TOSCA Monitoring Working Group Status Roger Dev June 17, 2015.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
SDMX in the Vietnam Ministry of Planning and Investment - A Data Model to Manage Metadata and Data ETV2 Component 5 – Facilitating better decision-making.
Advertisements

Proposal by CA Technologies, IBM, SAP, Vnomic
Programming Paradigms and languages
Walter Binder University of Lugano, Switzerland Niranjan Suri IHMC, Florida, USA Green Computing: Energy Consumption Optimized Service Hosting.
Chapter 3 Data Modeling Copyright © 2014 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent.
TOSCA Monitoring Straw-man for Initial Minimal Monitoring Use Case Roger Dev CA Technologies April 24, 2015.
® IBM Software Group © 2006 IBM Corporation Rational Software France Object-Oriented Analysis and Design with UML2 and Rational Software Modeler 04. Other.
DataGrid is a project funded by the European Union 22 September 2003 – n° 1 EDG WP4 Fabric Management: Fabric Monitoring and Fault Tolerance
OASIS Reference Model for Service Oriented Architecture 1.0
DESIGNING A PUBLIC KEY INFRASTRUCTURE
An Application-led Approach for Security-related Research in Ubicomp Philip Robinson TecO, Karlsruhe University 11 May 2005.
1 Real-time requirements  Intro to Software Engineering  Software Development Process Models  Formal methods in software specification  Structured.
ICS (072)Database Systems Background Review 1 Database Systems Background Review Dr. Muhammad Shafique.
Lesson 9: Creating and Configuring Virtual Networks
Chapter 6 Overview Simple Network Management Protocol
DESIGN OF A PLATFORM OF VIRTUAL SERVICE CONTAINERS FOR SERVICE ORIENTED CLOUD COMPUTING Carlos de Alfonso Andrés García Vicente Hernández.
TOSCA Monitoring Working Group Status Roger Dev August 10, 2015.
An Introduction to Software Architecture
Replication Mechanisms for a Distributed Time Series Storage and Retrieval Service Mugurel Ionut Andreica Politehnica University of Bucharest Iosif Charles.
London April 2005 London April 2005 Creating Eyeblaster Ads The Rich Media Platform The Rich Media Platform Eyeblaster.
Database System Concepts and Architecture
Indo-US Workshop, June23-25, 2003 Building Digital Libraries for Communities using Kepler Framework M. Zubair Old Dominion University.
Network Connectivity Use Case Modeling and YAML Syntax
Testing Workflow In the Unified Process and Agile/Scrum processes.
Lecture Set 11 Creating and Using Classes Part B – Class Features – Constructors, Methods, Fields, Properties, Shared Data.
Notes of Rational Related cyt. 2 Outline 3 Capturing business requirements using use cases Practical principles  Find the right boundaries for your.
Improved Access to RDA from the MSS OSD Executive Meeting April 28, 2009.
TOSCA Monitoring Reference Architecture Straw-man Roger Dev CA Technologies March 18, 2015 PRELIMINARY.
Search Engine Optimization © HiTech Institute. All rights reserved. Slide 1 What is Solution Assessment & Validation?
Example: object diagram for Scheduler, v What is wrong with this diagram? Seems like a lot of similarity between Task and UnplannedTask Can use.
Service Service metadata what Service is who responsible for service constraints service creation service maintenance service deployment rules rules processing.
TOSCA Monitoring Straw-man for Initial Minimal Monitoring Use Case Roger Dev CA Technologies Revision 3 May 21, 2015.
Architectural Principles for Services Group Name: WG2- ARC Source: Tim Carey, ALU, Meeting Date: Agenda Item:
Unified Modeling Language User Guide Section 4 - Basic Behavioral Modeling Chapter 16 - Use Cases Chapter 17 - Use Case Diagrams.
Legion - A Grid OS. Object Model Everything is object Core objects - processing resource– host object - stable storage - vault object - definition of.
THIS PRESENTATION: WINDOWS UPDATES VIA AUTOMATIC DEPLOYMENT RULES BEST PRACTICES SYSTEM CENTER CONFIGURATION MANAGER 2012 R2 Jodie Gaver Jodie Gaver Working.
16/11/ Semantic Web Services Language Requirements Presenter: Emilia Cimpian
Media Control Policy Chris Boulton, Umesh Chandra, Roni Even, Cullen Jennings, Alan Johnston, Brian Rosen, Mark Trayer.
May 26-28ICNEE 2003 ARCHON: BUILDING LEARNING ENVIRONMENTS THROUGH EXTENDED DIGITAL LIBRARY SERVICES Hesham Anan, Kurt Maly, Mohammad Zubair,et al. Digital.
Software Engineering1  Verification: The software should conform to its specification  Validation: The software should do what the user really requires.
RBSP Radiation Belt Storm Probes RBSP Radiation Belt Storm Probes 12/25/20151 Flight Software Template for Instrument Critical Design Review Gary M. Heiligman.
Module: Software Engineering of Web Applications Chapter 2: Technologies 1.
Cisco Confidential 1 © 2010 Cisco and/or its affiliates. All rights reserved. Cisco Prime Service Catalog 10.0 Demos Mehernosh Vadiwala.
Copyright © 2009 Pearson Education, Inc. Publishing as Prentice Hall Chapter 9 Designing Databases 9.1.
1. 2 Purpose of This Presentation ◆ To explain how spacecraft can be virtualized by using a standard modeling method; ◆ To introduce the basic concept.
SNOMED Core Structures NAHLN January 2005 Las Vegas, NV.
COPYRIGHT © 2012 ALCATEL-LUCENT. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. Monitoring in TOSCA – Future Use Cases Presenter: Ifat Afek, Alcatel-Lucent September 2015.
Slide 1 2/22/2016 Policy-Based Management With SNMP SNMPCONF Working Group - Interim Meeting May 2000 Jon Saperia.
© Copyright 2014 TONE SOFTWARE CORPORATION. Confidential and Proprietary. All rights reserved. ® Administrator Training – Release Alarms Administration.
TOSCA Monitoring Straw-man for Initial Minimal Monitoring Use Case Roger Dev CA Technologies Revision 2 May 1, 2015.
SwCDR (Peer) Review 1 UCB MAVEN Particles and Fields Flight Software Critical Design Review Peter R. Harvey.
MPUG Global December 2 nd 2004 Portland, Oregon Brian Smith, Microsoft Corporation.
Information Technology Project Management, Seventh Edition.
Project CS 116 Section 4 Deadline 04/28 11:59PM Points: 12.
PART1 Data collection methodology and NM paradigms 1.
SDN-O LCM for Mercury Release Key Points and Overview
ONAP and MEF LSO External API Framework Functional Reference Architecture 12 July 2017 Andy Mayer, Ph.D. © 2016 AT&T Intellectual Property. All rights.
Chapter 6 The Traditional Approach to Requirements.
Global Science and Technology, Inc., Greenbelt, MD, USA
LOCO Extract – Transform - Load
Les Ginsberg Stefano Previdi Peter Psenak Martin Pilka
Deploying and Configuring SSIS Packages
DF design as a node type.
TOSCA Matching Or how the orchestrator provides implementation for abstract nodes or dangling requirements.
Instance Model Structure
Patterns.
TOSCA v1.3 Enhancements February 21, 2019.
NFV adhoc Shitao li.
Task 55 Scope – TOSCA Profile
Creating and Using Classes
Presentation transcript:

