<html> <head> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> </head> <body text="#000000" bgcolor="#FFFFFF"> On 10/17/2011 08:35 PM, Adam Young wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:4E9CC9C2.6020600@redhat.com" type="cite"> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> On 10/17/2011 08:10 PM, Jack Magne wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:4E9CC3FA.3010605@redhat.com" type="cite"> <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"> On 10/17/2011 01:18 PM, Ade Lee wrote: <blockquote cite="mid:1318882723.30369.41.camel@localhost.localdomain" type="cite"> <pre wrap="">Hi all, I tried to put this on the dogtag wiki, but it did not seem to work. Will chat with Matt. In the meantime, here is a copy for you guys to look at and comment on. It has most everything except the installation servlets and token operations (for which I need to think about the object model). If you look at the mapped servlets, you'll get a sense of what operations are covered in each URL mapping. This is a first cut -- hopefully a good starting point for discussion. So please comment away! Ade </pre> <pre wrap=""><fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> _______________________________________________ Pki-devel mailing list <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Pki-devel@redhat.com">Pki-devel@redhat.com</a> <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel</a> </pre> </blockquote> Thanks Ade. Just a few questions after having a look. 1. I noticed we have the following key related resources: PUT /pki/key "Add a key" POST /pki/key "Modify a key" In my quick readings, it appeared that the POST method was favored for creating brand new resources where PUT was used to modify existing ones? </blockquote> I think you have it backwards. PUT is the normal way for creating things. The POST operation is very generic and no specific meaning can be attached to it. In general, use POST when only a subset of a resource needs to be modified and it cannot be accessed as its own resource; or when the equivalent of a method call must be exposed. <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://developer.mindtouch.com/REST/REST_for_the_Rest_of_Us">http://developer.mindtouch.com/REST/REST_for_the_Rest_of_Us</a> says this about POST: " usually either create a new one, or replace the existing one with this copy, where as POST is kinds of a catch all. " We could possibly use PUT for both add and modify if we wanted. I tend to favor making objects immutable, and to replacing whole objects when possible. However, I know that is not always possible, especially when working with a pre-existing API. So I'd say lets try to stick to PUT semantics where possible, but deliberately use POST when we are making finer grain API calls. </blockquote> And...now I am going to contradict that. I see that the general wisom is to use POST if you want the server to create the unique ID for you, and PUT if you know it a-priori....so we will probably be using POST for things like Cert creation where the Serial number comes from the server. <blockquote cite="mid:4E9CC9C2.6020600@redhat.com" type="cite"> <blockquote cite="mid:4E9CC3FA.3010605@redhat.com" type="cite"> I also noticed that you have two GET versions of "pki/key". Is that kind of duplication encouraged? Or is that really just the same api entity with different input payloads? 2. You suggested I take a look at some of the TKS TokenServlet stuff. I noticed that we have a simple short list of servlets that appear to return very short lived resources. Examples being, session keys , encrypted data , and a block of randomly generated data. I would imagine it would be a POST op like something as follows: POST /pki/tks/sessionKey , which would return a link to the key itself? But does it make sense to have a "resource" for something so short lived, or does this concept even belong in such a design? </blockquote> In general, REST works best if the service is stateless. Session based information should be minimized if possible. <blockquote cite="mid:4E9CC3FA.3010605@redhat.com" type="cite"> 3. I was just curious about the Java back-end for this design. Will we be using the JAX-RS stuff that provides annotations in the java code in order to hook all of this up? </blockquote> I am not a fan of annotations. Under other circumstances, I might be prone to say "well, that is the way of the world" and go with JAX-RS, but since we don not yet have a set of Entity objects that would drive the JAX-RS, I am more prone to look at other alternatives. THere are good libraries for serializing to JSON or XML that should be sufficient for our needs, and that will keep us from having to make our API conform to JAX-RS. So my inclination is to say no to JAX-RS to start. <blockquote cite="mid:4E9CC3FA.3010605@redhat.com" type="cite"> thanks, jack </blockquote> Ade's document has founds its way into the wiki world: <a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://pki.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Dogtag_Future_Directions">http://pki.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Dogtag_Future_Directions</a> I might have made some Wiki errors in translation. If this contradicts Ade's spreadsheet, assume the spreadsheet is Canonical. <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset> <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________ Pki-devel mailing list <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:Pki-devel@redhat.com">Pki-devel@redhat.com</a> <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel">https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pki-devel</a> </pre> </blockquote> </body> </html>