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

clarification: canonical (signed) batch job result URL + partial query param? #507

Open
soxofaan opened this issue Sep 7, 2023 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #513
Open

clarification: canonical (signed) batch job result URL + partial query param? #507

soxofaan opened this issue Sep 7, 2023 · 1 comment · May be fixed by #513
Milestone

Comments

@soxofaan
Copy link
Member

soxofaan commented Sep 7, 2023

I'm working on crossbackend job execution in aggeragtor (Open-EO/openeo-aggregator#115).

One of the pieces of the current solution we aim for is leveraging "partial" result listings through the partial parameter e.g. /jobs/{job_id}/results?partial=true.
However we also require signed URLs through a "canonical" link in /jobs/{job_id}/results, e.g. possibly https://whatever.com/azerty123 (where the azerty123 is an opaque blob that securely can be resolved to the original batch job result listing)

It is not completely clear how the partial=true should be included in the signed URL: should it be encoded automatically in the opaque blob, or should the user add it explicitly, e.g. https://whatever.com/azerty123?partial=true?

I guess it's the former, but we might have to clarify that a bit .

E.g. current description state:

It is strongly recommended to add a link with relation type canonical, which points to this STAC document using a signed URL. This way the STAC metadata can be used by non-openEO clients without additional authentication steps.

e.g.

... which points to this STAC document (including all query parameters like partial) using a signed URL...

@m-mohr
Copy link
Member

m-mohr commented Sep 8, 2023

I guess it's the former, but we might have to clarify that a bit .

Yeah, that makes sense to me, too.

See PR #513 for an updated view on this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
2 participants