-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 273
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
Support request/reply pattern #94
Comments
Thanks for the suggestion @adrianhopebailie. I think we'll need to somehow support the request/response pattern in the future. We need to figure out how to properly design it so it ages well in the spec. Sorry for the short answer, this feature can't be added quickly without adding so much complexity to the current spec status. I'll have a look in detail as soon as I have time. |
+1 to this from me. Common pattern on messaging platforms. Done many such implementations on WebSphere MQ in a former life. As mentioned above, #78 would be fundamental to this. Something in the style of a Callback Object would be a good approach. |
Also +1 |
Interesting, I haven't heard about MQTT 5. Going to take a look. Thanks for commenting! |
Doing the investigation on this for a post v2.0.0 solution |
Hi there, we are starting to use async communication more and more and we have both variants in use, the basic request/response pattern where we send an responseEvent parameter like the mqtt corrId, on incoming data it will do stuff and send the wanted information back to the responseEvent. Also we use the publish/subscribe pattern were we need it. So we are very intereseted to get this into the definition. For me the most flexible way would be just a combination of
I think a flexible and good way would be to name subscribe as mentioned "request" https://www.asyncapi.com/docs/specifications/2.0.0-rc1/#operationObject For example:
If we assume errors / success status, we could just create a template by our own defintions which we can $ref in a, for example, called "status" property
With the use of the operation object we would not get into trouble in my opinion, as the definition should cover all feature variants of communication, so the operation object will be mutated and extended in future versions of asyncapi and that will extend also the response type. What do you think? |
The suggestion of @prdatur matches pretty well with our thought (except we would expect the response/reply object on the same structural level as the request object). |
hey, any update on this? |
It's on the list for the next minor versions. Any research on how this could be done is appreciated. |
Interested party here also for request/response pattern! |
@fmvilas Any draft available for a sneak peek? |
Hey @basickarl! There's no literature on this yet. Anything you can provide as a starting point would be greatly appreciated. |
Request-Response in the context of MQTT 5.
|
Slightly different scenarios. The one in the MQTT has a broker. Client <-> Broker <-> Client. I'm specifically interested in the Client <-> Client scenario, e.g. for WebSocket connections from web clients to servers. Also for public facing WebSocket API's. |
@fmvilas based on your first examples which is a way we can go. I have one question or one change request. We should just name the reply queue within the request definition like adding a new field before "correlationId" which is named "replyTo" of type string, this string can hold an existing channel which defines the response data. Another way would be a variable as the channel, in this case a generator or user will not be confused to check wether the channel is just a response or actually a channel which the client can subscribe.
So this channel would define the response channel which is located within the rpc_queue message header field "replyTo". The definition will be a subscribe operation. Third option is to define that if publish and subscribe exists within the same channel declares that this channel is a request / response operation. A self subscribing channel where the software will publish data would be a bit confusing :) So we can use this for the request response definition. What do you mean? |
I think that opening the door for expressions in the channel name would open a door for potential complexity but we will explore it.
Does it make sense? |
I understood that this is a However with this, we currently have two problems First, the response is not linked to any operation. After I used and wrote the word "operation" I might got a solution, why not link the operationId's... they must be unique per definition, so we could use something like Second, linking such a response to a publish operation we are not able to know for which message the response is Let me explain. {
"action": "do-something",
"data": "...."
} This means, a schema will look like: publish:
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/message1'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/message2'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/message3' If we have only one response channel, we will not know if the defined response is for message 1, 2 or 3. Also If we define 3 response messages, we will not know if the response message 1 will be published for message 1, 2 or 3. So with a simple change to not link the response channel to publish operation, we should link a response to a message. So the solution with channel expression would be one way.
