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

Add Compliance API draft #333

Closed
wants to merge 36 commits into from
Closed

Add Compliance API draft #333

wants to merge 36 commits into from

Conversation

marie-x
Copy link
Collaborator

@marie-x marie-x commented Jun 29, 2019

Explain pull request

This API describes a Compliance service that takes as inputs Events and Telemetry (received via Agency) and measures against Policy and Geography documents to produce a measurement of policy compliance or non-compliance.

Is this a breaking change

A breaking change would require consumers or implementors of the API to modify their code for it to continue to function (ex: renaming of a required field or the change in data type of an existing field). A non-breaking change would allow existing code to continue to function (ex: addition of an optional field or the creation of a new optional endpoint).

  • No, not breaking

Provider or Agency

Which API(s) will this pull request impact:

  • neither

Additional context

This is a branch off of the Policy PR, so that file is also included. That PR is a prerequisite.

@marie-x marie-x requested review from hunterowens, thekaveman and a team as code owners June 29, 2019 03:01
@marie-x marie-x changed the title Add Compliance Add Compliance API draft Jun 29, 2019
@marie-x
Copy link
Collaborator Author

marie-x commented Jun 29, 2019

Feedback solicited. I've got a couple of additional explanatory diagrams in the works. This doc is a little thin on verbiage, so please ask for clarification where you think it's needed.

A prototype of this service is currently running in LA, and is part of the code-drop in CityOfLosAngeles/mds-core.

@hunterowens hunterowens added this to the Future milestone Oct 11, 2019
@hunterowens
Copy link
Collaborator

moving milestone.

| Name | Type | R/O | Description |
| ------------- | ---- | --- | ----------------------------- |
| `provider_id` | UUID | O | If not provided in the JWT. |
| `end_date` | UUID | O | Take snapshot at a given time |

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hi, I guess the UUID type is a typo, and it's a timestamp in milliseconds as usual.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It was indeed -- the spec has been updated.

@CLAassistant
Copy link

CLAassistant commented Nov 6, 2019

CLA assistant check
Thank you for your submission! We really appreciate it. Like many open source projects, we ask that you all sign our Contributor License Agreement before we can accept your contribution.
2 out of 3 committers have signed the CLA.

✅ karcass
✅ avatarneil
❌ evansiroky
You have signed the CLA already but the status is still pending? Let us recheck it.

@sarob sarob added the enhancement New feature or request label Dec 19, 2019
@jfh01
Copy link
Contributor

jfh01 commented Apr 9, 2020

Should we consider for the 1.0.0 release?

@jfh01 jfh01 modified the milestones: Future, 1.0.0 Apr 9, 2020
@Retzoh Retzoh mentioned this pull request May 4, 2020
@marie-x marie-x requested a review from a team May 8, 2020 14:09
@marie-x marie-x requested a review from a team as a code owner May 8, 2020 14:09
@schnuerle
Copy link
Member

Hello @evansiroky can please you sign the OMF CLA for this commit you made in this PR?

@schnuerle schnuerle modified the milestones: 1.0.0, 1.1.0 Jun 11, 2020
@marie-x marie-x closed this Aug 13, 2020
@marie-x
Copy link
Collaborator Author

marie-x commented Aug 13, 2020

This is going to get re-written based on what we've learned in LA from the micro-mobility pilot.

@schnuerle schnuerle removed this from the 1.1.0 milestone Sep 1, 2020
@schnuerle
Copy link
Member

See the notes from the last WG call.

  • Only for one provider
  • Allows enforcement by device id
  • Some metrics could be compliance metrics
  • Be "Metrics sensitive" now that Metrics exists as it is rebuilt and submitted in a new PR
  • In use in LA but good time for feedback
  • Vianova has a compliance API - providers use it now to see what’s out of compliance
  • Louisville and Baltimore would like realtime notifications this could provide
  • Bill Dirk ride report thinks it could be needed
  • Seems useful for next release

Realize this PR is closed but wanted to capture this year for the new re-written version.

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 this pull request may close these issues.

9 participants