Hi, Bisakh. Great! I'm looking forward to seeing how the solutions you provide are implemented. XD
Best regards! Zeping Bai @bzp2010 Bisakh Mondal <[email protected]> 于2021年11月11日周四 下午1:58写道： > Thanks guys, for the cool responses and feedbacks. > @spacewander - You are right, we can provide the flexibility. Let's change > the min value to 100ms and the default value of ssl_verify to true. > > Thank you! > > > On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 at 10:14, Ayush das <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi Bisakh, > > Your proposal SGTM, > > Ping me if you need any sort of help. > > > > Thank you > > Best regards > > Ayush Das<https://github.com/iamayushdas> > > > > On Thu, 11 Nov 2021 at 10:08 AM, Zeping Bai <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > Hi, Bisakh. > > > > > > Your Proposal looks great. But I have a little question. > > > > > > > I am trying to maintain a generic schema so that it can be extended > in > > > > cloud functions from multiple cloud providers. We just have to take > > care > > > of > > > > the schema.authorization part and the related nuisances > > > > > > Can you tell me more about this part? Are you trying to implement an > > > easily extensible Serverless BasePlugin? > > > > > > > Hi Zeping, Yes kinda like that to reduce code duplication. See the thing > is, for every serverless plugin, we have to make a request to the cloud > provider's endpoint whenever the route is invoked. They all differ in the > way authorization is handled. What I have though is like this - a base > package module with a function that has the schema except for the > authorization part. It takes the authorization schema as a request argument > and returns the full schema (here plugins for the different service > providers can define their respective authorization schema in the > respective plugin Lua file). Another method that takes the HTTP params to > invoke the function URI. > > This is just a rough draft that I thought. Let's see how I end up > implementing it. > > > > > Best regards! > > > Zeping Bai @bzp2010 > > > > > > Bisakh Mondal <[email protected]> 于2021年11月11日周四 上午4:02写道： > > > > > > > Hi folks, > > > > > > > > This proposal is for integrating a new plugin to support Microsoft > > Azure > > > > cloud functions into Apache APISIX. > > > > > > > > proposed plugin_name = "azure-functions" > > > > > > > > The idea is fairly simple. Whenever a route is called with the plugin > > > > enabled, the serverless function will be treated as an upstream and > > will > > > be > > > > called in OpenResty "access" phase. The request headers, body and > > request > > > > params will be forwarded to the upstream and the response header, > body > > > and > > > > status code will be returned back to the client which has invoked the > > > > route. > > > > > > > > Plugin schema: > > > > > > > > { > > > > type = "object", > > > > properties = { > > > > function_uri = {type = "string"}, > > > > authorization = { > > > > type = "object", > > > > properties = { > > > > apikey = {type = "string"}, > > > > clientid = {type = "string"} > > > > } > > > > }, > > > > timeout = {type = "integer", minimum = 1000, default = 3000}, > > > > ssl_verify = {type = "boolean", default = false}, > > > > keepalive = {type = "boolean", default = true}, > > > > keepalive_timeout = {type = "integer", minimum = 1000, > default > > = > > > > 60000}, > > > > keepalive_pool = {type = "integer", minimum = 1, default = 5} > > > > }, > > > > required = {"function_uri"} > > > > } > > > > > > > > function_uri is the field where the users will pass the URI of the > > azure > > > > function. For example ( > > > > https://test-apisix.azurewebsites.net/api/HttpTrigger1). > > > > The authorization subschema has two fields > > > > - apikey - this could be either Function specific key or a host > key > > > > (azure specific). > > > > - clientid: mainly for webhooks (secured by azure active > directory) > > > > The rest of the fields are pretty much normal for any proxy plugins > to > > > > provide the users with the flexibility of customizing an HTTP > request. > > > > (I am trying to maintain a generic schema so that it can be extended > in > > > > cloud functions from multiple cloud providers. We just have to take > > care > > > of > > > > the schema.authorization part and the related nuisances) > > > > > > > > For the first version of the plugin, we are going to support only > HTTP > > > and > > > > HTTPS schemes. We will think about different schemes (gRPC, > WebSockets) > > > in > > > > the subsequent upgrades. > > > > > > > > I have started working with a draft PR[1]. If you have any updates, > > > > suggestions, recommendations, feel free to add so. > > > > Thank you. > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > Bisakh <https://github.com/bisakhmondal> > > > > > > > > [1]: https://github.com/apache/apisix/pull/5479 > > > > > > > > > >
