Multi-Tenant Adaptations

[lgblaumeiser]

WHAT

The feature documents an assessment of the current existing extensions especially for the control plane and what is the state concerning multi-tenant support.

From the discussion in the assessment, the goal for Tractus-X would be, to have a connector runtime, that is multi-tenant capable and contains all extensions necessary for a Catena-X dataspace. The discussion raised a point concerning the current strategy to collaborate on extensions and to differentiate on runtimes, as a multi-tenant runtime for different dataspaces require a superset of all extensions. The Multi-Tenant connector comes with dataspace scopes and the idea would be, that the different dataspaces define their own scope which is then used to activate extensions for that scope. This requires additional changes in the extensions which are not addressed with this item. This item is about summarizing the adaptations on the existing extensions concerning a runtime for a concrete dataspace, especially the Catena-X dataspace.

Tractus-X Extension list

Both Control-plane and Data-plane

Modules	Description	Ready?	Relevance	Notes	Issue
core/core-utils	Libs module	✅	Feature.
core/edr-core	"EDR with single call" core module	❌	Feature	Data storage adaptations to support multi participant data, in general, the edr extensions need to be refactored and brought together
edc-extensions/event-subscriber	Sends logs to an OTEL collector	❌	Not relevant	This extension forwards domain events to the logger. This is not a feature for a multi-tenant approach, as domain events should be handled per participant not in one central log store
edc-extensions/log4j2-monitor	Log4j implementation of the monitor	✅	✅	Support log4j as logger, easily reusable
edc-extensions/migrations/*	Migrations for database schemas	❌	Feature	Migrations need to be extended in order to support the new database schema supporting participant separation, follow-up activity of other changes
edc-extensions/single-participant-vault	Provides a single participant vault	❌	Not relevant	This extension can be deleted if EDC is at least at version 0.15.1
edc-extensions/tokenrefresh-handler	Provides "refresh token" feature to the "EDR with single call" feature (see edr-core)	❌	Feature	Under observation, will be influenced on work concerning DPS API, tokenrefresh should be refactored and brought together

Control-plane

Modules	Description	Ready?	Relevance	Notes	Issue
core/json-ld-core	Registers overall json-ld contexts and namespaces	✅	Standard Compliance
core/json-ld-cx	Registers Catena-X json-ld contexts and namespaces	✅	Standard Compliance
edc-extensions/agreements/retirement-evaluation-*	adds agreement retirement feature	❌	Feature	Data storage has to become participant aware
edc-extensions/agreements-bpns/bpns-evaluation-*	adds event subscriber that stores agreements with additional information, i.e., BPNLs	❌	Standard Compliance	Data storage has to become partipant aware	#2718
edc-extensions/bdrs-client	registers an AudienceMapper that will use the BDRS to map between BPNLs and DIDs	❌/✅	Standard Compliance	Is not participant aware, but potentially does not have to be, as there is no value in storing the mapping data redundantly and there is no record on which participant uses which mappings	#2695
edc-extensions/connector-discovery/*	Provides API to discover DSP connector endpoints given the root DSP endpoint	❌/✅	Feature	Is not participant aware, but potentially does not have to be, as the general discovery of a counter party connector is nothing participant specific and a general approach supports better caching of results.
edc-extensions/cx-policy	Registers policy functions	✅	Standard Compliance	Validation is about to be replaced by JSON Schema based validation and Evaluation should be replaced by CEL expressions
edc-extensions/cx-policy-legacy	Registers policy functions for Jupiter connections	✅	Not relevant	Becomes obsolete with removal of DSP 0.8
edc-extensions/data-flow-properties-provider	Adds custom properties to be sent to the data plane on transfer startup	✅	Future Standard Compliance	This feature is not offered by the upcoming DPS implementation (yet), the requirement is, that the access token must contain claims based on the contract and its usage policy
edc-extensions/dataspace-protocol/cx-dataspace-protocol	Registers 0.8 Dataspace Profile context	❌	Not relevant	Becomes obsolete with removal of DSP 0.8
edc-extensions/dataspace-protocol/dataspace-protocol-core	Registers 2025/1 Dataspace Profile context	✅	Standard Compliance
edc-extensions/dcp/tx-dcp	Registers scope extractor for DCP	❌/✅	Standard Compliance	Potentially needs to be adapted, analysis has to show, whether this is participant relevant or can be solved generally.
edc-extensions/dcp/tx-dcp-sts-dim	Add support for DIV in DCP	❌/✅	Feature	Potentially needs to be made participant aware
edc-extensions/dcp/verifiable-presentation-cache	Cache for verifiable presentations	✅	Feature
edc-extensions/did-document/did-document-service-dim	provides a client for managing DID Document Service entries using the DIV API	❌	Feature	Has to follow changes in did-document registration
edc-extensions/did-document/did-document-service-self-registration	Registers/unregisters DID service entry at startup/shutdown	❌	Feature	Needs some reconsideration for multi-tenancy , as registration of all instances during startup and shutdown could be am issue, potentially, a service that can be triggered from outside makes more sense.
edc-extensions/edr/*	"EDR with single call" feature additional extensions	❌	Feature	Has api and data storage topics concerning the support of multiple participants. A refactoring that brings this together with the core edr functionality is required.
edc-extensions/token-interceptor	Implements interceptors for DSP communication	✅	Not relevant	Becomes obsolete with removal of DSP 0.8 because it handles a pecularity, that the DSP v0.8 implementation did not have the Bearer prefix in Authorization header which was an issue in multi-version handling.
edc-extensions/validators/empty-asset-selector	Adds validators for Contract Definitions	❌	Feature	Should be replaced by json-schema validation (potentially not available at the moment upstream)

Data-Plane

The data plane modules are listed as the initial assessment from Andrea shows. They have not been analysed further, because the adoption of DPS will clearly set new constraints which might make these modules most likely either not needed anymore or require substantial change which might result of the adoption work.

Modules	Description	Supports multiple participants	Multi-support needed	Notes	Issue
edc-extensions/dataplane/dataflow-*	Adds endpoint to trigger the flow of a new chunk of data for non-finite transfers	❌	Api
edc-extensions/dataplane/dataplane-proxy/dataplane-proxy-http	Provides support for reading data from a Proxy HTTP.	✅		The underlying data-plane doesn't support multiple participants
edc-extensions/dataplane/dataplane-proxy/dataplane-public-api-v2	Provides HTTP Proxy endpoint for Data-Plane	✅		same as above ^
edc-extensions/dataplane/dataplane-proxy/edc-dataplane-proxy-consumer-api	Proxy endpoint that permits consumer to directly fetch data without knowing the EDR	❌	Api, Data
edc-extensions/dataplane/dataplane-token-refresh/*	Enable token refresh mechanism for HTTP Pull transfer type	❌	Api, Data
edc-extensions/dataplane/dataplane-util	Provides utility methods/classes	✅
edc-extensions/non-finite-provider-push/*	Provides "non finite push transfers" feature	✅		The underlying data-plane doesn't support multiple participants
edc-extensions/provision-additional-headers/*	Adds additional headers on the HTTP Pull incoming calls	❌	Configuration	This module is a control-plane one but it's deprecated and it should be migrated to data-plane in any case

WHY

The idea is, that the Eclipse Tractus-X connector runtime is also possible to run for a Catena-X connector and further on for other dataspace configurations as well to have a common Open Source implementation that can be used for productization.

[arnoweiss]

Can you elaborate on what "data" means? Does that mean that the sql schema is unfit for multi-tenancy?

[lgblaumeiser]

Hi @arnoweiss , this is work in progress, sorry, I was about to work on this reflecting my discussion with Andrea