I would prefer the expression, because it will not be a big change within the specification, but yes it will be more complex also for generators. Example of messageId solution: components:
messages:
responseSum:
payload:
type: object
properties:
result:
type: number
examples:
- 7
responseDevide:
payload:
type: object
properties:
result:
type: float
examples:
- 7.5
operationSum:
bindings:
amqp:
replyTo:
type: string
responseTo: '#/components/messages/responseSum'
payload:
type: object
properties:
operation:
type: string
enum:
- sum
numbers:
type: array
items:
type: number
examples:
- [4,3]
operationDevide:
bindings:
amqp:
replyTo:
type: string
responseTo: '#/components/messages/responseDevide'
payload:
type: object
properties:
operation:
type: string
enum:
- devide
numbers:
type: array
items:
type: number
examples:
- [15,2]
channels:
'{responseQueue}':
parameters:
responseQueue:
schema:
type: string
pattern: '^amq\\.gen\\-.+$'
bindings:
amqp:
is: queue
queue:
exclusive: true
subscribe:
bindings:
amqp:
ack: true
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/responseSum'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/responseDevide'
rpc_queue:
bindings:
amqp:
is: queue
queue:
durable: false
publish:
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/operationSum'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/operationDevide' Example for using just response within the message components:
messages:
responseSum:
payload:
type: object
properties:
result:
type: number
examples:
- 7
responseDevide:
payload:
type: object
properties:
result:
type: float
examples:
- 7.5
operationSum:
bindings:
amqp:
replyTo:
type: string
response:
$ref: '#/components/messages/responseSum'
payload:
type: object
properties:
operation:
type: string
enum:
- sum
numbers:
type: array
items:
type: number
examples:
- [4,3]
operationDevide:
bindings:
amqp:
replyTo:
type: string
response:
$ref: '#/components/messages/responseDevide'
payload:
type: object
properties:
operation:
type: string
enum:
- devide
numbers:
type: array
items:
type: number
examples:
- [15,2]
channels:
rpc_queue:
bindings:
amqp:
is: queue
queue:
durable: false
publish:
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/operationSum'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/operationDevide' Problem we have not defined the queue for the response. The problem is, that the request/response is really needed by us now. So it would be nice if we can get this finished. :) Anyway, as a real quick answer. Yes your explanation makes sense but we have no information which message will get response if someone publish to rpc_queue :) |
After a discussion with a co-worker, we will just use an components:
messages:
responseMessage1:
...
responseMessage2:
...
channels:
'{rQueue}':
...
subscribe:
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/responseMessage1'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/responseMessage2'
pubQueue:
...
publish:
...
message:
...
x-responses:
$ref: '#/components/messages/responseMessage1' Or if we have multiple responses like the example with ack, status, response pubQueue:
...
publish:
...
message:
...
x-responses:
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/responseMessage1' This allows us to define all required things (channel, messages) and just link the message to the response message so the documentator for example place a link below one of the accepeted messages to the response message. Maybe we can use this idea as the solution and just remove the |
Me and a co-worker had a chat and we would like to support several different actions on a "channel". for channel If you guys head over to https://crossbar.io/ (responsible for the WAMP protocol) and look at their fancy gif on the home page a little further down, you'll see a chronological scenario of what we want to accomplish via asyncapi. An example of how thew asyncapi could be updated to support it:
And we can take it a step further and include ACKs (inspired by mqtt 5.0):
Again, take a look at the gif at https://crossbar.io/. Regarding the mqtt 5.0 inspiration, comes from the following: https://docs.oasis-open.org/mqtt/mqtt/v5.0/os/mqtt-v5.0-os.html#_Toc3901121 (It feels like asyncapi would have to include these properties if it wants to help support mqtt 5.0?) I also understand @prdatur approach but would as @fmvilas says let people do their own thing and increase complexity. With the suggestion I proposed it would add on to how asyncapi is already written, add structure and also help conform to mqtt 5.0. |
{queue} problem@prdatur cant figure out if this is a current problem you have or a suggestion for solution to request reply 😄 If it is a current problemIf it is a current problem is this not something that can be solved at the implementation level i.e. is there a use-case for this property to be present in the specification? If we take template clients they would look at your AsyncAPI file and (dependent on the implementation of course) create a method for your channel `'{responseQueue}'` where you can subscribe a callback (or whatever) and get notified when a response ticks in. The generated client then tries parsing the received data to one of the `oneOf` messages and call your callback with the given message. Then with the use of `correlationId` (or something else) you can cross check and figure out which response has returned?If it is a suggestion for the request reply, then I gotta say I am more a fan of doing something like @basickarl suggests, at the channel level, which would provide complete clarity what is defined as request and reply in a given channel without having to go through the request operation first 😄 Request reply suggestion
@basickarl isn't this a bit too specific for mqtt for it to be in a specification? Many other protocols just have request/reply and pubsub, which is what I see as the commonality between the protocols I have encountered. However I also like the idea of adding channels:
mychannel/{myChannelId}/:
request: ...
