Merge "specs: Enable gerrit build of specs documentation"

3 files changed, 546 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/docs/design/index.rst b/docs/design/index.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e01a00b
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/design/index.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,14 @@
+.. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
+.. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
+.. Copyright (c) 2016 Open Platform for NFV Project, Inc. and its contributors
+
+============
+OVSNFV Specs
+============
+
+.. toctree::
+   :numbered:
+   :maxdepth: 3
+
+   specs/template.rst
+   specs/High-Priority-Traffic-Path.rst
diff --git a/docs/design/specs/High-Priority-Traffic-Path.rst b/docs/design/specs/High-Priority-Traffic-Path.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6243cbe
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/design/specs/High-Priority-Traffic-Path.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,260 @@
+..
+ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
+ License.
+
+ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
+
+==========================================
+High Priority Traffic Path
+==========================================
+
+https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/ovsnfv/OVSFV+Requirement+-+High+Priority+Traffic+Path
+
+Problem description
+===================
+
+A network design may need to adequately accommodate multiple classes of traffic, each
+class requiring different levels of service in critical network elements.
+
+As a concrete example, a network element managed by a service provider may be
+handling voice and elastic data traffic. Voice traffic requires that the end-to-end
+latency and jitter is bounded to some numerical limit (in msec) accuracy in order to ensure
+sufficient quality-of-service (QoS) for the participants in the voice call.
+Elastic data traffic does not impose the same demanding requirements on the network
+(there will be essentially no requirement on jitter. For example, when downloading a
+large file across the Internet, although the bandwidth requirements may be high there
+is usually no requirement that the file arrives within a bounded time interval.
+
+Depending on the scheduling algorithms running on the network element,
+frames belonging to the data traffic may get transmitted before frames
+belonging to the voice traffic introducing unwanted latency or jitter.
+Therefore, in order to ensure deterministic latency and jitter characteristics
+end-to-end, each network element through which the voice traffic traverses
+must ensure that voice traffic is handled deterministically.
+
+Hardware switches have typically been designed to ensure certain classes
+of traffic can be scheduled ahead of other classes and are also
+over-provisioned which further ensures deterministic behavior when
+handling high priority traffic. However, software switches (which includes
+virtual switches such as Open vSwitch) may require modification in order
+to achieve this deterministic behavior.
+
+Use Cases
+---------
+
+1. Program classes of service
+
+The End User specifies a number of classes of service. Each class of service
+will be represented by the value of a particular field in a frame. The class
+of service determines the priority treatment which flows in the class will
+receive, while maintaining a relative level of priority for other classes and
+a default level of treatment for the lowest priority class of service. As
+such, each class of service will be associated with a priority. The End User
+will associate classes of service and priorities to ingress ports with the
+expectation that frames that arrive on these ingress ports will get
+scheduled following the specified priorities.
+
+Note: Priority treatment of the classes of service cannot cause any one of
+the classes (even the default class) from being transferred at all. In other
+words, a strict priority treatment would likely not be successful for serving
+all classes eventually, and this is a key consideration.
+
+2. Forward high priority network traffic
+
+A remote network element sends traffic to Open vSwitch. The remote network
+element, indicates the class of service to which this flow of traffic belongs
+to by modifying a pre-determined but arbitrary field in the frame as specified
+in Use Case 1. Some examples include the Differentiated Services Code Point
+(DSCP) in an IP packet or the Priority Code Point (PCP) in an Ethernet frame.
+The relative priority treatment that frames get processed by Open vSwitch can be guaranteed by the
+values populated in these fields when the fields are different. If the fields
+are the same, ordering is not deterministic.
+
+For example: Packet A is sent with a DSCP value of 0 and packet B is sent
+with a value of 46; 0 has a lower priority than 46. Packet A arrives
+before packet B. If Open vSwitch has been configured as such, Packet
+B will be transmitted before Packet A.
