Versions Compared

Old Version 28

changes.mady.by.user Former user

Saved on

compared with

New Version Current

changes.mady.by.user Former user

Saved on

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

This page is intended as a working draft of how we will look to leverage and develop test cases for the dovetail project.

Table of Contents

Brainstorming

This section is intended to help us discuss and collaboratively edit a set of guiding principles for the dovetail program in OPNFV.
  • If you want to edit this page, please make sure that you add items/bullets/sub-bullets with you name identified as e.g. [bryan] so that we can track who has contributed the perspectives. We should work together to tweak the items/descriptions, so perspectives and responses added by others should be addressed asap, so that this becomes an effective tool for driving consensus.
  • This is itself a strawman proposal for how we can discuss this important topic. Alternatives are welcome, although the basic goal is that we can come to collaborative consensus as quickly as possible, with minimal barriers to participation in the discussion.
1) Focus on OPNFV role and unique aspects, e.g.
  • Integrated reference platforms
  • Component diversity
  • OPNFV-driven features 
  • The  basic assumption is that the scope of compliance testing falls within the included features of a given OPNFV release (as its upper bound)
2) Leverage upstream frameworks
  • wherever possible, verify components using upstream frameworks as a complete package (vs curating specific tests)
  • work proactively to further develop those frameworks to meet OPNFV needs.
3) Deliver clear value: release only tests that add clear value to SUT providers, end-users, and the community
4) Agile development with master and stable releases
  • fast rollout with minimum viable baseline, and continuous agile extension for new tests
  • Support SUT assessment against master and stable releases.
5) Establish and maintain a roadmap for the program
  • basic platform verification
  • well-established features, i.e. features that have become broadly supported by current OPNFV distros)
6) Move tests upstream asap
  • as soon as a home community is found, focus on upstreaming all tests  
  • I'm not sure how this will fit with a logo program, because in those programs you want to keep your tests stable and usually under your control, this seems to be more of a principle for the general test projects.
  • Upstream test cases that we use are always version referenced so the stability is tied the speed of development in that community. The issue is less of stability but more of the compatibility of different versions of different components in the reference platform. I think this may be one of the differences between traditional testing scheme and open source.
  • By the way, I think the integrated tests (inter-components) could reside in OPNFV, uniqueu features are another example, we may also be the natural home for nfv use cases etc.
  • one more point: upstream testing is sometimes developer-oriented, not always focused on compliance. in such cases, we need a way of either enhancing the upstream test suite or coming up a methodoly in dovetail.

Further Details

Dovetail Test Suite Purpose and Goals

...

  • Test cases should favour implementation of a published standard interface for validation
    • Where a compliance test suite exists for components of the SUT, this test suite should generally be considered as a baseline for Dovetail testing
    • Where no standard is available provide API support references
    • If a standard exists and is not followed, an exemption is required
  • The following things must be documented for the test case:
    • Use case specification
    • Test preconditions
    • Basic test flow execution descriptor
    • Post conditions and pass fail criteria
  • The following things may be documented for the test case:
    • Parameter border test cases descriptions
    • Fault/Error test case descriptions
  • Test cases must pass on OPNFV reference deployments
    • Tests must not require a specific NFVi platform composition or installation tool
    • Tests must not require unmerged patches to the relevant upstream projects

Additional Requirements / Assumptions (not yet agreed by Dovetail Group)

These are additonal requirements and assumptions that should be consdered by the group.  This agreement / issue is being tracked in JIRA, under DOVETAIL-352.  As these are agreed, they should be moved above into the full list.  Once the story is completed, this section can be deleted.

Assumptions

  1. Tests start from (use) an already installed / deployed OPNFV platform. OPNFV deployment/install testing is not a target of the program (that is for CI).

Requirements

...

    • Tests must not require features or code which are out of scope for the latest release of the OPNFV project

New test case proposals should complete a Dovetail test case worksheet to ensure that all of these considerations are met before the test case is approved for inclusion in the Dovetail test suite.

Considerations for the Test Strategy Document

There is a draft test strategy document for OPNFV in preparation (owner: Chris Price).

 

Dovetail Test Suite Structure

...

hongbo: the same as those defined in the phase 1 and phase 2

Annotated brainstorming/requirements proposals

Additional Requirements / Assumptions (not yet agreed by Dovetail Group)

These are additional requirements and assumptions that should be considered by the group.  This agreement / issue is being tracked in JIRA, under DOVETAIL-352.  As these are agreed, they should be moved above into the full list.  Once the story is completed, this section can be deleted.

