Route Server Integration feature swagger changes #19215
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
|
Hi, @anchalkpr Thanks for your PR. I am workflow bot for review process. Here are some small tips. Any feedback about review process or workflow bot, pls contact swagger and tools team. vscswagger@microsoft.com |
Swagger Validation Report
|
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
| OperationId should contain the verb: 'learnedipprefixes' in:'AzureFirewalls_ListLearnedPrefixes'. Consider updating the operationId Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L389 |
The following errors/warnings exist before current PR submission:
Only 30 items are listed, please refer to log for more details.
| Rule | Message |
|---|---|
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallIPConfigurationPropertiesFormat' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L443 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallIPConfiguration' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L466 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallPublicIPAddress' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L495 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallIpGroups' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L504 |
|
The schema 'HubPublicIPAddresses' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L519 |
|
The schema 'HubIPAddresses' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L536 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallPropertiesFormat' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L556 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewall' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L627 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallListResult' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L654 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallApplicationRuleCollectionPropertiesFormat' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L690 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallApplicationRuleCollection' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L720 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallApplicationRuleProtocol' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L744 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallApplicationRule' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L762 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNatRuleCollectionProperties' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L810 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNatRuleCollection' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L840 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNatRule' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L864 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNatRCAction' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L924 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNetworkRuleCollectionPropertiesFormat' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L945 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNetworkRuleCollection' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L975 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallNetworkRule' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L999 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallRCAction' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L1061 |
|
The schema 'AzureFirewallSku' is considered an object but without a 'type:object', please add the missing 'type:object'. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L1109 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L521 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L705 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L779 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L825 |
|
Missing identifier id in array item property Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json#L960 |
| 'PUT' operation 'FirewallPolicyIdpsSignaturesOverrides_Put' should use method name 'Create'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/firewallPolicy.json#L740 |
|
| 'PATCH' operation 'FirewallPolicyIdpsSignaturesOverrides_Patch' should use method name 'Update'. Note: If you have already shipped an SDK on top of this spec, fixing this warning may introduce a breaking change. Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/firewallPolicy.json#L685 |
|
| Consider using x-ms-client-flatten to provide a better end user experience Location: Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/firewallPolicy.json#L2123 |
️️✔️Avocado succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for Avocado.
️️✔️ModelValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for ModelValidation.
️️✔️SemanticValidation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SemanticValidation.
️️✔️Cross-Version Breaking Changes succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
There are no breaking changes.
- Compared Swaggers (Based on Oad v0.9.5)
- current:stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json compared with base:stable/2021-08-01/azureFirewall.json
- current:stable/2022-01-01/firewallPolicy.json compared with base:stable/2021-08-01/firewallPolicy.json
️️✔️SDK Track2 Validation succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SDKTrack2Validation
- The following tags are being changed in this PR
️️✔️PrettierCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for PrettierCheck.
️️✔️SpellCheck succeeded [Detail] [Expand]
Validation passes for SpellCheck.
Swagger Generation Artifacts
|
|
Here is a link the the ARM API review document that is already approved |
|
Hi @anchalkpr, Your PR has some issues. Please fix the CI sequentially by following the order of
|
This was referenced May 25, 2022
[AutoPR armnetwork] Route Server Integration feature swagger changes
azure-sdk/azure-sdk-for-go#1108
Closed
Closed
|
@anchalkpr , could you fix the tool check errors for lintdiff and modelvalidation? Thanks |
lirenhe
added
WaitForARMFeedback
lirenhe
reviewed
May 26, 2022
...manager/Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/examples/AzureFirewallListLearnedIPPrefixes.json
Outdated
Show resolved
Hide resolved
mentat9
reviewed
Jun 3, 2022
specification/network/resource-manager/Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
mentat9
reviewed
Jun 3, 2022
specification/network/resource-manager/Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
mentat9
reviewed
Jun 3, 2022
specification/network/resource-manager/Microsoft.Network/stable/2022-01-01/azureFirewall.json
Show resolved
Hide resolved
mentat9
reviewed
Jun 3, 2022
| @@ -1587,6 +1587,10 @@ | |||
| "items": { | |||
| "type": "string" | |||
| } | |||
| }, | |||
| "autoLearnPrivateRanges": { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mentat9 What is the benefit of having an enum here?