+
+Proposed change
+===============
+
+TBD
+
+Alternatives
+------------
+
+TBD
+
+OVSDB schema impact
+-------------------
+
+TBD
+
+User interface impact
+---------------------
+
+TBD
+
+Security impact
+---------------
+
+TBD
+
+Other end user impact
+---------------------
+
+TBD
+
+Performance Impact
+------------------
+
+TBD
+
+Other deployer impact
+---------------------
+
+TBD
+
+Developer impact
+----------------
+
+TBD
+
+Implementation
+==============
+
+Assignee(s)
+-----------
+
+Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
+throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
+
+If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
+primary author and contact.
+
+Primary assignee:
+  <email address>
+
+Other contributors:
+  <email address>
+
+Work Items
+----------
+
+TBD
+
+Dependencies
+============
+
+TBD
+
+Testing
+=======
+
+In order to test how effectively the virtual switch handles high priority traffic
+types, the following scheme is suggested.::
+
+                   +---------------------------+         Ingress Traffic Parameters
+                   |                           |         +-------------------------------------------+
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Packet Size: The size of the Ethernet frames
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Tmax: RFC2544 Max. Throughput for traffic of
+                   |                    PHY0   <-------+ "Packet Size"
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Total Offered Rate: The offered rate of both
+                   |                           |         traffic classes combined expressed as a % of
+                   |                           |         Tmax
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Ingress Rates are expressed as a percentage
+                   |                           |         of Total Offered Rate.
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Class A:
+                   |             OVS           |         Ethernet PCP = 0 (Background)
+                   |            (BR0)          |         Ingress Rate      : rate_ingress_a(n) Mfps
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Class B:
+                   |                           |         Ethernet PCP = 7 (Highest)
+                   |                           |         Ingress Rate      : rate_ingress_b(n) Mfps
+                   |                           |
+                   |                           |         Egress Traffic Measurements
+                   |                           |         +-------------------------------------------+
+                   |                           |         Class A:
+                   |                           |         Egress Throughput : rate_egress_a(n) Mfps
+                   |                           |         Egress Latency    : max_lat_egrees_a(n) ms
+                   |                           |         Egress Jitter     : max_jit_egress_a(n) ms
+                   |                    PHY1   +------->
+                   |                           |         Class B:
+                   |                           |         Egress Throughput : rate_egress_b(n) Mfps
+                   |                           |         Egress Latency    : max_lat_egrees_b(n) ms
+                   +---------------------------+         Egress Jitter     : max_jit_egress_b(n) ms
+
+
+Open vSwitch is configured to forward traffic between two ports agnostic to the
+traffic type. For example, using the following command:
+
+ovs-ofctl add-flow br0 in_port=0,actions=output:1
+
+The test will be carried out with the functionality to enable high-priority
+traffic enabled and disabled in order to guage the change in performance for
+both cases.
+
+Two classes of traffic will be generated by a traffic generator. In the example
+above, the classes are differentiated using the Ethernet PCP field. However,
+another means for differentiating traffic could be used, depending the
+prioritization scheme that is developed.
+
+Tests should be performed for each combination of:
+
+* Packet Sizes in (64, 512)
+* Total Offered Rate in (80, 120, 150) 
+* rate_ingress_b(n) / rate_ingress_a(n) in (0.1, 0.2, 0.5)
+
+For each set, the following metrics should be collected for each traffic
+class over a specified time period:
+
+Egress Throughput (Mfps)
+Maximum Egress Latency (ms)
+Maximum Egress Jitter (ms)
+
+Documentation Impact
+====================
+
+TBD
+
+References
+==========
+
+Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
+reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
+references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
+
+* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
+
+- http://lists.opnfv.org/pipermail/opnfv-tech-discuss/2015-December/007193.html
+- http://ircbot.wl.linuxfoundation.org/meetings/opnfv-ovsnfv/2016/opnfv-ovsnfv.2016-03-07-13.01.html
+
+* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
+
+- https://wiki.opnfv.org/download/attachments/5046510/qos_mechanisms.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1459187636000&api=v2
+
+* Related specifications as appropriate
+
+* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
+
+
+History
+=======
+
+Optional section intended to be used each time the spec
+is updated to describe new design, API or any database schema
+updated. Useful to let reader understand what's happened along the
+time.
+
+.. list-table:: Revisions
+   :header-rows: 1
+
+   * - Release Name
+     - Description
+   * - Colorado
+     - Introduced
diff --git a/docs/design/specs/template.rst b/docs/design/specs/template.rst
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..cc5dfd8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/docs/design/specs/template.rst
@@ -0,0 +1,272 @@
+..
+ This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 Unported
+ License.
+
+ http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/legalcode
+
+==========================================
+Example Spec - The title of your blueprint
+==========================================
+
+Include the URL of OPNFV wiki page description:
+
+https://wiki.opnfv.org/display/ovsnfv/OVSFV+Requirement+-+Example
+
+Introduction paragraph -- why are we doing anything? A single paragraph of
+prose that operators can understand. The title and this first paragraph
+should be used as the subject line and body of the commit message
+respectively.
+
+Some notes about the process:
+
+* The aim of this document is first to define the problem we need to solve,
+  and second agree the overall approach to solve that problem.
+
+* This is not intended to be extensive documentation for a new feature.
+
+* You should aim to get your spec approved before writing your code.
+  While you are free to write prototypes and code before getting your spec
+  approved, its possible that the outcome of the spec review process leads
+  you towards a fundamentally different solution than you first envisaged.
+
+* But, API changes are held to a much higher level of scrutiny.
+  As soon as an API change merges, we must assume it could be in production
+  somewhere, and as such, we then need to support that API change forever.
+  To avoid getting that wrong, we do want lots of details about API changes
+  upfront.
+
+Some notes about using this template:
+
+* Your spec should be in ReSTructured text, like this template.
+
+* Please wrap text at 79 columns.
+
+* Please do not delete any of the sections in this template.  If you have
+  nothing to say for a whole section, just write: None
+
+* For help with syntax, see http://sphinx-doc.org/rest.html
+
+* To test out your formatting, build the docs using sphinx
+
+* If you would like to provide a diagram with your spec, ascii diagrams are
+  required.  http://asciiflow.com/ is a very nice tool to assist with making
+  ascii diagrams.  The reason for this is that the tool used to review specs is
+  based purely on plain text.  Plain text will allow review to proceed without
+  having to look at additional files which can not be viewed in gerrit.  It
+  will also allow inline feedback on the diagram itself.
+
+Problem description
+===================
+
+A detailed description of the problem. What problem is this blueprint
+addressing?
+
+Use Cases
+---------
+
+What use cases does this address? What impact on actors does this change have?
+Ensure you are clear about the actors in each use case: Developer, End User,
+Deployer etc.
+
+Proposed change
+===============
+
+Here is where you cover the change you propose to make in detail. How do you
+propose to solve this problem?
+
+If this is one part of a larger effort make it clear where this piece ends. In
+other words, what's the scope of this effort?
+
+At this point, if you would like to just get feedback on the problem and
+proposed change, you can stop here and post this for review to get
+preliminary feedback. If so please say:
+Posting to get preliminary feedback on the scope of this spec.
+
+Alternatives
+------------
+
+What other ways could we do this thing? Why aren't we using those? This doesn't
+have to be a full literature review, but it should demonstrate that thought has
+been put into why the proposed solution is an appropriate one.
+
+OVSDB schema impact
+-------------------
+
+Changes which require modifications to the data model often have a wider impact
+on the system.  The community often has strong opinions on how the data model
+should be evolved, from both a functional and performance perspective. It is
+therefore important to capture and gain agreement as early as possible on any
+proposed changes to the data model.
+
+Questions which need to be addressed by this section include:
+
+* What new data objects and/or database schema changes is this going to
+  require?
+
+User interface impact
+---------------------
+
+Each user interface that is either added, changed or removed should have the
+following:
+
+* Specification for the user interface
+
+* Example use case including typical examples for both data supplied
+  by the caller and the response
+
+Security impact
+---------------
+
+Describe any potential security impact on the system.  Some of the items to
+consider include:
+
+* Does this change touch sensitive data such as tokens, keys, or user data?
