2589: RDAP API endpoint [rh] #2843

erinysong · 2024-09-23T17:52:35Z

Ticket

Resolves #2589

Changes

Adds public API endpoint /rdap/?domain= that fetches RDAP data of a domain from Cloudflare's RDAP API.
Adds appropriate tests for RDAP API functionality.
Remove _domains an artifact of old availability API that is no longer used

Context for reviewers

Adding manage.get.gov API endpoint to fetch domain RDAP in order to mediate fetching Cloudflare data from other .gov projects.

Setup

Go https://getgov-rh.app.cloud.gov/api/v1/rdap/?domain=... and replace ... with different domains. The API should respond to the following use cases:

Valid RDAP domain names (eg whitehouse.gov) will output a JSON of the domain's RDAP data from Cloudflare.
Valid RDAP domain names that exclude the .gov TLD (eg whitehouse) will output a JSOn of the domain's RDAP from Cloudflare.

Invalid domain names will be handled by Cloudflare's API handling and error codes which are then used on get.gov's end.

Domains that have a TLD (top-level-domain) that is not .gov will output JSON with the error message that the TLD does not exist under our registry.
Domains that have more than one part above the TLD (manage.get.gov) will output JSON with the error message that domains must have exactly one part above their TLD. Open to discussing if we should follow Cloudflare's protocol here or if our use cases warrant handling it differently.
Domain names that are not .gov domains (eg hello.gov) will output JSON with the error message that the .gov domain searched was not found.

Also confirmed that this API successfully displays RDAP JSON on GFEs and would like someone else to verify these steps work on their GFE.

Code Review Verification Steps

As the original developer, I have

Satisfied acceptance criteria and met development standards

Met the acceptance criteria, or will meet them in a subsequent PR
Created/modified automated tests
Added at least 2 developers as PR reviewers (only 1 will need to approve)
Messaged on Slack or in standup to notify the team that a PR is ready for review
Changes to “how we do things” are documented in READMEs and or onboarding guide
If any model was updated to modify/add/delete columns, makemigrations was ran and the associated migrations file has been commited.

Ensured code standards are met (Original Developer)

All new functions and methods are commented using plain language
Did dependency updates in Pipfile also get changed in requirements.txt?
Interactions with external systems are wrapped in try/except
Error handling exists for unusual or missing values

Validated user-facing changes (if applicable)

New pages have been added to .pa11yci file so that they will be tested with our automated accessibility testing
Checked keyboard navigability
Tested general usability, landmarks, page header structure, and links with a screen reader (such as Voiceover or ANDI)
Add at least 1 designer as PR reviewer

As a code reviewer, I have

Reviewed, tested, and left feedback about the changes

Pulled this branch locally and tested it
Reviewed this code and left comments
Checked that all code is adequately covered by tests
Made it clear which comments need to be addressed before this work is merged
If any model was updated to modify/add/delete columns, makemigrations was ran and the associated migrations file has been commited.

Ensured code standards are met (Code reviewer)

All new functions and methods are commented using plain language
Interactions with external systems are wrapped in try/except
Error handling exists for unusual or missing values
(Rarely needed) Did dependency updates in Pipfile also get changed in requirements.txt?

Validated user-facing changes as a developer

Note: Multiple code reviewers can share the checklists above, a second reviewers should not make a duplicate checklist

As a designer reviewer, I have

Verified that the changes match the design intention

Checked that the design translated visually
Checked behavior
Checked different states (empty, one, some, error)
Checked for landmarks, page heading structure, and links
Tried to break the intended flow

Validated user-facing changes as a designer

Checked keyboard navigability
Tested general usability, landmarks, page header structure, and links with a screen reader (such as Voiceover or ANDI)
Tested with multiple browsers (check off which ones were used)
- Chrome
- Microsoft Edge
- FireFox
- Safari
(Rarely needed) Tested as both an analyst and applicant user

Screenshots

github-actions · 2024-09-23T17:56:49Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

github-actions · 2024-09-24T18:06:31Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

github-actions · 2024-09-24T23:52:21Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

github-actions · 2024-09-24T23:55:24Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

github-actions · 2024-09-25T00:07:05Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

github-actions · 2024-09-25T16:23:38Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

erinysong · 2024-09-24T23:50:44Z

src/api/tests/test_rdap.py

+API_BASE_PATH = "/api/v1/rdap/?domain="
+
+
+class RDapViewTest(TestCase):


@abroddrick Since we don't call the RDAP API in any of manage.get.gov's views, I had our tests inherit from TestCase rather than create a mock RDAP library since it would go unused unless we find a reason to add RDAP views into the registrar. I can add a mock RDAP library class if we want to follow availability standards but it will likely go unused until we use RDAP in manage.get.gov and not just get.gov

erinysong · 2024-09-25T16:41:31Z

src/api/tests/test_rdap.py

+API_BASE_PATH = "/api/v1/rdap/?domain="
+
+
+class RdapViewTest(TestCase):


@abroddrick Since we don't call the RDAP API in any of manage.get.gov's views, I had our tests inherit from TestCase rather than create a mock RDAP library since it would go unused unless we find a reason to add RDAP views into the registrar. I can add a mock RDAP library class if we want to follow availability standards but it will likely go unused until we use RDAP in manage.get.gov and not just get.gov

That makes sense

abroddrick · 2024-09-26T00:46:11Z

src/api/views.py

@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@


 DOMAIN_FILE_URL = "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cisagov/dotgov-data/main/current-full.csv"


Can you remove this and any uses of this while your in the code

@abroddrick sure! I'm not as familiar with where this is used but is current-full no longer referenced in manage.get.gov?

