mitchell852 commented on a change in pull request #4537: Add blueprint for 
Flexible Topologies
URL: https://github.com/apache/trafficcontrol/pull/4537#discussion_r398190375
 
 

 ##########
 File path: blueprints/flexible-topologies.md
 ##########
 @@ -0,0 +1,395 @@
+<!--
+Licensed to the Apache Software Foundation (ASF) under one
+or more contributor license agreements.  See the NOTICE file
+distributed with this work for additional information
+regarding copyright ownership.  The ASF licenses this file
+to you under the Apache License, Version 2.0 (the
+"License"); you may not use this file except in compliance
+with the License.  You may obtain a copy of the License at
+
+    http://www.apache.org/licenses/LICENSE-2.0
+
+Unless required by applicable law or agreed to in writing,
+software distributed under the License is distributed on an
+"AS IS" BASIS, WITHOUT WARRANTIES OR CONDITIONS OF ANY
+KIND, either express or implied.  See the License for the
+specific language governing permissions and limitations
+under the License.
+-->
+
+# Flexible Topologies
+
+## Problem Description
+
+Today, a Traffic Control CDN is limited to 2 tiers -- *EDGE* and *MID* -- with 
the option to skip the *MID* tier for certain Delivery Service types (e.g. 
`HTTP_LIVE` and `HTTP_NO_CACHE`). In addition, a CDN is limited to one global 
parent hierarchy, which is defined via the `parent_cachegroup` and 
`secondary_parent_cachegroup` fields of cachegroups. Both of these problems 
limit a CDN's ability to scale with increased demand and changing usage 
patterns, and providing the ability to add more tiers to a CDN helps it keep up 
with that growth. A Topology that works well for one set of Delivery Services 
might not be ideal for a different set of Delivery Services, and a CDN needs 
the flexibility to provide the best Topology for any given Delivery Service -- 
with any number of tiers and custom caching hierarchies.
+
+## Proposed Change
+
+Traffic Control will provide the ability to define one or more Topologies, and 
a Topology can have any number of Delivery Services assigned to it. A Topology 
will be composed of Cachegroups along with their primary/secondary parent 
relationships to other Cachegroups as defined by the Topology.
+
+If a Delivery Service is assigned to a Topology, any `deliveryservice_server` 
assignments it has to `EDGE` caches will be ignored, because it will be 
assigned to all caches in the Delivery Service's CDN (filtered by server 
capabilities) that belong to the Topology's cachegroups. Ideally, this feature 
will obsolete legacy `deliveryservice_server` assignments, since Topologies 
negate the need to assign Delivery Services to individual `EDGE` caches. 
Nonetheless, legacy `deliveryservice_server` assignments will be supported 
alongside Topology-based Delivery Services for some time until all Delivery 
Services have been migrated to Topologies.
+
+### Traffic Portal Impact
+
+Traffic Portal will need new pages for creating and viewing Topologies, and 
the Delivery Service form will need to be updated to add a new Topology field 
for assigning a Delivery Service to a Topology. If a Delivery Service is 
assigned to a Topology, Traffic Portal should prohibit assigning `EDGE` servers 
to the Delivery Service (`ORIGIN` servers may still need to be assignable for 
MSO).
+
+Since Delivery Services will no longer be constrained to one global Topology 
as they are today, it would be extremely useful to be able to visualize a 
Delivery Service's Topology like a tree, where each node in the tree is a 
cachegroup, and the edges between nodes are the primary/secondary parent 
relationships between them. Clicking on a particular node would show all the 
servers in that cachegroup that could serve a request for the Delivery Service. 
This visualization will most likely be different from the Topology form for 
creating a Topology and does not necessarily need to be provided by Traffic 
Portal.
+
+### Traffic Ops Impact
+
+Traffic Ops will provide the ability to create Topologies, composed of 
cachegroups and parent relationships, which will be assignable to one or more 
Delivery Services.
+
+#### REST API Impact
+
+The following is the JSON representation of a `Topology` object:
+
+```JSON
+{
+    "name": "foo",
+    "description": "a foo topology",
+    "nodes": [
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "child-cachegroup",
+            "parents": [1, 2]
+        },
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "parent-cachegroup",
+            "parents": []
+        },
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "secondary-parent-cachegroup",
+            "parents": []
+        }
+    ]
+}
+```
+
+The following table describes the top-level `Topology` object:
+
+| field       | type                        | optionality | description        
                                                 |
+| ----------- | --------------------------- | ----------- | 
------------------------------------------------------------------- |
+| name        | string                      | required    | a unique name for 
identifying this Topology                         |
+| description | string                      | required    | the description of 
this Topology                                    |
+| nodes       | array of `node` sub-objects | required    | the set of `nodes` 
in this topology, similar to an *adjacency list* |
+
+The following table describes the `node` sub-object:
+
+| field      | type              | optionality | description                   
                                                                                
