Difference between revisions of "User:Infinity Linden/OGP Test Cases"

From Second Life Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(An Example of Fixture Data)
m (Authentication Test 2.6 - Select Failure of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents and a Hashed Authenticator)
 
(19 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
'''note: this is a brief note for informational purposes. it's eventually going to be "cleaned up" and moved to a more appropriate place on this wiki.'''
+
* '''note: this is a brief note for informational purposes. it's eventually going to be "cleaned up" and moved to a more appropriate place on this wiki.'''
 
+
* '''note: this is a branch from the original "OGP" Test Case page. PyOGP Test Cases are defined at [[User:Saijanai_Kuhn/OGP_Test_Cases]]'''
 
= Introduction =
 
= Introduction =
  
Line 13: Line 13:
 
Well... that's how it's supposed to be... In the real world, "running code" trumps written specifications, and probably will continue to do so. And that's one of the reasons we have the interop tests; properly written test cases succinctly communicate abstractions introduced in written specifications. So rather than viewing the SLGOGP spec and these tests as separate, think of them as being two sections of the same document.
 
Well... that's how it's supposed to be... In the real world, "running code" trumps written specifications, and probably will continue to do so. And that's one of the reasons we have the interop tests; properly written test cases succinctly communicate abstractions introduced in written specifications. So rather than viewing the SLGOGP spec and these tests as separate, think of them as being two sections of the same document.
  
= Test Fixtures =
+
= Base Tests ( Test 0.* ) =
  
== Login Test Fixtures ==
+
Many OGP messages take the form of an LLSD message serialized to XML and POSTed to an URL somewhere via HTTP (or HTTPS.) In the ideal world, HTTP would be free from error. But as it turns out there are many ways in which a HTTP request could fail, especially if your implementation of OGP uses proxies, load balancers, n-tier service architectures, etc. These tests are intended to ensure your client library properly communicates HTTP errors, assuming your client library has a standard technique for handling and recovering from such errors.
  
