|
Post by tomjoseph on May 29, 2023 17:21:15 GMT
In an RF Message, the Resolution field is currently implemented as a free-form string. However, I have been working on finding a solution that allows clients to take next actions based on the information in the resolution field. The objective is to enable RF clients to automate recovery steps for error conditions by extracting actionable information from the resolution field, thereby minimizing the need for human intervention. One proposed solution is to introduce machine-readable formats in the resolution field. I would like to verify if this approach aligns with the intended direction. - I believe the problem statement is quite generic. Are there any mechanisms other than Resolution field that can fulfill the requirements?
- Is there expectation about Resolution field to be "human readable" or implementation specific?
- Is there any prior art to solve this problem in Redfish?
- Is there a value in proposing a generic structured format for the resolution field or is the purpose best served by leaving it to the implementation.
|
|
|
Post by jautor on May 31, 2023 2:52:23 GMT
The "Resolution" text was intended to be human-readable, and also can (and it is recommended) be replaced with more accurate or detailed text by the implementation.
If I understand the idea, if a client would be better able to dispatch some processes based on a set of standardized values, I think is something that we could add to the schema.
What would be in that list? Is it as simple as (one or more of): - Reboot / retry - Replace the faulty hardware - Upgrade the software / firmware - Contact the vendor for service - "OEM"
Essentially a gross-level "is this a hardware fault (dispatch a part), a software fault (reboot/reset, try again, upgrade fw), something we can't explain (contact vendor)" that can set some service processes in motion.
|
|