...
| Deliverable Name | Deliverable Description |
|---|---|
| Components | Java Stand-Alone services suitable for running in any Java Environment |
| Docker Images | Individual Components (see below) Init Docker Helm Chart examples for Clients for Auto Cert Gen |
| Tools |
|
| Source Code | Java |
| Libraries | Jars |
| API | Currently Accessible in GUI. Desire Swagger for Frankfurt. |
| Documentation | Read-the-Docs |
Sub-Components
Resources and Repositories for Application Authorization Framework
Architecture
High level architecture diagram
...
List the API this project is expecting from other projects.
Prior to Release Planning review, Team Leads must agreed on the date by which the API will be fully defined. The API Delivery date must not be later than the release API Freeze date.
Prior to the delivery date, it is a good practice to organize an API review with the API consumers.
...
Testing and Integration Plans
Provide a description of the testing activities (unit test, functional test, automation,...) that will be performed by the team within the scope of this release.
Describe the plan to integrate and test the release deliverables within the overall ONAP system.
Confirm that resources have been allocated to perform such activitiesExisting CSIT and JUnit plans are paramount.
If possible, we want to increase CSIT testing, depending on resource, per requests to PTLs.
Testing of CMPv2 Interfaces are not fleshed out as yet, because of outstanding questions:
1) Exactly how to deploy an CMPv2 Service (per ONAP?, per Lab? , per Deployment?)
2) Do we SHARE the core AAF CA Cert currently used in "Local", or create new?
3) How to describe testing for a non-essential component for Integration, assuming we continue to use "Local" CA for Frankfurt, or how to work out 2 CAs in future.
CMPv2 Developers have been informed, and agreed, that their new code must have both JUnit Testing, and some sort of testing against a REAL CMPv2 Server.
Gaps
This section is used to document a limitation on a functionality or platform support. We are currently aware of this limitation and it will be delivered in a future Release.
List identified release gaps (if any), and its impact.
| Gaps identified | Impact | |
|---|---|---|
| To fill out | To fill out Goals for Certificates is to deal with Multiple CAs. The PTL (Jonathan) believes that this can be planned for, but is too aggressiveto promise, given TEST Plans must be worked out for all setups. | Workable "single CA" structure for initial rollout will not affect ONAP. |
Known Defects and Issues
Please refer to Frankfurt Defect Status
Risks
List the risks identified for this release along with the plan to prevent the risk to occur (mitigation) and the plan of action in the case the risk would materialized (contingency).
Please update any risk on the centralized wiki page - Frankfurt Risks
Resources
Fill out the Resources Committed to the Release centralized page.AAF for Frankfurt
Release Milestone
The milestones are defined at the Release Level and all the supporting project agreed to comply with these dates.
...