
> opnfv-tsc mailing list
> opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org
> https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tsc


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] Shout out: Julien Zhang

2016-08-18 Thread morgan.richomme

+1
Le 18/08/2016 à 00:31, Jack Morgan a écrit :
> OPNFV,
>
> I would like to take a moment to recognize Julien Zhang for his hard
> work and dedication during this Colorado release cycle. I really
> appreciate his input even though I as the Pharos PTL didn't provide much
> direction. Julien worked the JIRA issues in his name and created new
> ones when needed. He tirelessly focused on getting things done this
> cycle and even harassed me several times to approve his Gerrit hanges. I
> hope to be more like him moving forward.
>
> Since Julien is currently a contributor to the Pharos project, I'm going
> to recommend he be a committer via Gerrit. Please consider his
> nomination and add your +1 in Gerrit.
>
>
> Thanks,
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [RELENG] Vote to make Trevor a submitter on releng.

2016-08-08 Thread morgan.richomme

+1

Le 27/07/2016 02:58, Meimei a écrit :
> +1
>
>
> 在 2016/7/22 5:42, Jose Lausuch 写道:
>> +1
>>
>> -Original Message-
>> From: Aric Gardner [mailto:agard...@linuxfoundation.org]
>> Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2016 20:05 PM
>> To: OPNFV Tech
>> Cc: Fatih Degirmenci; Jose Lausuch; Meimei; RICHOMME Morgan IMT/OLN;
>> Ryota Mibu; Tim Rozet
>> Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [RELENG] Vote to make Trevor a
>> submitter on releng.
>>
>> Hi Releng committers,
>>
>> Please vote on making Trevor (tbramw...@linuxfoundation.org) a releng
>> committer.
>>
>> Here's my +1
>>
>> -Aric
>
>
>


-- 
Morgan Richomme
Orange/ IMT/ OLN/ CNC/ NCA/ SINA 

Network architect for innovative services
Future of the Network community member
Open source Orange community manager


tel. +33 (0) 296 072 106
mob. +33 (0) 637 753 326
morgan.richo...@orange.com


_

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.

___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

91 matches

Mail list logo