response: ...
subscribe: ...
publish: ... One question i'd like to raise: IF request/reply is not a feature we foresee as a standard feature for all protocols should it really be included in the specification and not just stay in the bindings as a boolean or a request/reply property for those protocols which do support it? |
@jonaslagoni As stated every protocol implements their own terminology for these things so I guess AsyncAPI will either have to add ALL of these terms to make everyone happy or put their foot down and define terms that everyone should adopt. These terms should however be able to satisfy what you wish to do with each protocol. MQTT was just an example, and one of the specs in MQTT 5.0 was that when you send a subscribe message than it sends a subscribe acknowledgement back to who sent the subscribe message. If we wished to implement this today and specify it in a document AsyncAPI would fall short. And answering your last question @jonaslagoni I don't see the harm in adding these things, you don't need to add it to your own AsyncAPI documentation, if you don't use request/response pattern in your API, just don't include it! |
+1 |
Would like to say we have forked 4 of the repos from https://github.com/asyncapi and have implemented the following:
It's fufilling our needs pretty well. |
Unfortunately I left the company as I was there on a project basis! I do still support this though! |
Hi folks, We have many amqp request reply communication between services as many people today. Keep in touch and hope a support for this soon. So thank you for your amazing stuff. |
Just dropping in to point out that this issue started 4 years ago. If async API is never going to support request/reply, I'd rather know that now rather than investing in a format that will ultimately never suit my needs. |
@autodidaddict thanks for taking the time to share your feedback, not many do. AsyncAPI Initiative is community-driven, with all needed mechanisms in place that enable anyone to contribute, work on features openly in a transparent environment. Some changes in the spec require a driver (champion), just nobody yet drove it to the end. There was a great attempt by @smarek (#594) but looks like he discontinued the work and we simply need someone else to champion this topic. The problem is that many people come and say "it is needed" and make some generic statements on "need for request/reply", but nobody really takes time to share in detail their use cases. Without clear and documented use cases, individual maintainers of the spec are unable to pick it up and work on the topic, thus we look forward to contributors. Some time ago I recorded this simple guide for spec contributors -> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQYyGlMzJCc |
Of course! What time and date would you suggest? That way we can set up the meeting as all the other meetings for everyone to join. |
Meeting scheduled: asyncapi/community#352 cc @smarek in case you still want to champion it 🙂 |
collected use cases:A: Topic based messaging using a broker: Well defined response topic + "correlationId".There you have a well defined response topic. That could be found in spec. B: Topic based messaging using a broker: Per process individual inbox aka. "replyTopic" + "correlationId".It works mostly the same as option A. C: Topic based messaging using a broker: Temporary reply topic for a individual response. Only "replyTopic"For reach request there will be a dedicated response topic. Otherwise it is the same as option B. D: WebSocket without topics: The channel is a tcp connection where flow messages. Only "correlationId"It works the same as option A. target to be reached by the spec
results of call from 16. MaySample for use case A, Dchannels:
user.creation.channel:
message:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/createUser'
user.creation.response.channel:
message:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/creationSucessfull'
operations:
createUser:
action: send
channel: user.creation.channel
description: Creates a user and expects a response in the same channel.
reply:
channel: user.creation.response.channel
components:
messages:
createUser:
type: request
name: CreateUser
summary: Represents an explicit request to the service xyz
contentType: application/json
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
description: This header have to be copied to the response message.
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/createUser'
creationSucessfull:
type: response
name: CreationWasSucessfull
summary: an entity was created
contentType: application/json
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/creationSucessfull'
Sample for use case B, Cchannels:
user.creation.channel:
message:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/createUser'
operations:
createUser:
action: send
channel: user.creation.channel
description: Creates a user and expects a response in the same channel.
