Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add diagrams to e2e consumer and provider tests #180

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

ma3u
Copy link

@ma3u ma3u commented Dec 19, 2024

Description

Add diagrams to e2e consumer and provider tests

Pre-review checks

Please ensure to do as many of the following checks as possible, before asking for committer review:

Copy link
Contributor

@mgarciaLKS mgarciaLKS left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Both diagrams look good and helpful to me.

Copy link
Member

@stephanbcbauer stephanbcbauer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM thx @ma3u

Copy link

@lgblaumeiser lgblaumeiser left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Some unclear things, please make it more precise.

Alice->>EDC_C: 8. Request Data
EDC_C->>EDC_P: 9. EDR Request
Note over EDC_C,EDC_P: Include auth token & endpoint
EDC_P->>Bob: 10. Validate EDR

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

What is Bob here doing? Imho, Bob is not concerned with EDR creation


EDC_C->>EDC_P: 13. Data Transfer Request
Note over EDC_C,EDC_P: With EDR token
EDC_P->>Bob: 14. Fetch Data

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That is a bit ambiguous, as Bob is here the participant, not the participants backend system which stores some data. I would prefer to have Bob as an active person and the backend system as an own entitiy.


Alice->>EDC_C: 1. Query Catalog
EDC_C->>EDC_P: 2. Request Catalog
EDC_P-->>EDC_C: 3. Return Available Assets

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wouldn't it make sense to add the validation of the access policies here?


Alice->>EDC_C: 5. Negotiate Contract
EDC_C->>EDC_P: 6. Contract Offer
EDC_P-->>EDC_C: 7. Contract Agreement

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Wouldn't it make sense to add the validation of the policies here, especially the credentials?

EDC_P-->>EDC_C: 12. EDR Response
Note over EDC_P,EDC_C: Contains data endpoint & token

EDC_C->>EDC_P: 13. Data Transfer Request

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Alice initiates the transfer, right?

Note over Bob,EDC: Access & usage constrains
Bob->>EDC: 3. Create Contract Definition
Note over Bob,EDC: To link asset & policy
EDC->>Alice: 4. Asset Discovery

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not favorable. With only the provider EDC in the game, you cannot describe Alice to retrieve the catalog, at least you should use ports here, to show, that Bob is using the management api to do his stuff and Alice is using the DSP api to retrieve the catalog. As is is decribed here, I would think that Alice is using the management api as well and we talk about a shared api-key scenario. This should not be indicated in any documentation.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Todo
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants