-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 117
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
[TSC] CNTT position about Installers Physical/Installer Descriptor Format (xDF). #965
Comments
@fuqiao123 I would like to hear your feedback as a leader of the Reference Implementation 1 Workstream |
Hi, Rabi. First let me explain why we need a xDF in the whole CNTT scenario. If we want to conduct implementation and verification in Labs, across multi-vendors or open-source communities, and we want to do this automatically, then such xDF is necessary, since currently all the different installer are using different DFs and we have to fill in each and every DF manually. This also answers your question about do we need one? Yes, we need only one. The current fact in the industry is we already have several installers, they each have their own community, all are quite mature, it would be difficult for us to create a "super installer" to cover all the implementation of vendors. Therefore, I think the best we can do is at least we can have a common DF, so that no matter what installer you are using, the end user only need to provide this common DF. This is the single source of truth. |
There are considerable interest of what this description format should be. |
Either is OK for me, and I think currently the center of the discussion is what the DF should be like rather than where it should locate. We now have create DF sample template in chp06 of RI, however that one need further discussion within both community. |
@fuqiao123 makes sense. do you feel we need to approve and merge #944 now? it has been open for very long. |
I think Chen Liang still plan to update the sample when hardware df has been defined. But we can merge #944 now, and create a new PR when the hardware DF requirement is merged. |
There are different views around about if CNTT is going to specify standard installer format or leave it to OPNFV to decide if this is of a value.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: