Skip to content

Distribution options for persistence & discovery#10

Merged
SteveLasker merged 12 commits into
notaryproject:prototype-1from
SteveLasker:distribution-proposal
Sep 21, 2020
Merged

Distribution options for persistence & discovery#10
SteveLasker merged 12 commits into
notaryproject:prototype-1from
SteveLasker:distribution-proposal

Conversation

@SteveLasker
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Includes:

Persistence options
Reference linking options
Signature discovery options
Paging options
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker stevenlasker@hotmail.com

This is the continuation of #5

Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md Outdated
* Based on the artifact type: `manifest.config.mediaType: "application/vnd.cncf.notary.config.v2+jwt"`, role check may be done to confirm the identity has a signer role
* As registry operators may offer role checking for different artifact types, Notary v2 Signatures are just one of many types they may want to authorize

**Cons with this approach:**
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Another con is inconsistency, similar to the case mentioned comment:
https://github.com/notaryproject/nv2/pull/10/files#r481223090

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I've lost track of which con I'd add to the list. @reasonerjt, can you comment the specific con so I can add? was it recursive signatures?

Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@samuelkarp samuelkarp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@SteveLasker Thanks for putting this together and taking the feedback from #5; the examples here are now much more clear!

Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md Outdated
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
Comment thread docs/distribution/README.md
GET /v2/<name>/manifests/sha256:90659bf80b44ce6be8234e6ff90a1ac34acbeb826903b02cfa0da11c82cbc042/references/list?page_token=1&page_size=10&next_page_token=<token>
```

The above specifies that a tags response SHOULD be returned, from the start of the result set, ordered lexically, limiting the number of results to `n`. The response to such a request would look as follows:
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I don't believe there's any requirement for a particular ordering. (I'd prefer that we leave an ordering requirement out so that implementing services can choose to return ordered results or not.)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Would this be a problem for a standard notary client to get different ordered results from different registries?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can we say that without an orderBy parameter, the results MUST return by __ order?
Or, should we have a set of required and optional orderBy values? I know search is the Achilles heel to these discussions, but I don't know how we get around it. So, what can we do to have something minimal?

Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
Signed-off-by: Steve Lasker <stevenlasker@hotmail.com>
@SteveLasker SteveLasker changed the title Distribution proposal Distribution options for persistence & discovery Sep 21, 2020
@SteveLasker SteveLasker merged commit a3d6785 into notaryproject:prototype-1 Sep 21, 2020
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants