Hi Slawek, thanks for getting back to us and sharing new potential tests and capabilities from neutron-tempest-plugin. Let's first discuss tests which are in tempest directly please. We have done an analysis where we have cross checked tests we have in our guidelines with the ones (api and non-admin ones) present in tempest at the tempest checkout we currently use and here are the results: https://etherpad.opendev.org/p/refstack-test-analysis There are 110 and tempest.api.network tests which we don't have in any guideline yet. Could you please have a look at the list of the tests? Would it make sense to include them in a guideline? Would they extend any network capabilities we have in OpenStack Powered Platform program or would we need to create a new one(s)? https://opendev.org/osf/interop/src/branch/master/next.json Thank you, On Mon, 24 May 2021 at 16:33, Slawek Kaplonski <skaplons@redhat.com> wrote:
Hi,
Dnia poniedziałek, 26 kwietnia 2021 17:48:08 CEST Martin Kopec pisze:
Hi everyone,
I would like to further discuss the topics we covered with the neutron team
during
the PTG [1].
* adding address_group API capability
It's tested by tests in neutron-tempest-plugin. First question is if tests
which are
not directly in tempest can be a part of a non-add-on marketing program?
It's possible to move them to tempest though, by the time we do so, could
they be
marked as advisory?
* Shall we include QoS tempest tests since we don't know what share of
vendors
enable QoS? Could it be an add-on?
These tests are also in neutron-tempest-plugin, I assume we're talking about
neutron_tempest_plugin.api.test_qos tests.
If we want to include these tests, which program should they belong to? Do
we wanna
create a new one?
Thanks,
--
Martin Kopec
Senior Software Quality Engineer
Red Hat EMEA
First of all, sorry that it took so long for me but I finally looked into Neutron related tests and capabilities and I think we can possibly add few things there:
- For "networks-security-groups-CRUD" we can add "address_groups" API. It is now supported by ML2 plugin [1]. In the neutron-tempest-plugin we just have some scenario test [2] but we would probably need also API tests for that, correct?
- For networks-l3-CRUD we can optionally add port_forwarding API. This can be added by service plugin [3] so it may not be enabled in all deployments. But maybe there is some "optional feature" category in the RefStack, and if so, this could be included there. Tests for that are in neutron-tempest-plugin [4] and [5].
- There are also 2 other service plugins, which I think could be included as "optional feature" in the RefStack, but IMO don't fit exactly in any of the existing groups. Those are QoS [6] and Trunks [7]. Tests for both are in the neutron-tempest-plugin as well: Qos: [8] and [9], Trunk [10], [11] and [12].
Please let me know what do You think about it and if that would be ok and if You want me to propose some patches with that or maybe You will propose them.
[1] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-lib/+/741784
[2] https://review.opendev.org/c/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/+/777833
[3] https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/neutron/services/portforwar...
[4] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
[5] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
[6] https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/neutron/services/qos/qos_pl...
[7] https://github.com/openstack/neutron/blob/master/neutron/services/trunk/plug...
[8] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
[9] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
[10] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
[11] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
[12] https://github.com/openstack/neutron-tempest-plugin/blob/master/neutron_temp...
--
Slawek Kaplonski
Principal Software Engineer
Red Hat
-- Martin Kopec Senior Software Quality Engineer Red Hat EMEA