{|style="background:white" width="100%" cellpadding="5"
+
It is entirely possible that ''your'' client library does not handle such errors cleanly. This is not a failure, per se, but we strongly encourage implementers to expose an interface to client applications allowing exceptional events to be communicated through the client library and to the application.
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
== Base Test 0.0 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Non-Existent Resource ==
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''0. agent domain fixtures''' - these are the "stock" agent domains, people who are testing against a different agent domain implementation will need to add their own
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
This test simply posts a properly formatted login request to an URL that does not exist. We anticipate a HTTP 404 result code, or at least that's what ''we'' would return if you sent a request to an undefined URL. In an ideal world we would test a resource from each resource class to ensure client library code handling each message properly propagates the "Not Found" exception. However, in the interests of alacrity we're only describing this test in terms of the agent_login resource class.
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. agent0.aditi.lindenlab.com
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
So, test 0.0 is considered "successful" if after attempting to access the agent_login resource defined for fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) at the agent domain described in fixture 0.404 (the canonical undefined agent domain), the client library produces a "HTTP Not Found" exception.
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1. agent1.aditi.lindenlab.com
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
== Base Test 0.1 - Return an Exception when Accessing a "Broken" Resource ==
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''1. region fixtures''' - these are the "stock" regions, people who are testing against a different simulator will need to add their own
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
This test posts a properly formatted login request to an URL that has been preconfigured to return a HTTP 500 result code.
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. sim1.vaak.secondlife.com
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
So, test 0.1 is considered "successful" if after attempting to access the agent_login resource defined for fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) at the agent domain described in fixture 0.500 (the canonical broken agent domain), the client library produces a "HTTP Internal Server Error" exception.
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''2. non-existent accounts'''
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
== Base Test 0.2 - Return an Exception when Accessing an "Unavailable" Resource ==
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. a generic account that does not exist in either of the agent domains listed above
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
This test posts a properly formatted login request to an URL that has been preconfigured to return a HTTP 503 result code.
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''3. accounts with a single agent'''
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
So, test 0.2 is considered "successful" if after attempting to access the agent_login resource defined for fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) at the agent domain described in fixture 0.503 (the canonical unavailable agent domain), the client library produces a "HTTP Service Not Available" exception.
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
= LLSD Tests ( Test 1.* ) =
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 2. account for agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 3. account for agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 4. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 5. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 6. account for agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 7. account for agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 8. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 9. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 10. account for agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 11. account for agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 12. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 13. account for agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 14. account for agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 15. account for agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 16. account for agent that does not exist
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
These tests exercise concepts introduced in the "LLSD" section of the OGP spec.
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''4. agents for accounts with a single agent'''
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
== LLSD Test 1.0 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource with the Wrong HTTP Method ==
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request using an unsupported HTTP method, the resource
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
SHOULD respond with a HTTP 405 result code.
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 2. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 3. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 4. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 5. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 6. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 7. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 8. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 9. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 10. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 11. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 12. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 13. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 14. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 15. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 16. agent that does not exist
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''5. account with multiple agents'''
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
Test 1.0 is considered "successful" if, after attempting sending a HTTP GET to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain), the client library produces a "LLSD Method Not Allowed" exception.
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. account for agent 6.0 and 6.1
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1. account for agent 6.2 and 6.3
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 2. account for agent 6.4 and 6.5
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 3. account for agent 6.6 and 6.7
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 4. account for agent 6.8 and 6.9
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 5. account for agent 6.10 and 6.11
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 6. account for agent 6.12 and 6.13
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 7. account for agent 6.14 and 6.15
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 8. account for agent 6.16 and 6.17
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 9. account for agent 6.18 and 6.19
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''6. agents for accounts with multiple agents'''
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
== LLSD Test 1.1 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource via GET with an Improper Media Type in Accept ==
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 2. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 3. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 4. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 5. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 6. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS and the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 7. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 8. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 9. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 10. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 11. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 12. agent that _has_ accepted the TOS, but not the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 13. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 14. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 15. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 16. agent that _has not_ accepted the TOS, but _has_ accepted the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 17. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 18. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 19. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 20. agent that _has not_ accepted either the TOS or the critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP GET, and the requester uses the 'Accept:' header to specify the media type it will accept, and that media type is not supported by the resource, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 415 result code.
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''7. agent info on agent domain'''
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
''hmm... need to define a canonical resource that accepts GET.''
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. agent info for agent 4.0, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS and viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1. agent info for agent 4.1, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS and viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 2. agent info for agent 4.2, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS and viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 3. agent info for agent 4.3, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS and viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 4. agent info for agent 4.4, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 5. agent info for agent 4.5, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 6. agent info for agent 4.6, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 7. agent info for agent 4.7, where agent domain state indicates agent has accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 8. agent info for agent 4.8, where agent domain state indicates agent has not accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 9. agent info for agent 4.9, where agent domain state indicates agent has not accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 10. agent info for agent 4.10, where agent domain state indicates agent has not accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 11. agent info for agent 4.11, whereagent domain state indicates agent has not accepted TOS but not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 12. agent info for agent 4.12, where agent domain state indicates agent not has accepted TOS and not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 13. agent info for agent 4.13, where agent domain state indicates agent not has accepted TOS and not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 14. agent info for agent 4.14, where agent domain state indicates agent not has accepted TOS and not viewed critical messages
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 15. agent info for agent 4.15, where agent domain state indicates agent not has accepted TOS and not viewed critical messages
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
== LLSD Test 1.2 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource via POST with an Improper Media Type in Accept Header ==
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''8. reason code URLs'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0.  url for "notice" (aka unsuccessful login)
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and the requester uses the 'Accept:' header to specify the media type it will accept, and that media type is not supported by the resource, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 415 result code.
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''9. faux machines''' - these are used to test machines blacklisted by mac address or id0
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0.  machine whose mac address and id0 are not blacklisted
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 1.  machine whose mac address is blacklisted and id0 is not blacklisted
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 2. machine whose mac address is not blacklisted and id0 is blacklisted
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 3.  machine whose mac address and id0 are blacklisted
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
Test 1.2 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+xml' and the 'Accept:' header is set to 'application/llsd+foo', the client library produces a "LLSD Unsupported Media Type" exception.
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''10. agent domain id0 blacklist''' - this is the list of machines that our faux agent domain believes are blacklisted
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. id0 of a blacklisted machine
+
  
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
<pre>
| valign="top" colspan="3" | '''11. agent domain mac blacklist''' - this is the list of machines that our faux agent domain believes are blacklisted
+
<?xml version="1.0"?>
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
<llsd>
| valign  ="top" width="10%" |
+
  <key>agent_login</key>
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0.  mac of a blacklisted machine
+
  <map>
|}
+
    <key>credential</key>
 +
    <map>
 +
      <key>identifier</key>
 +
      <map>
 +
        <key>type</key>
 +
        <string>agent</string>
 +
        <key>first_name</key>
 +
        <string>Arthur</string>
 +
        <key>last_name</key>
 +
        <string>Crimthande</string>
 +
      </map>
 +
      <key>authenticator</key>
 +
      <map>
 +
        <key>type</key>
 +
        <string>hash</string>
 +
        <key>algorithm</key>
 +
        <string>md5</string>
 +
        <key>secret</key>
 +
        <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
 +
      </map>
 +
    </map>
 +
  </map>
 +
</llsd>
 +
</pre>
  
== Transporting Fixtures ==
+
== LLSD Test 1.3 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource via POST with an Improper Media Type in Content-Type Header ==
  
So it might not be the best idea to publish a standard list of usernames and passwords that are used for testing in live systems. We therefore expect the actual values for the test fixtures (or at least the passwords) to be confidential. To facilitate the exchange of known fixtures, we have the following XML DTD which defines the values of fixtures, so multiple parties can communicate test data easily.
+
If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and the requester uses the 'Content-Type:' header to identify the media type of the the request body, and that media type is not supported by the resource, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 415 result code.
  
'''note : the values of the test fixtures below are non-normative.''' Fixture data is loaded from an XML file and referenced in the tests by it's id attribute.
+
Test 1.3 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+foo', the client library produces a "LLSD Unsupported Media Type" exception.
  
=== Fixture Transport DTD ===
+
<pre>
 +
<?xml version="1.0"?>
 +
<llsd>
 +
  <key>agent_login</key>
 +
  <map>
 +
    <key>credential</key>
 +
    <map>
 +
      <key>identifier</key>
 +
      <map>
 +
        <key>type</key>
 +
        <string>agent</string>
 +
        <key>first_name</key>
 +
        <string>Arthur</string>
 +
        <key>last_name</key>
 +
        <string>Crimthande</string>
 +
      </map>
 +
      <key>authenticator</key>
 +
      <map>
 +
        <key>type</key>
 +
        <string>hash</string>
 +
        <key>algorithm</key>
 +
        <string>md5</string>
 +
        <key>secret</key>
 +
        <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
 +
      </map>
 +
    </map>
 +
  </map>
 +
</llsd>
 +
</pre>
 +
 
 +
== LLSD Test 1.4 - Return an Exception when POSTing bad XML to a Resource ==
 +
 
 +
If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and Content-Type header of the request describes the body of the request as being a 'application/llsd+xml' media type, and the body is improperly formed XML, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 400 result code.
 +
 
 +
Test 1.4 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+xml', the client library produces a "LLSD Bad Request" exception.
  
 
<pre>
 
<pre>
this is an example of a DTD
+
<?xml version="1.0"?>
 +
<llsd>
 +
  <key>agent_login</key>
 +
  <map
 +
    <key>credential</key>
 +
    <map>
 +
      <key>identifier</key>
 +
      <map>
 +
        <key>type</key>
 +
        <string>agent</string>
 +
        <key>first_name</key>
 +
        <string>Arthur</string>
 +
        <key>last_name</key>
 +
        <string>Crimthande</string>
 +
      </map>
 +
      <key>authenticator</key>
 +
      <map>
 +
        <key>type</key>
 +
        <string>hash</string>
 +
        <key>algorithm</key>
 +
        <string>md5</string>
 +
        <key>secret</key>
 +
        <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
 +
      </map>
 +
    </map>
 +
  </map>
 +
</llsd>
 
</pre>
 
</pre>
  
=== An Example of Fixture Data ===
+
== LLSD Test 1.5 - Return an Exception when POSTing a misshaped request to a Resource ==
 +
 
 +
If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and the requester uses the 'Content-Type:' header to identify the media type of the the request body, and request is "mis-shaped" with respect to the LLIDL definition of the resource, it (the resource) SHOULD respond with a HTTP 400 result code.
 +
 
 +
Test 1.5 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+xml', the client library produces a "LLSD Bad Request" exception.
  
