[Hub Generated] Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes. #6742

sriramvu · 2019-07-26T14:46:47Z

If you are a MSFT employee you can view your work branch via this link.

Contribution checklist:

I have reviewed the documentation for the workflow.
Validation tools were run on swagger spec(s) and have all been fixed in this PR.

openapi-sdkautomation · 2019-07-26T14:46:50Z

In Testing, Please Ignore

[Logs] (Generated from 92fc22a, Iteration 4)

.NET: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-net [Logs] [Diff]

Microsoft.Azure.Management.RecoveryServices.SiteRecovery [Logs] [Instructions] [Generation PR]
- Microsoft.Azure.Management.RecoveryServices.SiteRecovery.2.0.2-preview.nupkg
- Microsoft.Azure.Management.RecoveryServices.SiteRecovery.2.0.2-preview.snupkg

Python: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-python [Logs]

No packages generated.

Java: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-java [Logs] [Diff]

recoveryservices.siterecovery/resource-manager/v2016_08_10 [Logs] [Instructions] [Generation PR] [Integration PR]
recoveryservices.siterecovery/resource-manager/v2018_01_10 [Logs] [Instructions] [Generation PR] [Integration PR]

Go: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-go [Logs] [Diff]

recoveryservices/mgmt/2016-08-10 [Logs]
recoveryservices/mgmt/2018-01-10 [Logs]

JavaScript: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-js [Logs] [Diff]

No packages generated.

Ruby: test-repo-billy/azure-sdk-for-ruby [Logs] [Diff]

No packages generated.

AutorestCI · 2019-07-26T14:49:15Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-python

AutorestCI · 2019-07-26T14:51:36Z

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

Nothing to generate for azure-sdk-for-go

azuresdkci · 2019-07-26T15:34:53Z

Can one of the admins verify this patch?

sriramvu · 2019-07-29T06:35:30Z

ModelValidationFailures are nothing to do with the change we have introduced as part of this PR / Commit.
@mybayern1974 - can you please review the change.

yungezz · 2019-07-30T05:20:28Z

...vicessiterecovery/resource-manager/Microsoft.RecoveryServices/stable/2018-07-10/service.json

@@ -7892,6 +7892,14 @@
          "description": "The fabric specific object Id of the virtual machine.",
          "type": "string"
        },
+        "initialPrimaryFabricLocation": {


add new properties in stable version better to be in a new api version.

These new properties do not break any existing flows / contracts, we would like to handle in latest API version itself.

These changes are considered a breaking change, a new API version is required.

Take a look at 'New property added to response' for why this is required:
https://microsoft.sharepoint.com/:w:/t/azureresourcemanagerteam/EWXsAQ1yx25KkyYCeeWGUgwBSBxEdUDEbHi6FZ__U8EOQw?rtime=WPZkgiIc10g

@ryansbenson:

As per referred "New property added to response" in RestAPI_BreakingChangeGuide, it is considered breaking if "customer does a PUT using the model that was returned from the GET", which does not apply for our GET / PUT ReplicationProtectedItem as property names are different (ref: GET ReplicationProtectedItem, PUT ReplicationProtectedItem).

These newly added properties are option (not required properties). As per PR Updating service.json to add few properties to VMNicDetails and VMNicInputDetails #6380, it is required to bump up the API version only on adding required properties.

We are referring "Definition of a breaking change" from "Microsoft REST API Guidelines" - where it is said that "Services MUST explicitly define their definition of a breaking change, especially with regard to adding new fields to JSON responses and adding new API arguments with default fields." - In our case, we define the current changes as not breaking change.

Please share some best practices to be followed within service to implement, handle, and maintain multiple versions for every optional property we introduce (our service version handling is here).

IN section 12.3, https://github.com/microsoft/api-guidelines/blob/vNext/Guidelines.md#123-definition-of-a-breaking-change, it is explicitly stated -
For example, Azure defines the addition of a new JSON field in a response to be not backwards compatible.

The guidance is to bundle all such changes so that every optional property addition does not require a new api-version.

please mark this as readonly since its not settable

sriramvu · 2019-08-01T06:54:14Z

Who from ARM Team will be reviewing for label WaitForARMFeedback?

yaohaizh

Need update examples?

yaohaizh · 2019-07-31T03:04:25Z

...vicessiterecovery/resource-manager/Microsoft.RecoveryServices/stable/2018-07-10/service.json

+        },
+        "diskEncryptionInfo": {
+          "$ref": "#/definitions/DiskEncryptionInfo",
+          "description": "The recovery disk encryption information (for one / single pass flows)."


With the new properties update, please also update the examples for references.

