OVP Phase 2 Project Mapping and Relationships

Status: DRAFT

Overview

This is an attempt to map the ecosystem Open Source projects in the OVP Phase 2 umbrella and their relationships.  The goal is to link the source of “what to validate” (i.e. requirements) to either testing specifications (i.e. Certifications) or testing implementations.  A project being in a box only implies it is potentially aligned to provide the functionality – not that it already has it or we confirmed alignment.

Additionally, we are analyzing areas where there is ambiguity or lack of clarity, and recommending alternative approaches to either eliminate the issue or make the scope clearer. 

Mapping (Current Categories)

General Questions/Comments/Concerns on Current Categorization

• Cloud Platform Performance - Do we envision that there will be specific requirements related to the performance of NFVI expressed as some minimum level of performance? UIf so where do we envision such expectations being documented? Alternatively, do we see this primarily as a benchmarking exercise where reference CNFs and tests will be run to produce results? If so, is this really in the scope of OVP or should benchmarking be a separate activity?

• CNF Onboarding and CNF Conformance don't appear to be separate concerns.  They are still functions of the CNF's compliance with CNTT and general Cloud Native/K8S requirements.  Given the current architecture of RA-2, there is also not a separate onboarding activity that is separate from instantiation - this is a difference from the VNF badge with ONAP.  Recommend collapsing these to a single category.

• Functional vs. Cloud Native - This distinction is not clear, and there are likely to be overlaps between the 2 categories.  Working with the assumption that CNTT will be the source of requirements, if there is going to be a breakdown it must be very clear what the distinction is or align to a breakdown in the source requirements (i.e. RA-2).  Recommend collapsing these categories.

• CNF Performance - This type of testing is often very specific to the function of the CNF.  We're not clear that a general purpose framework could be created nor requirements could be defined.  We recommend at a minimum this is outside the MVP scope, and it may be outside of OVP scope as well.

Other Open Questions/Concerns

• No project in the LFN umbrella is currently defining requirements for what a CNF needs to comply with. The only project identified is the CNF Conformance project which is part of CNCF TUG. Given that a CNF will need to be compatible with a given CNTT RA and RI, it would seem there needs to be a project somewhere in CNTT to manage those requirements and potentially tests.  If there are more general Cloud Native requirements that aren't specific to the CNTT, then we could create a requirement to comply with those external requirements and test suites.

• There was mention of using ONAP as a vehicle to define CNF onboarding requirements, but this presents some challenges:

  • ONAP’s support of CNFs is fledgling and still under development. As such, no requirements currently exist for CNFs in ONAP and they are likely go under significant change as support is built out.

  • Additionally, ONAP is not required for a CNF to utilize an RA-2 based implementation.

  • Suggestion: We need a place within CNTT to define the requirements of a CNF to be compatible with RA-2. ONAP may define additional requirements to onboard a CNF into ONAP for orchestration and management, but that would be a separate and optional set of requirements that would only be applicable when using ONAP.  This may impact how the badges are defined as well.

• RC-2 does not plan to handle certification of the CNFs, but rather the NFVIs.  However, the diagram on the OVP 2.0 Boot Strap page implies that RC-2 does play a role.  We either need to change the scope of RC-2 or correct the diagram.  

  • Answer: Per discussion with RC-2 lead, we agreed that some level of CNF requirements can be included in RC-2 (this would someone align with the approach for RC-1).  However, unlike RC-1 there are no external CNF-specific requirements within LFN to point to.  In RC-1, they were pointed to ONAP testing and requirements specific to the VNF.

Suggested Revised Categorization

• Cloud Platform Compliance

  • Performance/Non-Functional - Does the NFVI meet specific performance benchmarks using reference CNFs , and does it handle specific non-functional requirements

    • Note: This assumes that we envision there will be specific performance requirements.  If this is not true, then this category should be revisited.

  • Functional - Does the NVFI support the required capabilities as defined by RA-2

    • Note: If further sub-categorization is required, then it should be tied to categorization of requirements in CNTT

• CNF Conformance

  • Artifact Compliance (images, descriptors, charts, etc.) - Does the CNFs charts, configurations, descriptors, images, etc. meet CNF requirements as defined in CNTT?

  • Functional - Can the CNF perform specific general purpose LCM activities on a RA-2 compliant NFVI.

    • Note 1: This is not testing the the Network Function behavior itself (i.e. it operates properly as a firewall) which is out of scope of OVP

    • Note 2: If further sub-categorization is required (security, , then it should be tied to categorization of requirements in CNTT

Mapping (Proposed Categories)