Open AlexChiquito opened 7 months ago
Link to reviewed document: eu.arrowhead.service-registry-administration-http-json.yml.
This IDD has a name including the term "administration". Does the word "administration" has a meaning that is distinct from the term "management" used for the eu.arrowhead.authorization-management-http-json service? If not, then I'd argue that being consistent is good and that both should use the same term. We have mostly used "management" historically, and unless there is a good argument against using that term instead of "administration", I'd say we go with it.
Normal application systems should not use this, only administrators and higher level supporting systems.
camelCase
or only kebab-case
service-type
: What is the purpose of this field? In the example, protocol and data format are present. If this field is really needed, then it should be interface independent. time-to-live
: "2d12h": should be a moment in time, not an interval (also name should be expires-at) metadata
: why ordered? Previously, we considered to support list and object values as well. interface
: The example is using the old and simple (almost useless) interface definition.auth-info
: seems like security level (confusing name) Example of how we think a service instance response payload should look like:
[
{
"serviceId":"provider01-myservice-1.4",
"provider":{
"name":"provider01",
"metadata":{
"key":"value"
}
},
"serviceDefinition":"myservice",
"version":"1.4",
"expiresAt":"2023-07-14T14:46:47Z",
"metadata":{
"additionalProp1":"value1",
"additionalProp2":[
"value2a",
"value2b"
],
"additionalProp3":{
"key":"value"
}
},
"interfaces":[
{
"name":"http-myservice",
"protocol":"http",
"policy":"unsecured",
"properties":{
"accessAddress":"127.0.0.1",
"accessPort":6413,
"basePath":"/path",
"method":"GET",
"contentType":"application/json"
}
}
]
}
]
DELETE operation: should not use request body, to delete a sr entry you need only the serviceID (or systemname, service def name, and optionally version)
Administration or Management?
We vote for "management" due to the historical aspect.
Typo:
@AlexChiquito @emanuelpalm @PerOlofsson-Sinetiq Could you please provide Sinetiq's feedback before the next RoadMap (05.02) in order to being able to discuss it there? As you know, last time the 14th of May (before AIMS 5.0 GA) was agreed to target the specification being finalized, so we don't have so much time.
In this Issue we will collect the comments about the service-registry-administration interface definition.