@yaohaizh - Azure Site Recovery (ASR) service supports multiple replication providers and following are published providers (under ReplicationProviderSpecificSettings): * A2AReplicationDetails * HyperVReplicaAzureReplicationDetails * HyperVReplicaBlueReplicationDetails * HyperVReplicaReplicationDetails * InMageAzureV2ReplicationDetails * InMageReplicationDetails

All the resource operations examples are with one such provider "HyperVReplicaAzure".

And the new properties belong to "A2A".

We cannot update the examples.

For documentation purposes, you should include examples for each of these.

@ryansbenson:

Are you suggesting us to include examples for all the above shared provider specific properties? If so, we would like to take as a sperate checkin.
PS: The new properties in this PR belong to one provider (Azure To Azure) and have no relation with the provider (HyperV to Azure) mentioned in the examples.

Will it be okay if we give examples for all the providers and all the properties - it will be a very very big thing - we have multiple properties (multiple provider specific properties with almost all operations). Please share some complex service examples for our reference & next steps.

Few of the properties are mutual exclusive, do we need to give multiple examples within a provider for all the mutual exclusive properties?

Is there anyone who can review in IDC (or IDC time friendly office hours)? So that we can expedite the review.

sriramvu · 2019-08-07T18:44:35Z

@mybayern1974, @yaohaizh, @yungezz - please let us know who needs to review this PR.

yungezz · 2019-08-08T01:12:18Z

The PR is pending ARM feedback. @yaohaizh, could you pls take care of this PR? Thanks.

yaohaizh · 2019-08-08T02:11:32Z

@yungezz asked for ARM review board.

sriramvu · 2019-08-08T09:11:30Z

Reasking the same question after 6 days "Who from ARM Team will be reviewing for label WaitForARMFeedback?"

PS: label WaitForARMFeedback got added 9 days back.

@yungezz - please share any individual mail or DL to whom we can request for review wrt label WaitForARMFeedback.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-08-12T17:27:38Z

@sriramvu - @ryansbenson from ARM review board has reviewed this and added comments.

sriramvu · 2019-08-13T14:02:57Z

Yes Gaurav, we have responded to @ryansbenson - waiting for guidance wrt the questions asked.

yungezz · 2019-08-16T05:47:50Z

Hi @ravbhatnagar could you pls help to continue ARM review since @ryansbenson is oof, while service team is urgent for the PR merging.

yungezz · 2019-08-16T06:29:04Z

there's semantic and model validation error at https://dev.azure.com/azure-sdk/public/_build/results?buildId=90117&view=logs&j=95dbed5b-845d-57ba-33d3-f6c5e69afcf4 , pls fix them.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-08-19T18:37:35Z

As per discussion from Punit Bhatt, it seems like the second put which does not contain this property will not over write the property state on the server, it will take the value from the DB.
[11:31 AM] Punit Bhatt
Ok. So, let me just explain the basic end to end scenario in brief.
1 - User protects the VM (PUT) through enable DR
2 - User can update reconfigurable properties (reset state) through an Update option (PATCH)
3 - User fails over to recovery/ target side
4 - User reprotects (second PUT described above)
5 - User fails back to the original source
6 - User disables protection

User can only reconfigure/reset properties during the UpdateVM call (2). Here, he can modify the values or reset them back to null
[11:31 AM] Punit Bhatt
only those values which the service allows to be reconfigured
SO as per above conversation, although typically this change requires a new api-version, I am signing off on this since the chances of customer breaking is not possible.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-08-19T18:50:57Z

...vicessiterecovery/resource-manager/Microsoft.RecoveryServices/stable/2018-07-10/service.json

+          "description": "The initial primary fabric location.",
+          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "initialRecoveryFabricLocation": {


this also looks like readonly

It is a read only property. Made appropriate changes.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-08-19T18:51:22Z

...vicessiterecovery/resource-manager/Microsoft.RecoveryServices/stable/2018-07-10/service.json

@@ -8043,6 +8051,10 @@
        "recoveryAvailabilityZone": {
          "description": "The recovery availability zone.",
          "type": "string"
+        },
+        "vmEncryptionType": {


does it have an allowed set of values? can we make this enum?

Changed this and added a set of allowed values.

ravbhatnagar · 2019-08-19T18:57:19Z

diskEncryptionInfo - for encrypted VMs, if this is missing in second put, Service will fail. for unencrypted VMs, if this is not present on second put, its ignored. So will not lead to breaking change. For 2 properties, they are readonly and Punit will update. encryptionType will be made as enum.
After these changes, its good to sign off!

…-Microsoft.RecoveryServices-2018-07-10-OnePassAdeChanges Resolving Azure/azure-rest-api-specs Azure#6742 PR comments

ravbhatnagar · 2019-08-23T18:10:53Z

Signing off from ARM side.