reply:
replyTopic:
source: header
field: replyTo
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/creationFailed'
- $ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/creationSucessfull'
components:
messages:
createUser:
type: request
name: CreateUser
summary: Represents an explicit request to the service xyz
contentType: application/json
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
- replyTo
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
replyTo:
type: string
pattern: user.creation.response.([^.]+)
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/createUser'
creationSucessfull:
type: response
name: CreationWasSucessfull
summary: an entity was created
contentType: application/json
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/creationSucessfull'
New defined schema elementsoperations.*.actiontype: string
enum:
- send
- receive This is the replacement of async api v2 components.messages.*.typetype: string
default: generic
enum:
- generic
- request
- response Specify a messages as request or response. To give the code generator a hint. components.messages.*.replyComplex type. type: object
properties:
channel:
type: string
description: referring to a defined element in channels section
message:
type: object
description: Either message or channel have to be set, to define the response message schema. If both are given, the message object will overwrite the message of the channel, all other options from the channel still take in place.
replyTopic:
type: object
description: |
Either replyTopic or channel have to be set, to define response topic. If both are given, the replyTopic will overwrite the topic of the channel, all other options from the channel still take in place.
The replyTopic describes where in the request message, the replyTopic can be found.
required:
- source
- field
properties:
source:
type: string
enum:
- header
- body
field:
type: string
description: the field name where the response topic string could be found. In case of the body, the replyTopic needs to be in a root level field. To define a request reply couple. components.messages.*.reply.channelThis field is optional. It should be set if:
components.messages.*.reply.messageThis field is optional. It should be set if:
components.messages.*.reply.replyTopicThis field is optional. It should be set if:
components.messages.*.reply.replyTopic.sourceThe request message contains the reply topic either in the message header or body. components.messages.*.reply.replyTopic.fieldThe field name where the response topic string could be found. In case of the body, the replyTopic needs to be in a root level field. Sub level pathes can not be defined. |
Thanks a lot for this breakdown @GreenRover 👏 This is definitely what we need in order to move forward. IIRC, we should also look into JSON RPC as a use case so it can be covered as well. |
Is there some one out in the wild that can provide input for JSON RPC? I never used it before. So if there is no one i have to start reading. |
Not myself but there was a person in the call who said they were using it. Maybe they join next call 🤔 |
Yes that was me, I'll describe our use case ASAP (probably tomorrow) |
@GreenRover in the meantime if your curious the spec is here ans it's fairly simple: |
So here is how we currently use JSON RPC 2.0: We have servers that can handle multiple methods. For sake of example let's say our server supports the following 2 methods:
Our server listens over MQTT for JSON RPC requests at the following topic: For MQTT 5, the server will reply to the topic specified by the client in the responseTopic property. This can be anything as the client is responsible for choosing that topic. Therefore it doesn't really make sense to document that topic in the AsyncAPI definition of the server. For MQTT 3 the server will reply to the When used with MQTT the correlationData field of MQTT5 is not really important since JSON RPC has a correlation ID already in the body of the message so it's not used or could be set to the JSON RPC Id. So in a nutshell what we need is a way to describe multiple methods that are all received on the same topic and also describe the schema of the reply (that needs to be linked with the method) JSON RPC also has the concept of notifications. A notification is a message send without an ID by the client. When a notification is received, the server must not reply so in that case a response schema is not necessary. Of some interest is also the fact the server can support other transports than MQTT for the JSON RPC aspect. We usually support UDP/TCP/WebSockets as well. Could be nice if there was a way to represent this in AsyncAPI (although it might be out of scope). Here's an example of how addUser and delete user would work: request -->
response <--
The server could also respond with an error:
What we're mostly interested in documenting via a schema is the Let me know if this is clear or if you need me to elaborate further ! Thanks :) |
Hey folks, leaving the examples I shared on my screen during the last call: # channels.yaml (probably defined and maintained at company level)
asyncapi: 3.0.0
channels:
userCreationChannel:
address: user.creation.channel
message:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/createUser'
userCreationChannelWithType2:
address: user.creation.channel
message:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/createUser2'
userCreationReply:
address: null
message:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/creationFailed'
- $ref: '#/components/messages/creationSuccessful'
userCreationSuccessfulReply:
address: null
message:
- $ref: '#/components/messages/creationSuccessful'
components:
messages:
createUser:
...
createUser2:
...
creationFailed:
...
creationSuccessful:
... # myapplication.yaml (owned by my team)
asyncapi: 3.0.0
operations:
createUserWithSucessfulReply:
action: send
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/userCreationChannelWithType2'
description: Creates a user and expects a response in the same channel.
