This table summarizes each project's plan in regard to support of "Platform Maturity" in Dublin Release. The data below are extracted from each project plan.
The Platform Maturity recommendations are documented in Platform Maturity Requirements (and sub-pages) from djhunt
Legend
Color code:
- Red: below maturity level
- Yellow: same maturity.
- Green: improved maturity level.
M1 Actual represents the assessment before M1. M1 Target represents, at M1 date, what the team plans to implement. M4 result represents what has been really implemented at M4 date . All these fields are self-assessed by the team.
| M1 Version: v71 | AREA | |||||||||||||||||||||
| Design / Run-Time | (min: Level 2 for closed-loop project; 0 for others) | (min: level 2 all projects) | (min: level 2 for runtime, level 1 others) | (min: Project Level 2, 70% at silver) | (min: level 1 for runtime projects) | (min: level 2 all projects) | (min: level 2 all projects) | |||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Min TSC Recommendations | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | M1 Actual | M1 Target | M4 result | |
| Project Name | ||||||||||||||||||||||
| A&AI | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 (Stretch goal) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1+ (see note #10) | 1+ (see note #10) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Application Authorization Framework | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1+ (see note #20) | 1+ | 1 | 1+ (see note #21) | 1+ |
| APPC | R | 0 | 1 or 2 (Stretch Target) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 (Stretch goal) | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 (Stretch goal) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| CLAMP | D | 0 | 0 | 0 BM | 1 | 2(Stretch goal) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Common Controller SDK | R | 0 | 0 | 0 | NA | NA | NA | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | NA | NA | NA | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| DCAE | D & R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 (Stretch goal) Note#2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1+ (see Note#14) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 (STRETCH GOAL) | 1+ (see Note#13) |
| DMaaP | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | (see note #15) | 2 | 2 | 2 | WIP Note #9 | 2 (Stretch goal) | 1+ (see note #16) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1+ (see note #17) | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Documentation | NA | |||||||||||||||||||||
| External API Framework | R | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| Holmes | R | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1+ | 1 | 2 | 1+ | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1+ |
| NA | NA | NA | NA | 2 | 2 | (See note 22) | 2 | 2 | (See note 22) | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |
| Logging Enhancements Project | R | 2 | 2 | 2* (unable to test/verify) | 2 | 3 | 2? | 2 | 2 | 2 | 0 | 0 (M4 stretch 1) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 (see note #8) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| POMBA (under but separate pod from Logging) | R | 2 | 2 | 2* (unable to test/verify) | 2 | 3 | 2? | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| Microservices Bus | R | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 |
| Modeling | D/R | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Multi VIM/Cloud | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| MUSIC | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| ONAP CLI (N/C since Casablanca) | D & R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| ONAP Operations Manager | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | |||||||||||||
| ONAP Optimization Framework | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1+ (75% towards silver) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| ONAP Usecase UI Project Proposal | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1+ | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1+ | 1 | 1 | 1+ | 1 |
| Policy Framework Project Proposal | D & R | D: 1 R: 1+ | D: 1 R: 2 | D: 1 R: 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | D: 1 R: 1+ | D: 2 R: 2 | D: 2 R: 2 | 1+ | 2 (CII Silver is stretch goal) | 2 (No silver) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1+ | 1+ | 1 | 2 | 2 |
| Portal Platform Project Proposal | D & R | 1 | 1 See Note #11 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 |
| SDN-C | R | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Service Design & Creation | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1+AAF | 1 (Note #12) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Service Orchestrator | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 2 (Stretch goal) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| VFC | R | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| VID | R | 0 | 0 | 0 | 2 (Note #1) | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 (Note #8) | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| VNF SDK | D | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1+ (Note #18) | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 (Note #19) |
| VNF Requirements | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | ||||||||||||||
| VNF Validation (VVP) | D | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | NA | ||||||||||||||
Note 1: Assumption is that platform 72 hour test is run by Integration team; Component team will run regression (Level 1) on Casablanca release
Note 2: Drop in Stability level due to new requirement for 80% coverage; project team cannot commit due to resource constraint. Level 2 (platform) test will be under Integration team scope. (Updated 1/29/19) - Level 2 is partial committed as S3P requirements were clarified on last TSC call and expectation for Dublin is ~52% coverage.
Note 3: SO for security improvement based on the resource availability
Note 8: logging spec and implementation changes done with AT&T/TechMahindra to sync to Acumos - logging resources are absolute minimal during casablanca - 1.2 spec completion is pushed to Dublin
Note 9: AAF CADI integration is pending
Note 10: logging spec very close to 1.2; completion slated for Dublin
Note 11: As per risk# 3 and 4, all the target maturity levels for Portal will remain same as actuals due to resource constraint.
Note 12: As per risk #25, AAF integration and HTTPS support was postpone to El-Alto due to resources constraint.
Note 13: Level2 - Swagger definition completed; new component API's standardized with ONAP API Common Versioning Strategy and some existing component (VESCollector) updated
Note 14: CII Passing badge level > 70%; all external ONAP communication interfaces support secure interface. RBAC/CADI integration deferred to next release.
Note 15: Assumption is that the platform level 72 hour testing will be executed by the Integration team.
Note 16: CII silver level > 70%. All external ONAP communication over secure interface. Not all internal communication secure and being deferred to El Alto.
Note 17: MDC and markers to be implemented. Project is already using EELF framework for logging.
Note 18: VNFSDK Already support to expose API via Https
Note 19: VNFSDK integrate OPNFV Dovetail and ONAP CLI to run the xNF Test cases and VNFSDK also have a portal to trigger the tests.
Note 20: AAF can connect to ANY logging, and has Transactional logging with high degree of detail. We do not claim ONAP Level 3, because there seems to be a specific Library involved, which we haven't looked into.
Note 21: AAF comes with GUIs, API Documentation, etc. However, it may not be in ONAP format, and all the current documentation has not been transferred either. Thus, only claiming 1+ at this point.
Note 22: Integration doesn't deliver code to ONAP platform. Integration team will run ONAP platform stability and resiliency test after RC2 when release candidate is available.
this row should be removed
This row should also be removed