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

DSP: TransferRequestMessage contains a processId, but should not (at least not according to the spec) #3253

Closed
matgnt opened this issue Jun 30, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
bug_report Suspected bugs, awaiting triage triage all new issues awaiting classification

Comments

@matgnt
Copy link

matgnt commented Jun 30, 2023

This is similar to #3241 in the negotiation process, but I think the messages and spec description is more clear in the transfer process.

https://github.com/International-Data-Spaces-Association/ids-specification/blob/d58a9ff0bec98d48825ed98325d45d316e17c834/transfer/transfer.process.protocol.md?plain=1#L102

Providers must include a `processId` property in the `TransferProcess` with a value set to the `@id` of the corresponding `TransferRequestMessage`.

Also, the examples for the TransferRequestMessage do NOT contain such a processId field.

EDC in the role of a consumer DOES add a processId to the TransferRequestMessage and consequently of course also expects the TransferStartMessage to contain exactly that as the processId

Independent of whether this is good or not in the spec, I think EDC is not compliant here right now.

Example EDC request message: (EDC 0.1.0 / product-edc 0.4.1)

{
    "@id": "9beead35-1136-4cf0-bb1a-12bd876efbfe",
    "@type": "dspace:TransferRequestMessage",
    "dspace:agreementId": "02e00787-08d2-4dc2-adfd-98a336170fda:3b3dd386-cb06-4906-9bf0-c2951a6ae381:ab910320-4d31-49be-808b-cb512464efb7",
    "dct:format": "HttpProxy",
    "dspace:callbackAddress": "http://consumer-control-plane:8282/api/v1/dsp",
    "dspace:processId": "ffe09988-97bc-433e-9755-893509e4987c",
    "@context": {
        "dct": "https://purl.org/dc/terms/",
        "tx": "https://w3id.org/tractusx/v0.0.1/ns/",
        "edc": "https://w3id.org/edc/v0.0.1/ns/",
        "dcat": "https://www.w3.org/ns/dcat/",
        "odrl": "http://www.w3.org/ns/odrl/2/",
        "dspace": "https://w3id.org/dspace/v0.8/"
    }
}

--
Matthias Binzer

@matgnt matgnt added bug_report Suspected bugs, awaiting triage triage all new issues awaiting classification labels Jun 30, 2023
@ndr-brt
Copy link
Member

ndr-brt commented Jul 4, 2023

definitely a leftover in the specs, the message @id represents the message itself (mainly for idempotency), while the processId represents the whole process, and it's shared between the two parts.
This issue should be opened on the ids-specification repo.

@github-actions
Copy link

This issue is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale Open for x days with no activity label Jul 19, 2023
@jimmarino jimmarino removed the stale Open for x days with no activity label Jul 19, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Aug 3, 2023

This issue is stale because it has been open for 14 days with no activity.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale Open for x days with no activity label Aug 3, 2023
@github-actions
Copy link

This issue was closed because it has been inactive for 7 days since being marked as stale.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this as not planned Won't fix, can't repro, duplicate, stale Aug 10, 2023
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale Open for x days with no activity label Aug 10, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug_report Suspected bugs, awaiting triage triage all new issues awaiting classification
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants