provides lease extension spec #311
Conversation
OlegDokuka
requested review from
linux-china,
nebhale,
smaldini,
yschimke,
stevegury,
rstoyanchev,
spencergibb,
benjchristensen and
rdegnan
OlegDokuka
force-pushed
the
enchancement/leasing-extension
branch
2 times, most recently
from
daf81c3
to
0c3d3a3
Compare
OlegDokuka
force-pushed
the
enchancement/leasing-extension
branch
from
0c3d3a3
to
7fb802c
Compare
OlegDokuka
changed the title
OlegDokuka
force-pushed
the
enchancement/leasing-extension
branch
from
d791254
to
dc64b5f
Compare
OlegDokuka
force-pushed
the
enchancement/leasing-extension
branch
from
dc64b5f
to
3a6f1e2
Compare
| [wk]: WellKnownLeaseStrategies.md | ||
|
|
||
| Note, if the selected lease strategy has a different frame layout than the default one, the first [`LEASE`][lf] frame MUST follow the default [`LEASE`][lf] frame layout, in order to let the `Client` read metadata field content | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This should also deal with the possibility that a server does not specify any strategy in the LEASE frame such as when the server is unaware of and does not support the extension. I suppose in that case "Request Count" is chosen by default although the client may not have included that in its list of choices. Should "Request Count" be required then as a fallback?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
also, we should mention that the first lease frame may have zero ttl and zero permits in order to specify lease preferences
|
|
||
| ### Handling Unexpected | ||
|
|
||
| If `Server` does not specify lease strategy defined in the [negotiation](#negotiation) section, the `Client` MUST close the connection with the __CONNECTION_ERROR__ [Error Code][ec] and reestablishe connection without specifying lease strategies or without leasing at all. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
typo reestablishe -> reestablish
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Protocol lease semantics section also need to be adapted with support for new lease strategies.
But I'm really curious, is it really ok, to change layout of frame, by extension? Isn't it better (if possible) to change layout of lease frame to have some Lease payload that will be decoded differently, depending on specified strategy. Almost nothing will be changed, except, that current default lease strategy description will be moved from core protocol, and so it will be easily understandable, that lease frame payload can be different (something similar to authentication spec). Such change is more related to how, it will be written in spec, and should not affect implementation details, described in proposal
Co-authored-by: Oleg Yukhnevich <whyoleg@gmail.com>
This PR provides a Lease frame extension so now one can override a default Lease strategy and provide one of the supported or event implement a custom one using
CompositeMetadataextensions during the setup phase.Note, this does not break existing Lease spec and is just an addition which is enabled only when the Metadata Payload content is present in the setup metadata