Implementing structured error reports ("Problem Details for HTTP APIs")?
Hello, IETF approved the future RFC draft-ietf-appsawg-http-problem "Problem Details for HTTP APIs" which standardize structured error reports (in JSON) to add machine-readable information to HTTP error codes. Would it be a good idea to convert current Atlas reports ({"error":{"status":400,"code":104,"detail":"__all__: Your selected prefix is not covered by our network.","title":"Bad Request"}}) to the new and standard format?
On 2016-02-22 11:08, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Hello,
IETF approved the future RFC draft-ietf-appsawg-http-problem "Problem Details for HTTP APIs" which standardize structured error reports (in JSON) to add machine-readable information to HTTP error codes.
Would it be a good idea to convert current Atlas reports ({"error":{"status":400,"code":104,"detail":"__all__: Your selected prefix is not covered by our network.","title":"Bad Request"}}) to the new and standard format?
Thanks for the heads up! We'll look at this, most likely when it actually becomes an RFC :) Regards, Robert
The 'new and standard' way of structuring API requests and output is here, that I/We am/are trying to adhere to is here: http://jsonapi.org/ <http://jsonapi.org/> For errors especially: http://jsonapi.org/format/#errors <http://jsonapi.org/format/#errors> greetings, Jasper
On 22 Feb 2016, at 12:03, Robert Kisteleki <robert@ripe.net> wrote:
On 2016-02-22 11:08, Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
Hello,
IETF approved the future RFC draft-ietf-appsawg-http-problem "Problem Details for HTTP APIs" which standardize structured error reports (in JSON) to add machine-readable information to HTTP error codes.
Would it be a good idea to convert current Atlas reports ({"error":{"status":400,"code":104,"detail":"__all__: Your selected prefix is not covered by our network.","title":"Bad Request"}}) to the new and standard format?
Thanks for the heads up! We'll look at this, most likely when it actually becomes an RFC :)
Regards, Robert
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:07:18PM +0100, Jasper den Hertog <jdenhertog@ripe.net> wrote a message of 142 lines which said:
The 'new and standard' way of structuring API requests and output is here, that I/We am/are trying to adhere to is here:
I don't know if it was mentioned at the IETF during the discussion before the approval of draft-ietf-appsawg-http-problem but it is annoying there are two standards... [Insert mandatory xkcd picture on standards.]
On Mon, Feb 22, 2016 at 12:03:18PM +0100, Robert Kisteleki <robert@ripe.net> wrote a message of 17 lines which said:
Thanks for the heads up! We'll look at this, most likely when it actually becomes an RFC :)
RFC 7807 has been published (no, not today :-)
participants (3)
-
Jasper den Hertog -
Robert Kisteleki -
Stephane Bortzmeyer