[opnfv-tech-discuss] Fwd: OPNFV VCO Demo 2.0

[Brandon Wick]

OPNFV Technical Community:

FYI, here's some information on the evolution of the Virtual Central Office
Demo. We'll be discussing it as well on next week's TSC call.

-- Forwarded message --
From: Brandon Wick 
Date: Fri, Aug 11, 2017 at 5:14 PM
Subject: OPNFV VCO Demo 2.0
To: opnfv-...@lists.opnfv.org


OPNFV TSC:

The process has now begun to start planning out the next version of the
OPNFV Virtual Central Office Demo (VCO Demo 2.0). A VCO Demo 2.0 wiki page
 has been created
where the community can begin collaboration and volunteer HW, SW, VNFs, lab
space, and overall participation.

This conversation is happening on the OPNFV Marketing Committee but input
and participation from the TSC is welcome in order to help ensure alignment
with the OPNFV projects and overall technical direction for OPNFV. Community
members are asked to indicate their (and their company's) interest in
participation no later than *September 29, 2017*.

This topic will be presented on an upcoming TSC call. In the meantime,
please send any questions to bw...@linuxfoundation.org.

Best,

Brandon Wick
OPNFV Head of Marketing, The Linux Foundation
Mobile: +1.917.282.0960 <(917)%20282-0960>  Skype: wick.brandon
Email / Google Talk: bw...@linuxfoundation.org
___
opnfv-tech-discuss mailing list
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
https://lists.opnfv.org/mailman/listinfo/opnfv-tech-discuss

[opnfv-tech-discuss] [OVN4NFV] Weekly Meeting - 6

[Vikram Dham]

Hi OVN4NFV folks,

We will meet on IRC channel #ovn4nfv-meeting today @ 1600 HRS UTC to discuss 
about MS5 & MS6.

Meeting IRC: #ovn4nfv-meeting
Time: 1600 HRS UTC

Thanks,

Vikram___
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] [Bottlenecks] VSPERF and StorPerf

[Klozik, MartinX]

Hi Mark,

just to be sure I got correctly your network setup - you want to stress test 
full OpenStack installation by simulation of NIC and storage utilization, am I 
right?

In that case vsperf can be used in "trafficgen mode", where it only controls 
selected traffic generator and collects final results. As of now, vsperf 
doesn't collect any periodic metrics from the traffic generator. It runs 
selected traffic pattern (e.g. RFC2544 Throughput) and records measured values.

However I think that both scenarios would be possible, but first scenario would 
have to be slightly changed:


1)  I start up VSPERF on the NICs that represent the tenant network in an 
OpenStack installation.

MK=> and measure e.g. throughput of setup without the storage network stressing
2)After 10 minutes, start up StorPerf read/write test that should stress 
the OpenStack storage network
3)See if there is a change to the VSPERF throughput.
MK=> i.e. execute vsperf again with the same settings as before and 
compare measured values

 Second scenario can be executed as proposed by you, without any changes.

Best Regards,
Martin


From: opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org 
[mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Beierl, Mark
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 4:39 PM
To: Yuyang (Gabriel) 
Cc: opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [VSPERF] [Bottlenecks] VSPERF and StorPerf

Hello, Gabriel.

The idea behind starting one first is so we can see the delta at the point 
where it started.  We certainly can run both independently as a baseline, and 
then run them together can measure the delta that way...

Regards,
Mark

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

On Aug 17, 2017, at 04:20, Yuyang (Gabriel) 
> wrote:

Hi Mark,

I fully support the idea here. I think it is time testing projects together 
develop some sophisticated stress test cases across components of the system.
Just 1 question, why start VSPERF and STORPERF separately. Why not start both 
tests simultaneously and monitoring/reporting the throughput variation along 
time.

Thanks,
Gabriel


From: 
opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
 [mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] On Behalf Of Beierl, Mark
Sent: Thursday, August 17, 2017 12:17 AM
To: 
opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
Subject: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [VSPERF] [Bottlenecks] VSPERF and StorPerf

Hello, Trevor and VSPERF team.

I'd like to get a quick overview of VSPERF and how the metrics are captured.  
Sorry if these are dumb questions :)

First, is there a test that simply pushes packets over the network to see what 
the maximum throughput is, like a saturation test?

Does VSPERF capture periodic metrics, or just a summary report at the end?  If 
I change something in the network while the test is running (such as adding 
more traffic outside of VSPERF), is there a way to see the impact of that while 
the test is running?

The reason behind the questions are for the following scenario:

1) I start up VSPERF on the NICs that represent the tenant network in an 
OpenStack installation.
2) After 10 minutes, start up StorPerf read/write test that should stress the 
OpenStack storage network
3) See if there is a change to the VSPERF throughput.

Alternatively, as StorPerf does have minute by minute metrics, we can do this:

1) Start StorPerf read/write
2) After 10 minutes, start VSPERF to stress the tenant network NICs
3) Look at the change in StorPerf throughput at the time that VSPERF starts.

