On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 3:44 PM, Lakshman Udayakantha <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> Don't we have an extensible API lifecycle states in c5 implementation? If
> we have any user who doesn't want this blocked state can remove from state
> configuration and who wants this blocked state can keep this state in
> configuration.
> WDYT?
> Yes we have a customizable API lifecycle in C5. So, anyone wants to add a
> state to lifecycle can import customized lifecycle and implement the logic.
> It does not need a configuration to do that.
>

Thanks,
Yasima.

>
>
Thanks,
> Lakshman
>
> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 3:22 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> If by any chance an API Developer wants to block his entire API
>> temporarily, he has two options.
>>
>> 1) Set the endpoint limit to 0req/min
>> 2) Use a temporary ballerina to send an error back to the customer.
>>
>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 12:06 PM, Sanjeewa Malalgoda <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 12:03 PM, Nuwan Dias <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I agree that "Blocked" is never a standard state in any SDLC. Therefore
>>>> I don't think its right to have a state called Blocked in the API Lifecycle
>>>> as well.
>>>>
>>> There are existing users who heavily use this feature. If we are going
>>> to disable then we need to provide alternative. Lets think i'm API
>>> developer and i have my back end service as well. At some point i realized
>>> my back end not performing and i will temporary set blocked state until i
>>> fixed issue. User will see proper message saying access is blocked then he
>>> can skip invoking it. If we hack throttle etc to do same then end user will
>>> get incorrect information. Directly modify ballerina and send proper error
>>> message is good alternative.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Blocking is always a temporary action. If you need to take off an API
>>>> permanently the usual practice is to deprecate and retire it. Therefore it
>>>> doesn't sound right to have a state called "Blocked" in the API Lifecycle.
>>>>
>>>> Moreover, I've never seen an API Publisher blocking his entire API.
>>>> There are cases when he needs to blocks certain Apps but never his entire
>>>> API. So I think its a very edge case requirement to have a Blocked state in
>>>> the lifecycle and hence I don't think we should be supporting it as a first
>>>> class feature. Therefore I suggest that we take off the capability of
>>>> blocking APIs from the Publisher app completely. The admin can still block
>>>> APIs in the usual way (through the admin portal).
>>>>
>>> If user need to block API using throttling in admin dashboard he need to
>>> be super admin of the system. Normal API publishers cannot create blocking
>>> policies. So if this is about blocking policy it will not work IMO.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> sanjeewa.
>>>
>>>>
>>>> If by any chance this edge case requirement comes up, the publisher can
>>>> either set the endpoint throttling limit to 0req/min or put up a temporary
>>>> ballerina code to say the API is blocked. This way we avoid having many
>>>> mechanisms of performing the same action (lesser complications = increased
>>>> stability) and avoid having to support a feature for a minority user base
>>>> (actually 0 in my personal experience).
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 17, 2017 at 11:50 AM, Yasima Dewmini <[email protected]>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi All,
>>>>>
>>>>> As in the previous APIM versions, there were 4 ways to block an
>>>>> API/Subscription.
>>>>>
>>>>> *1. Block an API using API lifecycle "Blocked" state*
>>>>>
>>>>> API owner can block an API in publisher using API lifecycle. This will
>>>>> temporarily block an API and can be promoted to "Published" state again.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *2. Block a subscription*
>>>>> Publisher can block subscriptions using manage subscription. This can
>>>>> be used to block an app in Production level or in both Production and
>>>>> Sandbox levels.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *3. Throttle level blocking*
>>>>> An specific endpoint can be blocked by setting Production and Sandbox
>>>>> TPS to 0 in publisher .
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> *4. Block an API using Admin dashboard*An API can be blocked using
>>>>> Black List feature in Admin dashboard.
>>>>>
>>>>> As per discussion within the team, we came to a conclusion to remove
>>>>> the "Blocked" state from API lifecycle which is used to block an API, 
>>>>> since
>>>>> it is an edge case where API owner blocks his own API in publisher. If an
>>>>> API needs to be blocked it can be done using 2,3 or 4.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please share your thoughts on this.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Yasima.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> http://wso2.com/signatureYasima Dewmini
>>>>> Software Engineer, WSO2, Inc.
>>>>> Email: [email protected]
>>>>> Mobile: +94713117081 <+94%2071%20311%207081>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Nuwan Dias
>>>>
>>>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>>>> email : [email protected]
>>>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <077%20777%205729>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> *Sanjeewa Malalgoda*
>>> WSO2 Inc.
>>> Mobile : +94713068779 <+94%2071%20306%208779>
>>>
>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>blog
>>> :http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/
>>> <http://sanjeewamalalgoda.blogspot.com/>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Nuwan Dias
>>
>> Software Architect - WSO2, Inc. http://wso2.com
>> email : [email protected]
>> Phone : +94 777 775 729 <+94%2077%20777%205729>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Lakshman Udayakantha
> WSO2 Inc. www.wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
> Mobile: *0717429601*
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Architecture mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>
>


-- 
http://wso2.com/signatureYasima Dewmini
Software Engineer, WSO2, Inc.
Email: [email protected]
Mobile: +94713117081
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to