reply:
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/userCreationSuccessfulReply' |
results of call from 23. MaySample for use case A, Dchannels:
user.creation.channel:
message:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/createUser'
user.creation.response.channel:
message:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/creationSucessfull'
operations:
createUser:
action: send
channel: user.creation.channel
description: Creates a user and expects a response in the same channel.
reply:
channel: user.creation.response.channel
components:
messages:
createUser:
type: request
name: CreateUser
summary: Represents an explicit request to the service xyz
contentType: application/json
correlationId:
description: Default Correlation ID
location: $message.header#/correlationId
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
description: This header have to be copied to the response message.
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/createUser'
creationSucessfull:
type: response
name: CreationWasSucessfull
summary: an entity was created
contentType: application/json
correlationId:
description: Default Correlation ID
location: $message.header#/correlationId
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/creationSucessfull'
Sample for use case B, Cchannels:
user.creation.channel:
message:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/createUser'
operations:
createUser:
action: send
channel: user.creation.channel
description: Creates a user and expects a response in the same channel.
reply:
message:
oneOf:
- $ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/creationFailed'
- $ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/messages/creationSucessfull'
components:
messages:
createUser:
type: request
name: CreateUser
summary: Represents an explicit request to the service xyz
contentType: application/json
correlationId:
description: Default Correlation ID
location: $message.header#/correlationId
replyTopic:
description: Default topic to answer to
location: $message.header#/replyTo
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
- replyTo
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
replyTo:
type: string
pattern: user.creation.response.([^.]+)
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/createUser'
creationSucessfull:
type: response
name: CreationWasSucessfull
summary: an entity was created
contentType: application/json
correlationId:
description: Default Correlation ID
location: $message.header#/correlationId
headers:
type: object
required:
- correlationId
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
payload:
$ref: 'sample.yaml#/components/schemas/creationSucessfull'
New defined schema elementscomponents.messages.*.typetype: string
default: generic
enum:
- generic
- request
- response Specify a messages as request or response. To give the code generator a hint. components.messages.*.replyTopicThis field is optional. For specifying and computing the location of a Correlation ID, a runtime expression is used. operations.*.actiontype: string
enum:
- send
- receive This is the replacement of async api v2 operations.*.replyComplex type. type: object
properties:
channel:
type: string
description: referring to a defined element in channels section
message:
type: object
description: Either message or channel have to be set, to define the response message schema. If both are given, the message object will overwrite the message of the channel, all other options from the channel still take in place. To define a request reply couple. operations.*.reply.channelThis field is optional. It should be set if:
operations.*.reply.messageThis field is optional. It should be set if:
|
results of call from 23. May, off topic: message / channelIn async api v2 -> v3 the relation between In v3: channelA asyncapi: 3.0.0
channels:
userCreationReply:
address: null
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/creationFailed'
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/creationSuccessful' In v2->v3 there is a bigger change: the channel name asyncapi: 3.0.0
channels:
userCreationChannel:
address: user.creation.channel
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/createUser'
For requestReply where the reply adress is part of the request message, the On going discussion:For request reply not to set
Optinion of meeting attendee: Have it defined as NULL makes it more clear and harder to over read. On going discussion:A channel can transport multiple messages schemas. --> See: "Assuming the In v3: operationA asyncapi: 3.0.0
operations:
createUserWithSucessfulReply:
action: send
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/userCreation'
message: '/components/messages/createUser'
description: Creates a user and expects a response in the same channel.
reply:
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/replies'
message: '/components/messages/createSuccesfull' Optinions:
Assuming the
|
Example: Converted the kraken 2.0.0 spec sample made by @fmvilas to 3.0.0 to kraken async api 3.0.0 example
asyncapi: 3.0.0
info:
title: Kraken Websockets API
version: '1.8.0'
description: |
WebSockets API offers real-time market data updates. WebSockets is a bidirectional protocol offering fastest real-time data, helping you build real-time applications. The public message types presented below do not require authentication. Private-data messages can be subscribed on a separate authenticated endpoint.
### General Considerations
- TLS with SNI (Server Name Indication) is required in order to establish a Kraken WebSockets API connection. See Cloudflare's [What is SNI?](https://www.cloudflare.com/learning/ssl/what-is-sni/) guide for more details.
