search

camaraproject / QualityOnDemand

Repository to describe, develop, document and test the QualityOnDemand API family
https://wiki.camaraproject.org/x/zwOeAQ
Apache License 2.0
42 stars 59 forks source link

Resolving "in" and "out" ambiguity #35

Closed eric-murray closed 2 years ago

eric-murray commented 2 years ago

The current API definition uses "in" and "out" to define flow direction (as in "protocolIn" and "protocolOut"), but these are relative terms and hence ambiguous. The UE would view "in" as the downlink and "out" as the uplink, whereas the AS would view "in" as the uplink and "out" as the downlink. And who know what a 3rd party API caller would think.

As UE and AS are explicitly identified in the API, I would suggest to define flow direction in terms of these actors to avoid any possibility of confusion. So "protocolIn" would become "protocolAStoUE" and "protocolOut" would become "protocolUEtoAS". And if the eminently sensible proposal in issue #32 to replace "protocolIn" and "protocolOut" with "protocol" and "direction" parameters is adopted, then the options for "direction" would be "UEtoAS", "AStoUE" and "BOTH".

hdamker commented 2 years ago

I fully agree that we need clear parameter names and values for them which are understandable. Closing this issue to focus the discussion in #32.