You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

« Previous Version 4 Next »

This is a work in progress to define the minimum viable/valuable product for a program to validate the life-cycle of VNF running "in/with" ONAP.

The MVP definition does not prohibit anyone from contributing to other projects or efforts related to VNF testing, but should help set developer priorities.

Requirements & Deliverables 

  1. The goal of the MVP is to develop validation testing within the time-frame of the E-release of ONAP.
  2. Tests will focus on on-boarding and instantiation of the VNF in/within ONAP.
  3. Tests will focus on HEAT based VNFs.
  4. Test will leverage the SDNC and APPC controllers.
  5. Tests will use the the VIM that is provided with ONAP (a future program update / release may migrate to other VIMs).
  6. VNFs are validated against the specific release of ONAP (i.e. VNF is validated against ONAP E-release or F-release).
  7. VNFs must also past the compliance testing (i.e. testing defined in the initial release of VNF testing).
  8. Testing uses existing interfaces into ONAP for stimulus / response to "drive" the test.

What is needed / Work to do

  1. ONAP release must be readily deploy-able, to allow a test framework to run on the deployment to test a VNF.  
    1. Will ensure VNF tests are conducted in a uniform environment.
  2. Definition of life cycle requirements (i.e. what the test cases validate)
    1. Does instantiation include configuration?
    2. Does instantiation include health check?
  3. Test case description template for VNF validation work
  4. Definition of the set of ONAP components required for the testing (ONAP profile used for testing).
  5. Definition of requirements needed for testing (i.e. hardware / pod requirements to run testing).

Open Questions

  1. Can the test requirements or definitions (procedures) by pulled from, or reuse, the ETSI TST-0007

Definition of Done / Success Measures

  1. Tests can readily be run, with high level of repeatability.
  2. Level of complexity is manageable by end users (i.e. ease of ONAP deployment + test cases).
  • No labels