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

Clarification: Behaviour when requested duration < minDuration #247

Closed
jlurien opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 7 comments · Fixed by #259
Closed

Clarification: Behaviour when requested duration < minDuration #247

jlurien opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 7 comments · Fixed by #259
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@jlurien
Copy link
Collaborator

jlurien commented Dec 19, 2023

Problem description

Question I get from our dev team:

Currently the minimum duration for a session in the spec is just 1 second, but GET /qos-profiles allow to return a minDuration per profile. Behaviour when a value lower than minDuration is requested is not documented.

Possible evolution

Some options I see:

a) Implementation will set duration to minDuration, and return it in the response, in cases when input duration is lower than that value.

b) Implementations will return a 400 error with a dedicated message.

This is kind of scenarios that need to be modeled in the test plan.

@jlurien jlurien added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 19, 2023
@hdamker hdamker changed the title Clarification: Behaviour when requested duration > minDuration Clarification: Behaviour when requested duration < minDuration Dec 21, 2023
@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator

hdamker commented Dec 21, 2023

Hi @jlurien ... i suppose you meant in the title "if requested duration < minDuration" and have corrected it accordingly. Said this, the preferred option on our side would be b) (a 400 error with a dedicated message). We plan to set the minimum duration probably to 10 seconds within the profiles.

@jlurien
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jlurien commented Dec 21, 2023

Thanks for the title correction. 400 is acceptable here, IMO also.

@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator

hdamker commented Jan 23, 2024

@jlurien will you create the PR with the 400 or should I? I would like to have it ready to merge this week, as it should go into v0.10.0 release.

@jlurien
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jlurien commented Jan 23, 2024

I can create it

@jlurien
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jlurien commented Jan 23, 2024

@hdamker Should I propose the PR for the main branch? do we keep version as 0.10.0-rc or should we upgrade it to 0.10.0-rc2?

@hdamker
Copy link
Collaborator

hdamker commented Jan 23, 2024

Yes, for main.

In my mind the version is again 0.10.0-wip (= "unreleased"), until we decide and create a new release candidate 0.10.0-rc2 or the final release of 0.10.0. But the first merge after 0.10.0-rc is not already 0.10.0-rc2.

@jlurien
Copy link
Collaborator Author

jlurien commented Jan 23, 2024

Yes, for main.

In my mind the version is again 0.10.0-wip (= "unreleased"), until we decide and create a new release candidate 0.10.0-rc2 or the final release of 0.10.0. But the first merge after 0.10.0-rc is not already 0.10.0-rc2.

Ok, that's fine to me

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants