RE: [tosca] Proposal for requirement "occurrences"

[Chris Lauwers <lauwers@ubicity.com>]

I no longer have a working visualizer (not enough time to keep everything up to date) but I used to show:

 

• Nodes as the vertices of the graph
• Relationships as the edges of the graph
• Capabilities and requirements as the âportsâ on nodes that âterminateâ the relationships.

 

With this model, there is no issue with visualizing âdangling requirementsâ in a template graph (and in fact you could use visual cues to highlight dangling requirements).

 

Chris

 

From: Tal Liron <tliron@redhat.com>
Sent: Saturday, February 5, 2022 11:07 AM
To: Calin Curescu <calin.curescu@ericsson.com>
Cc: Chris Lauwers <lauwers@ubicity.com>; tosca@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [tosca] Proposal for requirement "occurrences"

 

I have a question for both Chris and Calin --

 

How do you understand the Cloudnet demo we saw last week? (repo, recording)

 

We saw some very nice graphs of service topologies. But Cloudent is entirely a Day 0 design analysis tool and doesn't deploy anything. (Like Puccini, it is not an orchestrator. Though Puccini does intend to be a frontend for orchestators, such as Ansible and Terraform. By the way, I am working on Terraform integration and may have something nice to show soon.)

 

I'm not trying to trip you here, I'm just really trying to understand how you see that kind of topology representation fitting into the operational model and of course the "requirements" keyword we are discussing.