[openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Ravi, Goutham Goutham.Ravi at netapp.com
Sat Jun 18 15:13:37 UTC 2016

True, manila is currently using the same header; but given that nova and ironic are supporting the new header recommendation, this has come up for discussion in the manila community.

In any case, the use of the prefix “X-“, and project names within the header is not recommended. Please refer to the API Working Group’s recommendation in this regard:


The example already suggests what needs to be done in case of the identity project ☺


From: Steve Martinelli <s.martinelli at gmail.com>
Reply-To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Date: Saturday, June 18, 2016 at 6:22 AM
To: "OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)" <openstack-dev at lists.openstack.org>
Subject: Re: [openstack-dev] Version header for OpenStack microversion support

Looks like Manila is using the service name instead of type (X-OpenStack-Manila-API-Version) according to this link anyway: http://docs.openstack.org/developer/manila/devref/api_microversion_dev.html

Keystone can follow the cross project spec and use the service type (Identity instead of Keystone).
On Jun 17, 2016 12:44 PM, "Ed Leafe" <ed at leafe.com<mailto:ed at leafe.com>> wrote:
On Jun 17, 2016, at 11:29 AM, Henry Nash <henrynash9 at mac.com<mailto:henrynash9 at mac.com>> wrote:

> We are currently in the process of implementing microversion support in keystone - and are obviously trying to follow the cross-projec spec for this (http://specs.openstack.org/openstack/api-wg/guidelines/microversion_specification.html).
> One thing I noticed was that the header specified in this spec is of the form:
> OpenStack-API-Version: [SERVICE_TYPE] [X,Y]
> for example:
> OpenStack-API-Version: identity 3.7
> However, from what i can see of the current implementations I have seen of microversioning in OpenStack (Nova, Manilla), they use service-specific headers, e.g.
> X-OpenStack-Nova-API-Version: 2.12
> My question is whether there a plan to converge on the generalized header format….or are we keep with the service-specific headers? I’d obviously like to implement the correct one for keystone.

Yes, the plan is to converge on the more generic headers. The Nova headers (don’t know about Manilla) pre-date the API WG spec, and were the motivation for development of that spec. We’ve even made it possible to accept both header formats [0] until things can be migrated to the recommended format.

[0] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/300077/

-- Ed Leafe

OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe<http://OpenStack-dev-request@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20160618/8011fbbb/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list