Versions Compared

Old Version 32

changes.mady.by.user Takamune Cho

Saved on

compared with

New Version 33

changes.mady.by.user Takamune Cho

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

AreaActual LevelTargeted Level for current ReleaseHow, EvidencesComments
Performance0

1

2 - Stretch goal

Jira Legacy
serverSystem Jira
columnskey,summary,type,created,updated,due,assignee,reporter,priority,status,resolution
serverId4733707d-2057-3a0f-ae5e-4fd8aff50176
keyAPPC-1310


Stability

1 - project team

2 - Integration team


1 - project team but we may not reach 80% code coverage

2 - Integration team

Assume Integration team will address Level 2 -  72 hour test in Dublin

*current (1/13/19) code coverage is 67.9%

  • Level 0: none beyond release requirements
  • Level 1: 72 hour component-level soak test (random test transactions with 80% code coverage; steady load)
Resiliency2

2




Security11, 2 (partial, please the comments)
there is http internal connection between CDT and APPC, we need to find the resource to migrate from http to https.
Scalability11

Manageability1

1, 2(partial, please see the comments, APPC will comply two items on level 2)



  • Level 2:
    • A component can be independently upgraded without impacting operation interacting components
    • Component configuration to be externalized in a common fashion across ONAP projects
    • All application logging to adhere to ONAP Application Logging Specification v1.2
    • Implement guidelines for a minimal container footprint
Usability1

1




Recommendation for Casablanca is Level 2; however, we cannot meeting Level 2

All new API’s must adhere to the ONAP API Common Versioning Strategy and Documentation Guidelines;   - There was an issue with ODL & API version - need to investigate further

TBD - Swagger 2.0 - We dependent on what ODL Fluroine Fluorine for API documentation and they dictate version of Swagger used, currently looked like

...