mentat9
added
the
ARMChangesRequested
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
WaitForARMFeedback
|
We have created a PBI item to migrate to v3 common types. Product Backlog Item 14644404 [Swagger] Azure Networking needs to start using common-types v3 in swagger (visualstudio.com). This will be fixed in the next release. |
mentat9
added
the
ARMSignedOff
openapi-workflow-bot
bot
removed
the
ARMChangesRequested
lirenhe
approved these changes
Jun 8, 2022
lirenhe
pushed a commit
that referenced
this pull request
Jun 23, 2022
* Adds base for updating Microsoft.Network from version stable/2021-08-01 to version 2022-01-01 * Updates readme * Updates API version in new specs and examples * Updated Explicit proxy settings by adding one boolean field to it (#19011) * API for provider port (#19041) * Update readme.md * Create expressRouteProviderPort.json * Create expressRouteProviderPortList.json * Create expressRouteProviderPort.json * Update custom-words.txt * Update expressRouteProviderPort.json * Update expressRouteProviderPortList.json * Update expressRouteProviderPort.json * Add WAF match variable operators (#18925) ### webapplicationfirewall.json * Add GreaterThanOrEquals operator and Any operator to custom rule match conditions in WAF policy spec * Add VirtualHub Router autoscale configuration (#19131) Co-authored-by: Andrii Kalinichenko <ankalini@microsoft.com> * Adding rule priority to Tls Proxy routing rule object model (#19135) Co-authored-by: Vinay Mundada <vimundad@microsoft.com> * swagger changes for new ssl policies (#19183) * Update Swagger Spec for VMSS Packet Capture (#19202) * Update Swagger Spec for VMSS Packet Capture * Remove extra line * Update Swagger spec for Connection Monitor VMSS (#19203) * Adding new endpoint in ConnectionMonitor * Changing ConnectionMonitor endpoints order * Add flushConnection to NSG (#19085) * Merge NetworkManger into 2022-01-01 (#19169) * Merge NetworkManger into 2022-01-01 * Remove EffectiveVnet APIs * Remove SecurityUser Resource * update readme * Fix as comments * fix as comments * remove network group type * Add new parameter noInternetAdvertise to CustomIPPrefix (#19340) * fix * fix Co-authored-by: Weiheng Li <weihl@microsoft.com> * Route Server Integration feature swagger changes (#19215) * Route Server Integration feature swagger changes * prettier run changes * updating api version in examples file * fixing test errors * fixing test errors * fixing modelvalidation errors * fixing test errors * fixing modelvalidation errors * changes based on review comments * fixing lintdiff failure * updating examples * update wrong enum value for customipprefix (#19382) * fix * fix * fix Co-authored-by: Weiheng Li <weihl@microsoft.com> * Updated ExplicitProxySettings to ExplicitProxy on Firewall Policy ver2022-01-01 (#19299) Co-authored-by: Gizachew Eshetie <v-geshetie@microsoft.com> * Add resource type (#19434) Co-authored-by: Andrii Kalinichenko <ankalini@microsoft.com> * Fix prettier errors (#19462) Co-authored-by: Andrii Kalinichenko <ankalini@microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: uditmisra52 <103006702+uditmisra52@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: jashsing-mic <79445297+jashsing-mic@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Anurag Kishore <kishore.1337.anurag@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: AndriiKalinichenko <kalinichenkoandrew@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Andrii Kalinichenko <ankalini@microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: Vinay Jayant Mundada <vinaymundada27@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Vinay Mundada <vimundad@microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: kaushik-ms <103559254+kaushik-ms@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: snagpal99 <95475229+snagpal99@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: kumaam <102141910+kumaam@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Satya-anshu <70507845+Satya-anshu@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: yanfa317 <53584318+yanfa317@users.noreply.github.com> Co-authored-by: Weiheng Li <weihengli.tj@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Weiheng Li <weihl@microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: Anchal Kapoor <ankapoo@microsoft.com> Co-authored-by: Gizachew-Eshetie <gizchanie@gmail.com> Co-authored-by: Gizachew Eshetie <v-geshetie@microsoft.com>
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
MSFT employees can try out our new experience at OpenAPI Hub - one location for using our validation tools and finding your workflow.
Changelog
Add a changelog entry for this PR by answering the following questions:
Contribution checklist:
If any further question about AME onboarding or validation tools, please view the FAQ.
ARM API Review Checklist
Otherwise your PR may be subject to ARM review requirements. Complete the following:
Check this box if any of the following appy to the PR so that the label "ARMReview" and "WaitForARMFeedback" will be added by bot to kick off ARM API Review. Missing to check this box in the following scenario may result in delays to the ARM manifest review and deployment.
-[ ] To review changes efficiently, ensure you are using OpenAPIHub to initialize the PR for adding a new version. More details, refer to the wiki.
Ensure you've reviewed following guidelines including ARM resource provider contract and REST guidelines. Estimated time (4 hours). This is required before you can request review from ARM API Review board.
If you are blocked on ARM review and want to get the PR merged with urgency, please get the ARM oncall for reviews (RP Manifest Approvers team under Azure Resource Manager service) from IcM and reach out to them.
Breaking Change Review Checklist
If any of the following scenarios apply to the PR, request approval from the Breaking Change Review Board as defined in the Breaking Change Policy.
Action: to initiate an evaluation of the breaking change, create a new intake using the template for breaking changes. Addition details on the process and office hours are on the Breaking change Wiki.
Please follow the link to find more details on PR review process.