- All messages sent and received via WebSockets are encoded in JSON format
- All decimal fields (including timestamps) are quoted to preserve precision.
- Timestamps should not be considered unique and not be considered as aliases for transaction IDs. Also, the granularity of timestamps is not representative of transaction rates.
- At least one private message should be subscribed to keep the authenticated client connection open.
- Please use REST API endpoint [AssetPairs](https://www.kraken.com/features/api#get-tradable-pairs) to fetch the list of pairs which can be subscribed via WebSockets API. For example, field 'wsname' gives the supported pairs name which can be used to subscribe.
- Cloudflare imposes a connection/re-connection rate limit (per IP address) of approximately 150 attempts per rolling 10 minutes. If this is exceeded, the IP is banned for 10 minutes.
- Recommended reconnection behaviour is to (1) attempt reconnection instantly up to a handful of times if the websocket is dropped randomly during normal operation but (2) after maintenance or extended downtime, attempt to reconnect no more quickly than once every 5 seconds. There is no advantage to reconnecting more rapidly after maintenance during cancel_only mode.
servers:
# i dont know how this section will look like in 3.0.0
channels:
ping:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/ping'
pong:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/pong'
heartbeat:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/heartbeat'
systemStatus:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/systemStatus'
subscriptionStatus:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/subscriptionStatus'
subscribe:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/subscribe'
unsubscribe:
address: /
message:
- $ref: 'channels.yaml#/components/messages/unsubscribe'
operations:
pingPong:
action: send
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/ping'
reply:
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/pong'
heartbeat:
action: receive
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/heartbeat'
systemStatus:
action: receive
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/systemStatus'
subscribe:
action: send
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/subscribe'
reply:
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/subscriptionStatus'
unsubscribe:
action: send
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/unsubscribe'
reply:
channel: 'channels.yaml#/channels/subscriptionStatus'
components:
messages:
ping:
summary: Ping server to determine whether connection is alive
description: Client can ping server to determine whether connection is alive, server responds with pong. This is an application level ping as opposed to default ping in websockets standard which is server initiated
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/ping'
headers:
type: object
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
correlationId:
location: $message.header#/correlationId
pong:
summary: Pong is a response to ping message
description: Server pong response to a ping to determine whether connection is alive. This is an application level pong as opposed to default pong in websockets standard which is sent by client in response to a ping
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/pong'
headers:
type: object
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
correlationId:
location: $message.header#/correlationId
subscribe:
description: Subscribe to a topic on a single or multiple currency pairs.
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/subscribe'
headers:
type: object
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
correlationId:
location: $message.header#/correlationId
unsubscribe:
description: Unsubscribe, can specify a channelID or multiple currency pairs.
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/unsubscribe'
headers:
type: object
properties:
correlationId:
type: string
correlationId:
location: $message.header#/correlationId
subscriptionStatus:
description: Subscription status response to subscribe, unsubscribe or exchange initiated unsubscribe.
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/subscriptionStatus'
examples:
- payload:
channelID: 10001
channelName: ohlc-5
event: subscriptionStatus
pair: XBT/EUR
reqid: 42
status: unsubscribed
subscription:
interval: 5
name: ohlc
- payload:
errorMessage: Subscription depth not supported
event: subscriptionStatus
pair: XBT/USD
status: error
subscription:
depth: 42
name: book
systemStatus:
description: Status sent on connection or system status changes.