TOSCA Monitoring Working Group Status Roger Dev June 17, 2015

Working Group Status Determined that providing an interoperable generalized monitoring capability is beyond the reach of the working group – Too complex for the target users of TOSCA to specify – Requires definition of new protocols outside the TOSCA charter Refocused on minimal useful scenario – Monitor Scenario 1 – Service Template defines only service monitoring needs – not methods or mechanisms – Basic monitoring functionality – Limited set of Core Metrics allowing private extensions – No interoperability mechanisms defined Ready to request YAML definition by YAML WG

Monitoring Activation Flow Service Template Virtual Machine (new) Software Component (new) Monitoring Sub-System (MSS) Notify Component State Change: -Create -Modify -Destroy Deliver Metrics (any existing push or pull protocol) Orchestrator Components Created TOSCA specified Outside current charter KEY ? Monitoring Exception

Monitoring Scenario 1 Features FeatureProvided In MS1? Define Key Metrics and GroupsYes Allow for Extended Metric TypesYes Service Template Requests MonitoringYes Service Template Requires MonitoringYes Specify Metric Types to be monitoredYes Limit the Components (sub-node) to be monitored Yes Specify Minimum Sample FrequencyYes Actions on thresholds / state changesNo Derived Metrics (Formulas, Aggregations)No

Not to be defined under MS1 Interfaces between Orchestrator and MSS Metrics publishing interface Access to stored Metrics or Events Monitoring of Orchestrator Explicit support for Services with embedded MSS

Next Steps Define needed extensions to YAML definitions (under review) YAML WG produces YAML definitions Review and approve YAML definitions Define Core Metric Types and Groups Work toward new features: – Thresholds, Events, and Actions – Derived Metrics Should we be working toward interoperability agreement of some sort?