OnePassADE changes

c36b7f5

sriramvu mentioned this pull request Jul 26, 2019

ADE OnePass changes AsrOneSdk/azure-powershell#14

Open

13 tasks

azuresdkci assigned mybayern1974 Jul 26, 2019

azuresdkci requested a review from mybayern1974 July 26, 2019 14:58

sriramvu changed the title ~~[Hub Generated] Review request for Microsoft.RecoveryServices to add version stable/2018-07-10~~ [Hub Generated] Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes. Jul 30, 2019

yungezz added the WaitForARMFeedback <valid label in PR review process> add this label when ARM review is required label Jul 30, 2019

yungezz reviewed Jul 30, 2019

View reviewed changes

mybayern1974 assigned yaohaizh Jul 30, 2019

sriramvu requested a review from yungezz August 1, 2019 06:51

yaohaizh reviewed Aug 1, 2019

View reviewed changes

sriramvu requested a review from yaohaizh August 1, 2019 16:10

ryansbenson added the ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review label Aug 8, 2019

sriramvu requested a review from ryansbenson August 9, 2019 09:50

yungezz closed this Aug 16, 2019

yungezz reopened this Aug 16, 2019

ravbhatnagar reviewed Aug 19, 2019

View reviewed changes

zikalino self-assigned this Aug 21, 2019

Punit Bhatt and others added 2 commits August 22, 2019 13:47

Resolving Azure/azure-rest-api-specs Azure#6742 PR comments

7bdf0f7

Merge pull request #1 from punit1396/dev-recoveryservicessiterecovery…

92fc22a

…-Microsoft.RecoveryServices-2018-07-10-OnePassAdeChanges Resolving Azure/azure-rest-api-specs Azure#6742 PR comments

ravbhatnagar added ARMSignedOff <valid label in PR review process>add this label when ARM approve updates after review and removed ARMChangesRequested <valid label in PR review process>add this label when require changes after ARM review labels Aug 23, 2019

yaohaizh approved these changes Aug 25, 2019

View reviewed changes

yungezz merged commit d439e7f into Azure:master Aug 26, 2019

ayfathim mentioned this pull request Oct 15, 2019

Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes Azure/azure-sdk-for-net#8117

Merged

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

[Hub Generated] Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes. #6742

[Hub Generated] Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes. #6742

sriramvu commented Jul 26, 2019

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

azuresdkci commented Jul 26, 2019

sriramvu commented Jul 29, 2019

yungezz Jul 30, 2019

sriramvu Jul 30, 2019 •

edited

Loading

ryansbenson Aug 8, 2019

sriramvu Aug 9, 2019 •

edited

Loading

ravbhatnagar Aug 19, 2019

ravbhatnagar Aug 19, 2019

ravbhatnagar Aug 19, 2019

sriramvu commented Aug 1, 2019

yaohaizh left a comment

yaohaizh Jul 31, 2019

sriramvu Aug 1, 2019

ryansbenson Aug 8, 2019

sriramvu Aug 9, 2019

sriramvu commented Aug 7, 2019

yungezz commented Aug 8, 2019

yaohaizh commented Aug 8, 2019

sriramvu commented Aug 8, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 12, 2019

sriramvu commented Aug 13, 2019 •

edited

Loading

yungezz commented Aug 16, 2019

yungezz commented Aug 16, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 19, 2019

ravbhatnagar Aug 19, 2019

punit-bhatt Aug 23, 2019

ravbhatnagar Aug 19, 2019

punit-bhatt Aug 23, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 19, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 23, 2019

[Hub Generated] Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes. #6742

[Hub Generated] Azure Site Recovery (ASR) - Azure Disk Encryption OnePass support changes. #6742

Conversation

sriramvu commented Jul 26, 2019

Contribution checklist:

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jul 26, 2019 • edited Loading

In Testing, Please Ignore

[Logs] (Generated from 92fc22a, Iteration 4)

AutorestCI commented Jul 26, 2019 • edited Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-python

AutorestCI commented Jul 26, 2019 • edited Loading

Automation for azure-sdk-for-go

azuresdkci commented Jul 26, 2019

sriramvu commented Jul 29, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sriramvu Jul 30, 2019 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sriramvu Aug 9, 2019 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sriramvu commented Aug 1, 2019

yaohaizh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

sriramvu commented Aug 7, 2019

yungezz commented Aug 8, 2019

yaohaizh commented Aug 8, 2019

sriramvu commented Aug 8, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 12, 2019

sriramvu commented Aug 13, 2019 • edited Loading

yungezz commented Aug 16, 2019

yungezz commented Aug 16, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 19, 2019

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 19, 2019

ravbhatnagar commented Aug 23, 2019

openapi-sdkautomation bot commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

AutorestCI commented Jul 26, 2019 •

edited

Loading

sriramvu Jul 30, 2019 •

edited

Loading

sriramvu Aug 9, 2019 •

edited

Loading

sriramvu commented Aug 13, 2019 •

edited

Loading