Nope it isn't

asaki222 · 2024-09-26T15:37:47Z

src/api/views.py

+@ttl_cache(ttl=600)
+def rdap(request, domain=""):
+    """Returns JSON dictionary of a domain's RDAP data from Cloudflare API"""
+    domain = request.GET.get("domain", "")


overall lgtm! I was just wondering why the ttl is 600 seconds? Is that standard?

I think generally 5 minutes is one of the standard defaults for caching which we also use in the availability endpoint! If there ends up being a cache time that makes more sense for this data we can also always update it if the need arises :")

Okay, LGTM. 600 seconds is 10 minutes. Was that intentional for this cache?

Ack you're right, did not math that math correctly :")

github-actions · 2024-09-30T18:40:42Z

🥳 Successfully deployed to developer sandbox es.

erinysong added 2 commits September 20, 2024 11:45

Add initial rdap api endpoint

2dca24f

Add updated RDAP API endpoint

3f7dbd5

Handle domains without TLD

919fbbf

erinysong added 4 commits September 24, 2024 16:37

Add RDAP tests

5439894

Remove unused mock RDAP lib class since RDAP not used in registrar views

23cb568

Fix linter

155e736

Fix typo

a435eb1

Add description to rdap endpoint

d6201fc

erinysong marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2024 00:02

erinysong requested a review from abroddrick as a code owner September 25, 2024 00:02

erinysong changed the title ~~2589: RDAP API endpoint~~ [draft] 2589: RDAP API endpoint Sep 25, 2024

erinysong marked this pull request as draft September 25, 2024 00:07

erinysong changed the title ~~[draft] 2589: RDAP API endpoint~~ 2589: RDAP API endpoint Sep 25, 2024

erinysong added 2 commits September 25, 2024 09:10

Add cache time

a4c4bba

Add timeout to RDAP request

ea4b4e2

erinysong marked this pull request as ready for review September 25, 2024 16:19

erinysong requested review from therealslimhsiehdy, Matt-Spence, CocoByte, rachidatecs, dave-kennedy-ecs, asaki222, zandercymatics and lizpearl September 25, 2024 16:36

erinysong commented Sep 25, 2024

View reviewed changes

abroddrick reviewed Sep 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

asaki222 reviewed Sep 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

erinysong changed the title ~~2589: RDAP API endpoint~~ 2589: RDAP API endpoint [rh] Sep 26, 2024

erinysong requested review from abroddrick and asaki222 September 26, 2024 22:22

asaki222 approved these changes Sep 26, 2024

View reviewed changes

Remove old availability URL implementation

2ab29b9

erinysong merged commit ab5cd2c into main Sep 30, 2024
10 checks passed

erinysong deleted the es/2589-rdap-api branch September 30, 2024 18:43

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

2589: RDAP API endpoint [rh] #2843

2589: RDAP API endpoint [rh] #2843

erinysong commented Sep 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

github-actions bot commented Sep 23, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 24, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 24, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 24, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2024

erinysong Sep 24, 2024

erinysong Sep 25, 2024

abroddrick Sep 26, 2024

abroddrick Sep 26, 2024

erinysong Sep 26, 2024

abroddrick Sep 30, 2024

asaki222 Sep 26, 2024

erinysong Sep 26, 2024

asaki222 Sep 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading

erinysong Sep 27, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 30, 2024

		API_BASE_PATH = "/api/v1/rdap/?domain="


		class RDapViewTest(TestCase):

		@@ -19,6 +19,7 @@


		DOMAIN_FILE_URL = "https://raw.githubusercontent.com/cisagov/dotgov-data/main/current-full.csv"

2589: RDAP API endpoint [rh] #2843

2589: RDAP API endpoint [rh] #2843

Conversation

erinysong commented Sep 23, 2024 • edited Loading

Ticket

Changes

Context for reviewers

Setup

Code Review Verification Steps

As the original developer, I have

Satisfied acceptance criteria and met development standards

Ensured code standards are met (Original Developer)

Validated user-facing changes (if applicable)

As a code reviewer, I have

Reviewed, tested, and left feedback about the changes

Ensured code standards are met (Code reviewer)

Validated user-facing changes as a developer

As a designer reviewer, I have

Verified that the changes match the design intention

Validated user-facing changes as a designer

Screenshots

github-actions bot commented Sep 23, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 24, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 24, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 24, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2024

github-actions bot commented Sep 25, 2024

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

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

asaki222 Sep 26, 2024 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

github-actions bot commented Sep 30, 2024

erinysong commented Sep 23, 2024 •

edited

Loading

asaki222 Sep 26, 2024 •

edited

Loading