On 02/01/2016 09:13 AM, Brant Knudson wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 27, 2016 at 1:47 PM, michael mccune <m...@redhat.com
> <mailto:m...@redhat.com>> wrote:
>
> hi all,
>
> there have been a few reviews recently where the issue of service
> type versus project name have come up for use in the headers. as
> usual this conversation can get quite murky as there are several
> good examples where service type alone is not sufficient (for
> example if a service exposes several api controllers), and as has
> been pointed out project name can also be problematic (for example
> projects can change name).
>
> i'm curious if we could come to a consensus regarding the use of
> service type *or* project name for headers. i propose leaving the
> ultimate decision up to the projects involved to choose the most
> appropriate identifier for their custom headers.
>
> i am not convinced that we would ever need to have a standard on how
> these names are chosen for the header values, or if we would even
> need to have header names that could be deduced. for me, it would be
> much better for the projects use an identifier that makes sense to
> them, *and* for each project to have good api documentation.
>
> so, instead of using examples where we have header names like
> "OpenStack-Some-[SERVICE_TYPE]-Header", maybe we should suggest
> "OpenStack-Some-[SERVICE_TYPE or PROJECT_NAME]-Header" as our guideline.
>
> for reference, here are the current reviews that are circling around
> this issue:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/243429
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/273158
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/243414
>
> and one that has already been merged:
>
> https://review.openstack.org/#/c/196918
>
> thoughts?
>
>
> Why does the service type or name need to be in the header at all? The
> request goes to a specific service so the server and client already know
> the service type or name. - Brant
Sometimes it does. But some times we have one service return ref links
to another url, which might be in a different service.
A very common instance is Nova returning links to glance images, which
include a glance image url directly.
Keeping that header in place is extremely helpful from a clarity
perspective instead of using heuristics of manually splitting apart urls
and guessing. That second approach is one of the reasons the devstack
keystone v3 patches keep being disruptive.
-Sean
--
Sean Dague
http://dague.net
__________________________________________________________________________
OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
