I like the idea of the "microservice_plugin" because really what you are describing is true "Proxy" functionality. So maybe that's what we are looking for, is a "Proxy" config that allows for remote URL's.
-Dew On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 11:04 AM Robert Butts <[email protected]> wrote: > Yeah, we could write a framework like that. But this framework is strictly > more powerful than that. Would you want both? Seems simpler to just have > one plugin framework that can do both. > > In fact, if you wanted, you could add a generic "microservice plugin" as a > plugin, which looks at the config file for mappings like that, e.g. > `"microservice_plugin":{ ["/api/1.3/myawesomeextensiton", " > http://myushost.com/mypath";] }`, and remaps anything. > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:54 AM Jan van Doorn <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Yea, I don’t mean edit the routes.go to add your service and compile it > > in, but make it so that you can have a dynamic list of > > > > Path -> absolute URL > > > > So for example > > > > /api/1.3/myawesomeextensiton http://myushost.com/mypath < > > http://myushost.com/mypath> > > > > Would result in that path calling that absolute URL. > > > > Would that not work? > > > > Cheers, > > JvD > > > > > On Oct 1, 2018, at 09:50, Robert Butts <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > @jan this is for extensions, for code an organization isn't able to > open > > > source. > > > > > > Sure, you could just add a line to `routes.go` if you want. You can do > > that > > > right now. But you'd have to deal with regular merge conflicts. > > > > > > With this dedicated plugin system, the plugins are self-contained, you > > > don't modify any other file to create your plugin. Which means (in > > theory) > > > you should never have merge conflicts when Traffic Control changes. > > > > > > > > > On Mon, Oct 1, 2018 at 10:44 AM Jan van Doorn <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> Why wouldn’t we just have the routes.go be able to point to an > “outside > > >> url” that is the micro service? > > >> > > >> Rgds, > > >> JvD > > >> > > >> > > >>> On Oct 1, 2018, at 09:39, Robert Butts <[email protected]> wrote: > > >>> > > >>> So, as we move Traffic Ops from Perl to Go, we need a way to write > > >>> extensions in Go, like we have in Perl. > > >>> > > >>> I wrote a plugin system for Go, modeled after the plugin frameworks > in > > >>> Grove and Traffic Monitor, PR is here: > > >>> > > >>> https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/pull/2513 > > >>> > > >>> It's by no means complete, just like with Grove, we'll have to add > > >>> additional hooks and data as we find the need. But it works, it has > > basic > > >>> hooks, and includes some sample plugins. > > >>> > > >>> There was a question about microservices, if someone wants to write > > >>> extensions to their Traffic Ops as separate services, instead of > built > > >> into > > >>> the same app. This framework allows that, it's easy to make a plugin > > that > > >>> calls out to another service when an endpoint is requested. > > >>> > > >>> Does anyone object to this PR? Could I get some +1's/-1's so we can > > get a > > >>> feel for whether people are OK with this PR being merged, and using > > this > > >>> plugin system for Traffic Ops going forward? > > >>> > > >>> Thanks, > > >> > > >> > > > > >
