csit rls1701 report edits:

[csit.git] / docs / report / honeycomb_functional_tests / overview.rst

diff --git a/docs/report/honeycomb_functional_tests_virl/overview.rst b/docs/report/honeycomb_functional_tests/overview.rst
similarity index 77%
rename from docs/report/honeycomb_functional_tests_virl/overview.rst
rename to docs/report/honeycomb_functional_tests/overview.rst
index 2bfc89a..d93de13 100644 (file)
--- a/docs/report/honeycomb_functional_tests_virl/overview.rst
+++ b/docs/report/honeycomb_functional_tests/overview.rst
@@ -1,8 +1,8 @@
 Overview\r
 ========\r
 \r
-Tested Topologies VIRL\r
-----------------------\r
+Tested Virtual Topologies\r
+-------------------------\r
 \r
 CSIT Honeycomb functional tests are executed on virtualized topologies created\r
 using Virtual Internet Routing Lab (VIRL) simulation platform contributed by\r
@@ -45,8 +45,8 @@ test execution, all nodes are reachable thru the Management network connected
 to every node via dedicated virtual NICs and virtual links (not shown above\r
 for clarity).\r
 \r
-Honeycomb Functional Tests Overview\r
------------------------------------\r
+Functional Tests Coverage\r
+-------------------------\r
 \r
 The following Honeycomb functional test areas are included in the CSIT |release|\r
 with results listed in this report:\r
@@ -135,3 +135,34 @@ Because of this, test cases follow this general pattern:
 Test cases involving network interfaces utilize the first two interfaces on\r
 the DUT node.\r
 \r
+Functional Tests Naming\r
+-----------------------\r
+\r
+CSIT |release| introduced a common structured naming convention for all\r
+performance and functional tests. This change was driven by substantially\r
+growing number and type of CSIT test cases. Firstly, the original practice did\r
+not always follow any strict naming convention. Secondly test names did not\r
+always clearly capture tested packet encapsulations, and the actual type or\r
+content of the tests. Thirdly HW configurations in terms of NICs, ports and\r
+their locality were not captured either. These were but few reasons that drove\r
+the decision to change and define a new more complete and stricter test naming\r
+convention, and to apply this to all existing and new test cases.\r
+\r
+The new naming should be intuitive for majority of the tests. The complete\r
+description of CSIT test naming convention is provided on `CSIT test naming\r
+page <https://wiki.fd.io/view/CSIT/csit-test-naming>`_.\r
+\r
+Here few illustrative examples of the new naming usage for functional test\r
+suites:\r
+\r
+#. **Physical port to physical port - a.k.a. NIC-to-NIC, Phy-to-Phy, P2P**\r
+\r
+    - *eth2p-ethip4-ip4base-func.robot* => 2 ports of Ethernet, IPv4 baseline\r
+      routed forwarding, functional tests.\r
+\r
+#. **Physical port to VM (or VM chain) to physical port - a.k.a. NIC2VM2NIC,\r
+   P2V2P, NIC2VMchain2NIC, P2V2V2P**\r
+\r
+    - *eth2p-ethip4vxlan-l2bdbasemaclrn-eth-2vhost-1vm-func.robot* => 2 ports of\r
+      Ethernet, IPv4 VXLAN Ethernet, L2 bridge-domain switching to/from two vhost\r
+      interfaces and one VM, functional tests.\r