Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.
Comment: test plan updates


Table of Contents

...

Project NameEnter the name of the project
Target Release NameHonolulu 
Project Lifecycle StateMature. Refer to ONAP Charter, section 3.3 Project Lifecycle for further information
Participating Company AT&T, Nokia, Ericsson, Wipro,  ChinaMobile,  T-Mobile

Scope

What is this release trying to address?

...

REQ#DCAE Commit StatusDCAE Impact AssesmentDCAE JIRA #
REQ-438 - COMPLETION OF JAVA LANGUAGE UPDATE (v8 → v11)YES

Require exception for MOD/genprocessor/designtool/nifi-registry

Risk #6 (Honolulu Risks)

DCAEGEN2-2381

DCAEGEN2-2428

REQ-437 - COMPLETION OF PYTHON LANGUAGE UPDATE (v2.7 → v3.8YES


  • Cloudify upgrade to 5.1 community version 


Commitment from T-mobile, Independent contributon 


Risk #7 (Honolulu Risks)

DCAEGEN2-2494

DCAEGEN2-2427


DCAEGEN2-1546

...

 Platform Maturity (i.e., S3P items)  Honolulu Release Platform Maturity


 Green color → Target level ( details see Platform Maturity below)

      • Performance:  Level 1
      • Stability: Level 2
      • Resiliency: Level 2
      • Security: Level 1+
      • Scalability: Level 1
      • Manageability: Level 1+
      • Usability: Level 1+             

...

AreaActual LevelTargeted Level for current ReleaseHow, EvidencesComments
Performance11
    • Level 0: no performance testing done
    • Level 1: baseline performance criteria identified and measured  (such as response time, transaction/message rate, latency, footprint, etc. to be defined on per component)
    • Level 2: performance improvement plan created 
    • Level 3: performance improvement plan implemented for 1 release (improvement measured for equivalent functionality & equivalent hardware)
Stability2

2




    • Level 0: none beyond release requirements
    • Level 1: 72 hour component-level soak test (random test transactions with 80% code coverage; steady load)
    • Level 2: 72 hour platform-level soak test (random test transactions with 80% code coverage; steady load)
    • Level 3: track record over 6 months of reduced defect rate
Resiliency22
    • 0 – none
    • 1 – manual failure and recovery (< 30 minutes)
    • 2 – automated detection and recovery (single site)
    • 3 – automated detection and recovery (geo redundancy)
Security1

1+  (Most DCAE components are complaint; will address remaining in Honolulu based on resource availability)



    • Level 0: None
    • Level 1: CII Passing badge
      • Including no critical and high known vulnerabilities > 60 days old
    • Level 2: CII Silver badge, plus:
      • All internal/external system communications shall be able to be encrypted.
      • All internal/external service calls shall have common role-based access control and authorization using CADI framework.
    • Level 3: CII Gold badge 
Scalability1

1



    • Level 0: no ability to scale
    • Level 1: supports single site horizontal scale out and scale in, independent of other components
    • Level 2: supports geographic scaling, independent of other components
    • Level 3: support scaling (interoperability) across multiple ONAP instances
Manageability1

1+  (Except logging, all other requirements are met)



    • Level 1:
    • All ONAP components will use a single logging system.
    • Instantiation of a simple ONAP system should be accomplished in <1 hour with a minimal footprint
    • 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
    • Level 3
      • Transaction tracing across components
Usability1

1+



    • Level 1:
      • User guide created
      • Deployment documentation
      • API documentation
      • Adherence to coding guidelines
    • Level 2:
    • Level 3
      • Consistent UI across ONAP projects
      • Usability testing conducted
      • API Documentation
    • Level 4

...

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.

...

  • 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.

...

Risk identifiedMitigation PlanContingency Plan

With Cloudify 3.x support releated by Cloudify under 5.1.1, DCAE CM pod upgrade is targetted for H release. This will be major upgrade requiring extensive regression. For any issues identified - may need to coordinate with Cloudify which could span beyond H release timeframe

Based on severity of issue - we'll assess if new continairs can be released for H release or if need to be withheld.None
Due to upstream dependency on NIFI project, some of MOD (NiFI) components (designtool/gen-processor/nifi-registry) will remain in java 8Continue Guilin version

DCAEGEN2-2428

  • Resources

Please see the INFO.yaml files associated with each repo as the authoritative sources of information. https://gerrit.onap.org/r/admin/repos/q/filter:dcae

...

The milestones are defined at the Release Planning: Honolulu and all the supporting project agreed to comply with these dates.

...