Assumptions

  1. Tests start from (use) an already installed / deployed OPNFV platform. OPNFV deployment/install testing is not a target of the program (that is for CI).
    1. DN: Dovetail should be able to test platforms which are not OPNFV scenarios - we have a requirement that OPNFV scenarios should be able to pass the test suite, which ensures that only features in scope for OPNFV can be included

Requirements

  1. All test cases must be fully documented, in a common format, clearly identifying the test procedure and expected results / metrics to determine a “pass” or “fail” result for the test case.
    1. DN: We currently list a set of things which must be documented for test cases - is this insufficient, in combination with the test strategy document?
      1. lylavoie - No, we need to have the actual list of what things are tested in Dovetail, and how those things are tested.  Otherwise, how to can we even begin to know if the tool test the things we think it does (i.e. validate the tool).
      2. DN: I agree, but the scope of the test suite is a topic for the test strategy document, and not part of the decision criteria for a specific, individual test. Test case purpose and pass/fail criteria are part of the documentation requirements.
  2. Tests and tool must support / run on both vanilla OPNFV and commercial OPNFV based solution (i.e. the tests and tool can not use interfaces or hooks that are internal to OPNFV, i.e. something during deployment / install / etc.).
    1. DN: Again, there is already a requirement thsat tests pass on reference OPNFV deployment scenarios
      1. lylavoie: Yes, but it can not do that by requiring access to something "under the hood," this might be obvious, but it's an important requirement for Dovetail developers to know.
      2. DN: Good point. We do have that test cases must use public standard interfaces and APIs.
  3. Tests and tool must run independent of installer (Apex, Joid, Compass) and architecture (Intel / ARM).
    1. DN: This is already in the requirements: "Tests must not require a specific NFVi platform composition or installation tool"
  4. Tests and tool must run independent of specific OPNFV components, allowing different components to “swap in”. An example would be using a different storage than Ceph.
    1. DN: This is also covered by the above test requirement
  5. Tool / Tests must be validated for purpose, beyond running on the platform (this may require each test to be run with both an expected positive and negative outcome, to validate the test/tool for that case).
    1. DN: I do not understand what this proposal refers to
      1. lylavoie - The tool and program need must be validated.  For example, if a test case purpose is to verify a specific API is implemented or functions is a specific way, we need to verify the test tool does actually test that API/function.  Put differently, we need to check the test tool doesn't false pass or false fail devices.  This is far beyond just a normal CI type test (i.e. did it compile and pass some unit tests).
      2. DN: This is part of the test strategy document rather than part of the requirements for a specific test
  6. Tests should focus on functionality and not performance.
    1. Performance test output could be built in as “for information only,” but must not carry pass/fail metrics.
    2. DN: This is covered in the CVP already

Additional brainstorming

This section is intended to help us discuss and collaboratively edit a set of guiding principles for the dovetail program in OPNFV.
  • If you want to edit this page, please make sure that you add items/bullets/sub-bullets with you name identified as e.g. [bryan] so that we can track who has contributed the perspectives. We should work together to tweak the items/descriptions, so perspectives and responses added by others should be addressed asap, so that this becomes an effective tool for driving consensus.
  • This is itself a strawman proposal for how we can discuss this important topic. Alternatives are welcome, although the basic goal is that we can come to collaborative consensus as quickly as possible, with minimal barriers to participation in the discussion.
1) Focus on OPNFV role and unique aspects, e.g.
  • Integrated reference platforms
  • Component diversity
  • OPNFV-driven features 
  • The  basic assumption is that the scope of compliance testing falls within the included features of a given OPNFV release (as its upper bound)
  • DN: Additional clarification added that OPNFV is the upper bound: "Tests must not require features or code which are out of scope for the latest release of the OPNFV project"
2) Leverage upstream frameworks
  • wherever possible, verify components using upstream frameworks as a complete package (vs curating specific tests)
  • work proactively to further develop those frameworks to meet OPNFV needs.
  • DN: Requirements modified to clarify: "Where a compliance test suite exists for components of the SUT, this test suite should generally be considered as a baseline for Dovetail testing" - there was a feeling that we could not wholesale accept upstream frameworks without question, but the goal is to ensure that OPNFV compliant solutions are also compliant to component certification requirements
3) Deliver clear value: release only tests that add clear value to SUT providers, end-users, and the community
  • DN: Not easily actionable for test case requirements

4) Agile development with master and stable releases

  • fast rollout with minimum viable baseline, and continuous agile extension for new tests
  • Support SUT assessment against master and stable releases.
  • DN: This is a process issue, not a test case requirement
5) Establish and maintain a roadmap for the program
  • basic platform verification
  • well-established features, i.e. features that have become broadly supported by current OPNFV distros)
  • DN: This is a process issue, not a requirement for an individual test case
6) Move tests upstream asap
  • as soon as a home community is found, focus on upstreaming all tests  
  • I'm not sure how this will fit with a logo program, because in those programs you want to keep your tests stable and usually under your control, this seems to be more of a principle for the general test projects.
  • Upstream test cases that we use are always version referenced so the stability is tied the speed of development in that community. The issue is less of stability but more of the compatibility of different versions of different components in the reference platform. I think this may be one of the differences between traditional testing scheme and open source.
  • By the way, I think the integrated tests (inter-components) could reside in OPNFV, uniqueu features are another example, we may also be the natural home for nfv use cases etc.
  • one more point: upstream testing is sometimes developer-oriented, not always focused on compliance. in such cases, we need a way of either enhancing the upstream test suite or coming up a methodoly in dovetail.
  • DN: Requirement added to underline that upstream test suites are a baseline, but I do not think that we can specify in test case requirements that the test has been proposed to the relevant upstream