Thoughts?

Regards,
Mark

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

--
Intel Research and Development Ireland Limited
Registered in Ireland
Registered Office: Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, County Kildare
Registered Number: 308263


This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole
use of the intended recipient(s). Any review or distribution by others is
strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the
sender and delete all copies.
___
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] weekly call agenda 8/11

[SerenaFeng(zte)]

Hi,

FYI, I added ZTE to the table as offering an OPNFV distro POD for the beta
trial.

BR
Serena

On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 8:42 AM Tianhongbo 
wrote:

> Thanks
>
>
>
> Hongbo
>
>
>
> *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [mailto:
> opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org] *On Behalf Of *Cooper, Trevor
> *Sent:* 2017年8月18日 7:29
> *To:* Wenjing Chu ; Lincoln Lavoie <
> lylav...@iol.unh.edu>
>
>
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11
>
>
>
> Done https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/dovetail/Dovetail+Beta
>
>
>
> Trevor
>
>
>
> *From:* Wenjing Chu [mailto:wenjing@huawei.com
> ]
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 17, 2017 9:53 AM
> *To:* Lincoln Lavoie 
> *Cc:* Cooper, Trevor ; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN
> L) ; Dave Urschatz <
> dave.ursch...@cengn.ca>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11
>
>
>
> Very well said. Let me amend it. Thanks.
>
>
>
> Wenjing
>
>
>
> *From:* Lincoln Lavoie [mailto:lylav...@iol.unh.edu ]
>
> *Sent:* Thursday, August 17, 2017 5:31 AM
> *To:* Wenjing Chu 
> *Cc:* Cooper, Trevor ; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN
> L) ; Dave Urschatz <
> dave.ursch...@cengn.ca>; opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11
>
>
>
> It's not suppose to be "only bugs from beta testers," but beta testers are
> expected to be the primary source of bug reports.  During the beta period,
> no new tests or features would be added, only bug fixes.
>
>
>
> Cheers,
> Lincoln
>
>
>
> On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 2:25 AM, Wenjing Chu 
> wrote:
>
> Trevor & Bryan,
>
>
>
> Thanks for the interest in participating in Beta. It’s great to see the
> leaders stepping up.
>
>
>
> I think the quoted line meant to say that bugs encountered in beta have
> priority and the immediate attention, esp. if/when we have to choose.
> Another point is that during beta we have interests in stability as well,
> fixing non-critical bugs already known before the beta may cause more harm
> than good. That’s how I understood it as a developer.
>
>
>
> Lincoln, do you like to add comment as it’s from one of your suggestions?
>
>
>
> We can discuss & rephrase it as appropriate.
>
>
>
> Wenjing
>
>
>
> *From:* Cooper, Trevor [mailto:trevor.coo...@intel.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 16, 2017 7:01 PM
> *To:* SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) ;
> Wenjing Chu ; Dave Urschatz <
> dave.ursch...@cengn.ca>; Lincoln Lavoie 
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
>
>
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11
>
>
>
> I added Intel to the table as offering a Pharos POD for the beta trial.
>
>
>
> “Only bugs submitted by the beta testers will be reviewed and accepted
> during Beta” … why would we only fix bugs reported by beta testers? ALL
> reported bugs should be investigated and prioritized.
>
>
>
> /Trevor
>
>
>
> *From:* opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org [
> mailto:opnfv-tech-discuss-boun...@lists.opnfv.org
> ] *On Behalf Of *SULLIVAN,
> BRYAN L (BRYAN L)
> *Sent:* Wednesday, August 16, 2017 10:14 AM
> *To:* Wenjing Chu ; Dave Urschatz <
> dave.ursch...@cengn.ca>; Lincoln Lavoie 
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* Re: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11
>
>
>
> I added the table for beta participants.
>
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Bryan Sullivan | AT
>
>
>
> *From:* Wenjing Chu [mailto:wenjing@huawei.com
> ]
> *Sent:* Monday, August 14, 2017 10:44 PM
> *To:* Dave Urschatz ; Lincoln Lavoie <
> lylav...@iol.unh.edu>; SULLIVAN, BRYAN L (BRYAN L) <
> bryan.sulli...@research.att.com>
> *Cc:* opnfv-tech-discuss@lists.opnfv.org
> *Subject:* RE: [opnfv-tech-discuss] [dovetail] weekly call agenda 8/11
>
>
>
> Here is the Beta test page:
> https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/dovetail/Dovetail+Beta
> 
>
> I think I summarized most of the comments I received so far. Please let me
> know if I missed anything. Additional comments welcome and we’ll discuss in
> this week’s call.
>
> Again, thanks Bryan and Lincoln for your suggestions.
>
>
>
> Dave,
>
> On your first two points, please refer to the above wiki page.
>
> For the third point, yes,