<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:DengXian;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@DengXian";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-AU link="#0563C1" vlink="#954F72"><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal>Hi all,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>I was chatting with lmstrand on IRC, and we both came up with separate features where we’d essentially want Koha to proxy our HTTP requests to the Koha API endpoint to a backend service running on the Koha server.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>What do people think about using the Koha HTTP API that way?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Or would it just make more sense to run up Kong (or another API gateway) on the Koha server, and use it to proxy HTTP requests to backend services running on the Koha server? I think in both our cases Koha is itself only tangentially related. (lmstrand’s is a SIP2 client daemon available over HTTPS, while mine is a OAI-PMH harvester daemon available over HTTPS)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The advantage of using the Koha API is that it keeps everything together. The disadvantage is that we might not want to use Koha to proxy requests?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>The advantage of Kong is that it keeps a separation of concerns, Kong has a tonne of plugins that make working with APIs a great experience. The disadvantage is that it’s yet another dependency. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>David Cook<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Systems Librarian<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Prosentient Systems<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>72/330 Wattle St<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Ultimo, NSW 2007<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Australia<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Office: 02 9212 0899<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal>Online: 02 8005 0595<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>