...
- Need for simplifying ONAP Micro-Service architecture by leveraging best practices from Industry :
- Certificate enrollment (for Mutual TLS communication among services) in Beijing was manual, time consuming and error prone. Need automation of certificate enrollment is needed.
- Scale-out of ONAP is removed from the scope in Beijing release. Services that attempt do it has some learnings. Scale-Out/Load balancing/Circuit-breaking/DB-sync related functionality should be removed from actual micro services to sidecars/side-kicks to avoid each developer spending time and getting it right.
- Need share as much as possible the building blocks for ONAP Micro-services
- While the community focus on more about the micro-service arch. the diversity of building blocks for each micro-services complicates the debug/maintain effort for everyone willing to exercise/develop existing/new use cases. e.g. While java and python language are prevalent used for each most of micro-services, some other language binding(e.g. golang) was introduced as well. so whoever want to debug those microservices will have to either seek the help from community (with no promise to get timely support) or have to learn those language/framework,etc. This apparently hinder the adoption of some ONAP components, even they complies to micro-services architecture. I suggest each team should evaluate/review carefully what kind of building blocks are utilized instead of the choice to the contributors only. The principle is : whenever it is possible, the existing building blocks should be considered as preferred choices.
• Use cases:
- Increase the scope of vCPE use case in deploying multiple virtual Gateways (Multi-Customer support)
...