Questions? Suggestions?

BACKUP SLIDES

TOSCA Monitoring Reference Diagram Monitoring Automation Point (MAP) MAD (Monitoring Act / De-act) MIA (Monitorning Info Access) MEA (Monitoring Extension Advert) OM (Orchestrator Monitoring) Service TemplateExternal ProcessInternal Process External Monitoring System - Monitoring Template / Policy -Management Communication Info - Metric Availability - Metric Time Series - Events? -Metric Values -Events? -Metric Time Series -Events Focus on Subset of MAD

YAML Development Request (1 of 2) The Monitoring Ad Hoc Working Group requests that the following YAML definitions be developed and reviewed with this group in preparation for inclusion in the TOSCA specification: – Monitoring Policy – Define a new type of Policy object – Monitoring Policy -- which can specify the following fields. Monitoring will only be enabled for Nodes to which a Monitoring Policy is applied. Monitoring Disposition: – Required – Don’t deploy if you can’t monitor – Best Effort – Deploy in any case, but enable monitoring if available Minimum Sample Frequency (Optional) – Defines the minimum sample frequency in minutes for Metrics collection. If specified, and Monitoring Disposition (above) is set to “Required”, then the deployment will fail if this frequency cannot be met. If omitted, then the default frequency for the installation will be used. Specified in minutes. Metric Filter (Optional) – If not specified, then all of the standard metrics will be collected for all components – Metric Type filter (Optional) – Allows Metric Types to be included or excluded by name or hierarchical grouping. If not specified, then all of the standard metrics will be collected. » Metrics to Include – List of Metric Type Names to explicitly include. This allows core metrics to be named (or included as a group). It also allows non-standard metrics to be specified. A special value should be provided (e.g. “Maximum”) which instructs the Monitoring Subsystem to collect all available Metric Types. » Metrics to Exclude – List of Metric Type Names to exclude. If Metrics to include was specified, then this exclude list will only apply to the included metrics. Otherwise, it will apply to the standard metrics for each node type. – Component Filter (Optional) – Determines which components (below the level of Node) should be included or excluded for List type Metrics. Examples are CPUs, Interfaces, Ports, Storage Media, Users, etc. where metric values are available for multiple components within the Node. If this filter is omitted, then all components will be included. » Components to Include (Optional) -- A list of name filters, each of which can match one or more component names using e.g. wildcard or regular expression filters to match multiple component names. If this field is omitted, then all components will be included. » Components to Exclude (Optional) – A list of component name filters as above, which will be excluded from metrics collection. If components to include was specified, then this field will cause components within that input list to be excluded. Otherwise, this will filter the list of all applicable components for each Node.

YAML Development Request (2 of 2) – Metric Type Definition – Defines the core metrics supported under TOSCA. Metrics are grouped to allow inclusion or exclusion of groups or individual metrics. Metric Types define the following: Metric Type Name – The name by which the metric type is known Metric Type Description – Long text string describing the meaning of the Metric Type Metric Data Type – The base data type for metrics of this type: – String – Integer – Float Component Basis (Optional) – If specified, Metrics of this type will be collected for each component that exists of the specified type. For example, if the Component Basis is “CPU”, then an instance of this Metric Type will be created for each CPU defined for a Node. If omitted, then only a single instance will be created for each node. Units (Optional) – The unit type used for this Metric Type (e.g. Megabytes, Gigabytes, Seconds, Volts, Percent, etc. If not specified then the metric is assumed to be unitless. Constraints (Optional) – Defines constraints on the values which Metrics of this Type can hold – Range (Optional) – Defines a minimum and maximum value for numeric Metrics – Enumeration (Optional). Defines a set of valid values that Metrics of this type may take (e.g.. [‘Green’, ‘Yellow’, ‘Red], [0,1,2])