                                                                                
              |
+| ---------- | ----------------- | ----------- | 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 |
+| cachegroup | string            | required    | the `short_name` of a 
cachegroup this node maps to in the Topology                                    
                                                                                
                      |
+| parents    | array of integers | required    | zero-based indexes to other 
nodes in the Topology's `nodes` array, where the 1st element is for the 
*primary* parent relationship and the 2nd element is for the *secondary* parent 
relationship, and so on |
+
+API constraints:
+- a Topology must have at least 1 `node`; otherwise, it is useless
+- there cannot be multiple `nodes` for the same cachegroup in a Topology
+- `parents` must have 0, 1 or 2 elements, cannot contain duplicates, cannot 
contain the index of its own `node`, and cannot contain the index of `nodes` 
whose cachegroup is of type `EDGE_LOC`
+- leaf `nodes` must be cachegroups of type `EDGE_LOC`
+- all `nodes` in the Topology must be reachable -- i.e. a `node` is either a 
leaf (which would be an `EDGE_LOC`) or is a parent of at least one other node
+- a Topology cannot contain a cycle (through any combination of 
primary/secondary parent relationships)
+
+The following new endpoints will be required:
+
+##### `GET /topologies`
+
+response JSON:
+```JSON
+{ "response": [
+    {
+        "name": "foo",
+        "description": "a foo topology",
+        "nodes": [
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "child-cachegroup",
+                "parents": [1, 2]
+            },
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "parent-cachegroup",
+                "parents": []
+            },
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "secondary-parent-cachegroup",
+                "parents": []
+            }
+        ]
+    }
+]}
+```
+
+##### `POST /topologies`
+
+request JSON:
+```JSON
+{
+    "name": "foo",
+    "description": "a foo topology",
+    "nodes": [
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "child-cachegroup",
+            "parents": [1, 2]
+        },
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "parent-cachegroup",
+            "parents": []
+        },
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "secondary-parent-cachegroup",
+            "parents": []
+        }
+    ]
+}
+```
+
+response JSON:
+```JSON
+{
+    "alerts": [
+        {
+            "text": "topology was created successfully",
+            "level": "success"
+        }
+    ],
+    "response": {
+        "name": "foo",
+        "description": "a foo topology",
+        "nodes": [
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "child-cachegroup",
+                "parents": [1, 2]
+            },
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "parent-cachegroup",
+                "parents": []
+            },
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "secondary-parent-cachegroup",
+                "parents": []
+            }
+        ]
+    }
+}
+
+```
+
+##### `PUT /topologies?name=foo`
+
+request JSON:
+```JSON
+{
+    "name": "foo",
+    "description": "a foo topology",
+    "nodes": [
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "child-cachegroup",
+            "parents": [1, 2]
+        },
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "parent-cachegroup",
+            "parents": []
+        },
+        {
+            "cachegroup": "secondary-parent-cachegroup",
+            "parents": []
+        }
+    ]
+}
+```
+
+response JSON:
+```JSON
+{
+    "alerts": [
+        {
+            "text": "topology was updated successfully",
+            "level": "success"
+        }
+    ],
+    "response": {
+        "name": "foo",
+        "description": "a foo topology",
+        "nodes": [
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "child-cachegroup",
+                "parents": [1, 2]
+            },
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "parent-cachegroup",
+                "parents": []
+            },
+            {
+                "cachegroup": "secondary-parent-cachegroup",
+                "parents": []
+            }
+        ]
+    }
+}
+```
+
+##### `DELETE /topologies?name=foo`
+
+response JSON:
+```JSON
+{
+    "alerts": [
+        {
+            "text": "topology was deleted successfully",
+            "level": "success"
+        }
+    ]
+}
+```
+
+##### `/deliveryservices` endpoints
+
+All relevant Delivery Service APIs will have their JSON request and response 
objects modified to include a new `topology` field which references the name of 
the topology it's assigned to:
+```JSON
+{
+    ...
+    "topology": "foo"
+}
+```
+
+##### The various `/snapshot` endpoints
+
+The various `/snapshot` endpoints will need to be updated to include new 
Topologies data along with their associations to Delivery Services in the 
`CRConfig.json` snapshot. The data should only include the `EDGE_LOC` 
cachegroups of the Topologies, because those are all Traffic Router needs.
+
+##### Various endpoints that are affected by cachegroup parentage or 
deliveryservice-server assignment
+
+API endpoints that do things such as the following may need to be updated to 
take Topology-based Delivery Service assignment and parentage into account:
+- assign a Delivery Service to a server (or vice versa)
 
 Review comment:
   I would suggest leaving all the ds/server and server/ds endpoints as is. We 
can circle back and mark them as deprecated at some point when topologies are 
the ONLY choice. Technically, they are still relevant as you can either a) 
assign a topology to a ds or b) assign servers to a ds.
   
   In my opinion, there could be 2 ways to fetch servers "assigned to a ds"
   
   1. GET /ds/{id}/servers (existing) which will return servers DIRECTLY 
assigned to a ds
   2. GET /servers?topology=foo which will return servers INDIRECTLY assigned 
to a ds via a topology's cache groups.
   
   We can make TP smart enough to use the correct routes based on if a ds has a 
topology or not and we can update documentation to be clear what each endpoint 
is for.

----------------------------------------------------------------
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
 
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
us...@infra.apache.org


With regards,
Apache Git Services

Reply via email to