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/systemStatus'
heartbeat:
description: Server heartbeat sent if no subscription traffic within 1 second (approximately)
payload:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/heartbeat'
schemas:
ping:
type: object
properties:
event:
type: string
const: ping
reqid:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/reqid'
required:
- event
heartbeat:
type: object
properties:
event:
type: string
const: heartbeat
pong:
type: object
properties:
event:
type: string
const: pong
reqid:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/reqid'
systemStatus:
type: object
properties:
event:
type: string
const: systemStatus
connectionID:
type: integer
description: The ID of the connection
status:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/status'
version:
type: string
status:
type: string
enum:
- online
- maintenance
- cancel_only
- limit_only
- post_only
subscribe:
type: object
properties:
event:
type: string
const: subscribe
reqid:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/reqid'
pair:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/pair'
subscription:
type: object
properties:
depth:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/depth'
interval:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/interval'
name:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/name'
ratecounter:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/ratecounter'
snapshot:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/snapshot'
token:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/token'
required:
- name
required:
- event
unsubscribe:
type: object
properties:
event:
type: string
const: unsubscribe
reqid:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/reqid'
pair:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/pair'
subscription:
type: object
properties:
depth:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/depth'
interval:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/interval'
name:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/name'
token:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/token'
required:
- name
required:
- event
subscriptionStatus:
type: object
oneOf:
- $ref: '#/components/schemas/subscriptionStatusError'
- $ref: '#/components/schemas/subscriptionStatusSuccess'
subscriptionStatusError:
allOf:
- properties:
errorMessage:
type: string
required:
- errorMessage
- $ref: '#/components/schemas/subscriptionStatusCommon'
subscriptionStatusSuccess:
allOf:
- properties:
channelID:
type: integer
description: ChannelID on successful subscription, applicable to public messages only.
channelName:
type: string
description: Channel Name on successful subscription. For payloads 'ohlc' and 'book', respective interval or depth will be added as suffix.
required:
- channelID
- channelName
- $ref: '#/components/schemas/subscriptionStatusCommon'
subscriptionStatusCommon:
type: object
required:
- event
properties:
event:
type: string
const: subscriptionStatus
reqid:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/reqid'
pair:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/pair'
status:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/status'
subscription:
required:
- name
type: object
properties:
depth:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/depth'
interval:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/interval'
maxratecount:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/maxratecount'
name:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/name'
token:
$ref: '#/components/schemas/token'
interval:
type: integer
description: Time interval associated with ohlc subscription in minutes.
default: 1
enum:
- 1
- 5
- 15
- 30
- 60
- 240
- 1440
- 10080
- 21600
name:
type: string
description: The name of the channel you subscribe too.
enum:
- book
- ohlc
- openOrders
- ownTrades
- spread
- ticker
- trade
token:
type: string
description: base64-encoded authentication token for private-data endpoints.
depth:
type: integer
default: 10
enum:
- 10
- 25
- 100
- 500
- 1000
description: Depth associated with book subscription in number of levels each side.
maxratecount:
type: integer
description: Max rate-limit budget. Compare to the ratecounter field in the openOrders updates to check whether you are approaching the rate limit.
ratecounter:
type: boolean
default: false
description: Whether to send rate-limit counter in updates (supported only for openOrders subscriptions)
snapshot:
type: boolean
default: true
description: Whether to send historical feed data snapshot upon subscription (supported only for ownTrades subscriptions)
reqid:
type: integer
description: client originated ID reflected in response message.
pair:
type: array
description: Array of currency pairs.
items:
type: string
description: Format of each pair is "A/B", where A and B are ISO 4217-A3 for standardized assets and popular unique symbol if not standardized.
pattern: '[A-Z\s]+\/[A-Z\s]+'
|
Whoever listens to notifications from this issue, I encourage you to have a look at #847. It is pretty advanced with few cards on the table, we need different opinions to figure out which one is the best. If ya need guidance on where to look at, feel free to ask for help |
Somewhat related to:
It would be useful if it was possible to describe messages that are explicitly requests and responses and for the auto-generated code to deal with creating the appropriate ephemeral queues and performing matching on the correlationid.
The pattern that seems most common when using a pub-sub message broker is for the requestor to create a single use topic and provide this address as the 'reply-to' header in the request message. The requestor also provides a correlationId which is echoed back to help match requests and replies.
However, when using a transport like WebSockets it would be necessary to do additional work in the generated code to match requests and responses and also deal with message state and expiry.
Ideally this should be abstracted away from API designers who may prefer to define their API in a manner similar to Open API as follows (see the Responses Object - https://github.com/OAI/OpenAPI-Specification/blob/master/versions/3.0.2.md#responsesObject) :
I've used the
topics
object but maybe a newoperations
object would be more appropriate?One of the challenges here is the flexibility of having multiple possible responses but also defining the logic for identifying what response has actually been received. (Open API matches on HTTP response code so that's pretty simple).
In my example I just provide a matching rule but this could probably be a lot more flexible.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: