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

docs: Proposal for FederatedCatalog Distribution and TargetNodeDirectory #1555

Open
wants to merge 20 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open
Changes from 6 commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
@@ -0,0 +1,33 @@
# Proposal for FederatedCatalog with Tractus-X distribution and its TargetNodeDirectory

## Decision

Federated Catalog will be deployable as a standalone component capable of crawling all the chosen catalogs and expose that data. The Tractus-Connector Helm charts will be updated to feature a new Federated Catalog deployment template.
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
Regarding the TargetNodeDirectory, a new extension in the FederatedCatalog will have a db/cache containing the BPNL's and Connectors' URL's of each partner a member wants the offers from.
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

## Rationale

Considering the Federated Catalog distribution, choosing a solution that decouples it from the Control Plane (like the one used for the Data Plane) and able to be scalable will future-proof the Federated Catalog as a feature and embraces wider usage.
Having a specific runtime incurs on additional overhead (new Helm Chart, as example) and results in additional configuration complexity. Also, periodical crawling results in increased remote calls over time. However, being decoupled from the Control Plane, this solution permits the Federated Catalog to scale independently (based on own demand).
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

For TargetNodeDirectory it will be set by a new extension responsible for exposing an API, where a member can input the BPNL's of the participants from which the catalogs are wanted, and then it will retrieve and store the respective Connector URL's. This new extension would get the data from the Discovery Service, provided a BPNL, and will be named `DiscoveryServiceRetrieverExtension`. This solution allows the member to choose precisely the Target Catalog Nodes that interests them, resulting in reduced network calls and latency.
Additionally, if a Connector URL is registered (or unregistered) in the Discovery Service, the retriever will reflect it since it requests based on BPNL (which should not change) and the registered URL's will be returned.

Other solution for the TargetNodeDirectory was also considered
- File in a S3 bucket (or different cloud provider's solution)
- This solution was discarded due to one file for all instead of each partner having the data that respectively needs does not match the requirement and this solution would lock the usage of a proprietary tool (cloud provider) being harder to sustain in the long run.


## Approach

Since the Federated Catalog will be a standalone runtime, the Tractus-Connector Helm charts will be updated to include the Federated Catalog as a separated deployment. The update will include the creation of a specific `deployment-federatedcatalog.yaml`, similar [to this one](https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/tractusx-edc/blob/a263bf71a110245657131509d4b37d058a1d220d/charts/tractusx-connector-azure-vault/templates/deployment-dataplane.yaml#L47) (for `ingress` and `hpa` as well), for different scenarios (InMemory, PostreSQL, etc.). This results in added configuration complexity.
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

To enable the Federated Catalog flow, please [see this table](https://github.com/eclipse-tractusx/tractusx-edc/blob/75bdacbad43e2cad352204ea28a359c6aac7adea/docs/development/management-domains/README.md#enable-and-configure-the-crawler-subsystem).
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

spurious. how we configure an FCC is not relevant for this Decision Record.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I understand, kept the first paragraph since believe it to add relevant context here, but the enabling config was removed.
Removed in here.


For its TargetNodeDirectory, the user is able to obtain the Connectors' URL's through the Discovery Service and store them in the new extension through its API. The API will allow to save a list of BPNLs (and Connectors' URL's if desired) and the `DiscoveryServiceRetrieverExtension` is responsible to retrieve the data and store it (in memory or in a database). The URL's can later be retrieved and crawled by the Federated Catalog.
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
This solution improves on the default one of having the data in a static file since a dynamic approach would avoid downtime when a change is required.
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

Some limitations of this TargetNodeDirectory solution are:
- Each partner must have the BPNLs beforehand. If a new Partner registers and an existing partner would want their catalog, the BPNL (or Connector URL's) of the new partner must be obtained first;
bmg13 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
- Deal with the overhead an additional persistence store;
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

what does this mean? how is this a limitation? If anything, it means that we'll need an in-memory and an SQL variant of this store.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

You're right, this will be a limitation if a SQL store is used, but InMem or SQL options are provided as other cases and this is not a valid limitation here.
Removed in here.

- The usage of the Discovery Service requires a technical user account to access it (must be requested).
Loading