+
+* Does this change alter the interface in a way that may impact security, such as
+  a new way to access sensitive information?
+
+* Does this change involve cryptography or hashing?
+
+* Does this change require the use of sudo or any elevated privileges?
+
+* Does this change involve using or parsing user-provided data? This could
+  be directly at the API level or indirectly such as changes to a cache layer.
+
+* Can this change enable a resource exhaustion attack, such as allowing a
+  single interaction to consume significant server resources?
+
+Other end user impact
+---------------------
+
+Aside from the user interfaces, are there other ways a user will interact with this
+feature?
+
+Performance Impact
+------------------
+
+Describe any potential performance impact on the system, for example
+how often will new code be called, and is there a major change to the calling
+pattern of existing code.
+
+Examples of things to consider here include:
+
+* Will the change include any locking, and if so what considerations are there
+  on holding the lock?
+
+Other deployer impact
+---------------------
+
+Discuss things that will affect how you deploy and configure Open vSwitch
+that have not already been mentioned, such as:
+
+* What config options are being added? Should they be more generic than
+  proposed? Are the default values ones which will work well in
+  real deployments?
+
+* Is this a change that takes immediate effect after its merged, or is it
+  something that has to be explicitly enabled?
+
+* If this change is a new binary, how would it be deployed?
+
+* Please state anything that those doing continuous deployment, or those
+  upgrading from the previous release, need to be aware of. Also describe
+  any plans to deprecate configuration values or features.
+
+Developer impact
+----------------
+
+Discuss things that will affect other developers working on Open vSwitch,
+such as:
+
+Implementation
+==============
+
+Assignee(s)
+-----------
+
+Who is leading the writing of the code? Or is this a blueprint where you're
+throwing it out there to see who picks it up?
+
+If more than one person is working on the implementation, please designate the
+primary author and contact.
+
+Primary assignee:
+  <email address>
+
+Other contributors:
+  <email address>
+
+Work Items
+----------
+
+Work items or tasks -- break the feature up into the things that need to be
+done to implement it. Those parts might end up being done by different people,
+but we're mostly trying to understand the timeline for implementation.
+
+
+Dependencies
+============
+
+* If this requires functionality of another project that is not currently used
+  document that fact.
+
+* Does this feature require any new library dependencies or code otherwise not
+  included in Open vSwitch? Or does it depend on a specific version of library?
+
+
+Testing
+=======
+
+Please discuss the important scenarios needed to test here, as well as
+specific edge cases we should be ensuring work correctly. For each
+scenario please specify if this requires specialized hardware.
+
+Please discuss how the change will be tested: Open vSwitch unit tests, VSPERF
+performance tests, Yardstick tests, etc.
+
+Is this untestable in gate given current limitations (specific hardware /
+software configurations available)? If so, are there mitigation plans (3rd
+party testing, gate enhancements, etc).
+
+
+Documentation Impact
+====================
+
+Which audiences are affected most by this change, and which documentation
+should be updated because of this change? Don't
+repeat details discussed above, but reference them here in the context of
+documentation for multiple audiences. If a config option
+changes or is deprecated, note here that the documentation needs to be updated
+to reflect this specification's change.
+
+References
+==========
+
+Please add any useful references here. You are not required to have any
+reference. Moreover, this specification should still make sense when your
+references are unavailable. Examples of what you could include are:
+
+* Links to mailing list or IRC discussions
+
+* Links to relevant research, if appropriate
+
+* Related specifications as appropriate
+
+* Anything else you feel it is worthwhile to refer to
+
+
+History
+=======
+
+Optional section intended to be used each time the spec
+is updated to describe new design, API or any database schema
+updated. Useful to let reader understand what's happened along the
+time.
+
+.. list-table:: Revisions
+   :header-rows: 1
+
+   * - Release Name
+     - Description
+   * - 2.x
+     - Introduced