<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)">
<style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
</head>
<body lang="EN-US" link="blue" vlink="purple">
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoPlainText">Abraham,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Good analysis - see my replies in your email below…<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Bart<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">-----Original Message-----<br>
From: Arce Moreno, Abraham [mailto:abraham.arce.moreno@intel.com] <br>
Sent: December 4, 2018 4:25 PM<br>
To: starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io<br>
Subject: [Starlingx-discuss] API requests: stx-nfv<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">stx-nfv team,<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">As a result of time spent within stx-nfv and with the objective to align our<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">REST API Documentation [0] with our REST APIs, we are kindly requesting your<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">comments for questions "?" under each section [ Section ] [Sub Section]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Please assume:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">- The require X-Auth-Token is in place to authenticate:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> $ curl -i -X POST http://10.10.10.2:5000/v2.0/tokens<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> $ export TOKEN=...<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">- StarlingX is configured as Standard Controller: 2 Controllers, 2 Computes.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ Project Information ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">When we look at the name and description reported out by<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> curl -i http://10.10.10.2:4545/<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">we have the same name and description between documentation [1] and<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">information via API Query:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Name: nfv-vim<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> Description: NFV - Virtual Infrastructure Manager<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Anything to add / change to the name and / or description?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] The current response seems OK to me.</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ /api ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Here we are showing 3 different views of what we are seeing within stx-nfv<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">project:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - Our initial "Migration WADL to RST", see history here [2]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - What we have documented in our "Current Official API Documentation" pages [0]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - What the "API Query Output" is actually showing with<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> curl -i http://10.10.10.2:4545/api/...<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ /api ] [ Migration WADL to RST ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">FYI Only. Migration from WADL to RST format requested us to move "NFV VIM API v1"<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">(NFV VIM Service REST API) into stx-nfv repository, see [2] for the history.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ /api ] [ Current Official API Documentation ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Current Official API documentation [1] includes the following REST API methods<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">under "API Versions" details:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - /<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - /api<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - /api/orchestration<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - /api/orchestration/sw-patch<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - /api/orchestration/sw-upgrade<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">And the only documented API REST methods documented are:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - [3] Patch Strategy<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - [4] Upgrade Strategy<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Is "orchestration" not expected to be documented even if we have the GET<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> method available?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] The orchestration level is just a grouping for sw-patch and sw-upgrade. The GET method just returns the links to those and that is documented in [1] - what else would you want to add?</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ /api ] [ API Query Output ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">API queries output shows these API REST methods:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/orchestration<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/openstack<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/openstack/heat<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/virtualised-resources<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/virtualised-resources/computes<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/virtualised-resources/networks<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/virtualised-resources/images<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - api/virtualised-resources/volumes<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Our "Current Official API Documentation" does not have "openstack"<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> and "virtualised-resources", should they be added?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] Good question. We have never officially supported the openstack or virtualised-resources APIs and we know that some of them don’t work. I would be open to removing these from our API if that would
be less confusing.</span></i></b><span style="color:black"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ Project Repository ] [ Directory nfv-doc ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">We took a look at the project repository and we found the "nfv-doc" directory [5]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">with the following categories:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - Software Image Management<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - Virtualised Network Resource<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - Virtualised Storage Resource<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - Virtualised Compute Resource<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Since we have our "Current Official API Documentation", should we put a patch<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> to remove this directory? Any reason to keep it?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] I think we should remove the directory.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[ Project Repository ] [ Directory nfv-tests ]<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Looking this nfv-tests [6] it includes 3 categories:<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - nfv_api_tests<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - nfv_scenario_tests<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> - nfv_unit_tests<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Is there any restructure required in this nfv-tests directory?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] No</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Is there any need to think about a general test strategy which includes all<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> StarlingX projects moved its execution into another place? e.g. Zuul<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] Once the basic devstack setup is working for stx-nfv, we can look at adding new testcases to be executed in that environment. This won’t replace the existing testcases, but supplement them.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"> ? Is this directory still valid? If not should we put a patch to remove it?<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><b><i><span style="color:black">[Bart] The directory is still valid.</span></i></b><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Thanks for your initial support.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[0] https://docs.starlingx.io/api-ref/stx-nfv<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[1] https://docs.starlingx.io/api-ref/stx-nfv/api-ref-nfv-vim-v1.html?expanded=#api-versions<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[2] https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/StarlingX/Developer_Guide/API_Documentation#Analysis<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[3] https://docs.starlingx.io/api-ref/stx-nfv/api-ref-nfv-vim-v1.html?expanded=#patch-strategy<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[4] https://docs.starlingx.io/api-ref/stx-nfv/api-ref-nfv-vim-v1.html?expanded=#upgrade-strategy<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[5] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/stx-nfv/tree/nfv/nfv-docs<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">[6] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/openstack/stx-nfv/tree/nfv/nfv-tests<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Starlingx-discuss mailing list<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">Starlingx-discuss@lists.starlingx.io<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoPlainText">http://lists.starlingx.io/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/starlingx-discuss<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>