 
<pre>
 
<pre>
 
<?xml version="1.0"?>
 
<?xml version="1.0"?>
<fixtures>
+
<llsd>
   <agentdomains>
+
   <key>agent_login</key>
    <agent id="0_0">agent0.aditi.lindenlab.com</agent>
+
   <map>
    <agent id="0_1">agent1.aditi.lindenlab.com</agent>
+
     <key>identifier</key>
   </agentdomains>
+
     <string>agent</string>
  <regions>
+
     <region id="1_0">
+
      <host>sim1.vaak.secondlife.com</host>
+
      <port>13001</port>
+
     <region>
+
  </region>
+
  <accounts>
+
    <account id="2_0">
+
      <name>idontexist</name>
+
      <password>mekmitasdigoat</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_16"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_0">
+
      <name>Ana Goat</name>
+
      <password>Ahutrr</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_0"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_1">
+
      <name>Bill Goat</name>
+
      <password>Btehra</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_1"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_2">
+
      <name>Claudette Goat</name>
+
      <password>Carsobitl</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_2"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_3">
+
      <name>Danny Goat</name>
+
      <password>Dloly</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_3"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_4">
+
      <name>Erika Goat</name>
+
      <password>Eudroad</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_4"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_5">
+
      <name>Fred Goat</name>
+
      <password>Fay</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_5"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_6">
+
      <name>Grace Goat</name>
+
      <password>Gsutav</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_6"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_7">
+
      <name>Henri Goat</name>
+
      <password>Hnana</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_7"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_8">
+
      <name>Ida Goat</name>
+
      <password>Ike</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_8"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_9">
+
      <name>Joaquin Goat</name>
+
      <password>Jinpseohe</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_9"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_10">
+
      <name>Kate Goat</name>
+
      <password>Klye</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_10"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_11">
+
      <name>Larry Goat</name>
+
      <password>Lruaa</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_11"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_12">
+
      <name>Mindy Goat</name>
+
      <password>Mraco</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_12"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_13">
+
      <name>Nicholas Goat</name>
+
      <password>Nnaa</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_13"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_14">
+
      <name>Odette Goat</name>
+
      <password>Oamr</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_14"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_15">
+
      <name>Peter Goat</name>
+
      <password>Pamloa</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_15"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="3_16">
+
      <name>Rose Goat</name>
+
      <password>Rene</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="3_16"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_0">
+
      <name>Walter Llama</name>
+
      <password>Sally</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_0"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_1"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_1">
+
      <name>Virginie Llama</name>
+
      <password>Tdedy</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_2"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_3"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_2">
+
      <name>Thomas Llama</name>
+
      <password>Vkciy</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_4"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_5"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_3">
+
      <name>Shary Llama</name>
+
      <password>Wlefird</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_6"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_7"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_4">
+
      <name>Richard Llama</name>
+
      <password>Yvttee</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_8"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_9"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_5">
+
      <name>Paula Llama</name>
+
      <password>zoomadsl</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_10"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_11"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_6">
+
      <name>Otto Llama</name>
+
      <password>sesame</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_12"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_13"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_7">
+
      <name>Nicole Llama</name>
+
      <password>password</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_14"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_15"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_8">
+
      <name>Matthew Llama</name>
+
      <password>tiger</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_16"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_17"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
    <account id="5_9">
+
      <name>Lisa Llama</name>
+
      <password>toor</password>
+
      <agentrefs>
+
        <agentref ref="6_18"/>
+
        <agentref ref="6_19"/>
+
      </agentrefs>
+
    </account>
+
  </accounts>
+
  <agents>
+
    <agent id="4_0">
+
      <firstname>Arlene</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>smcadmin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_1">
+
      <firstname>Bret</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>SKY_FOX</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_2">
+
      <firstname>Cindy</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>changeme</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_3">
+
      <firstname>Don</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>piranha</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_4">
+
      <firstname>Emily</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>zoomadsl</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_5">
+
      <firstname>Franklin</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>sesame</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_6">
+
      <firstname>Gert</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>password</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_7">
+
      <firstname>Harvey</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>tiger</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_8">
+
      <firstname>Irene</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>toor</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_9">
+
      <firstname>Jose</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>admin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_10">
+
      <firstname>Katia</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>smcadmin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_11">
+
      <firstname>Lee</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>SKY_FOX</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_12">
+
      <firstname>Maria</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>changeme</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_13">
+
      <firstname>Nate</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>piranha</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_14">
+
      <firstname>Ophelia</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>zoomadsl</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_15">
+
      <firstname>Philippe</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>sesame</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="4_16">
+
      <firstname>Rina</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Sheep</lastname>
+
      <password>password</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_0">
+
      <firstname>William</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>tiger</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_1">
+
      <firstname>Valerie</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>toor</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_2">
+
      <firstname>Tony</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>admin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_3">
+
      <firstname>Sandy</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>smcadmin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_4">
+
      <firstname>Rafael</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>SKY_FOX</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_5">
+
      <firstname>Patty</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>changeme</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_6">
+
      <firstname>Oscar</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>piranha</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_7">
+
      <firstname>Nadine</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>zoomadsl</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_8">
+
      <firstname>Michael</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>sesame</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_9">
+
      <firstname>Leslie</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>password</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_10">
+
      <firstname>Kirk</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>tiger</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_11">
+
      <firstname>Joyce</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>toor</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_12">
+
      <firstname>Isaac</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>admin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_13">
+
      <firstname>Helene</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>smcadmin</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_14">
+
      <firstname>Gordon</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>SKY_FOX</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_15">
+
      <firstname>Florence</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>changeme</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_16">
+
      <firstname>Ernesto</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>ntacdmax</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_17">
+
      <firstname>Debby</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>pento</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_18">
+
      <firstname>Chris</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>microbusiness</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_19">
+
      <firstname>Beryl</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>johnlee</password>
+
    </agent>
+
    <agent id="6_20">
+
      <firstname>Alberto</firstname>
+
      <lastname>Camel</lastname>
+
      <password>piranha</password>
+
    </agent>
+
  </agents>
+
  <urls>
+
    <url id="8_0">http://agent0.aditi.lindenlab.com/messages/notice.html</url>
+
  </urls>
+
  <fauxmachines>
+
    <fauxmachine id="9_0">
+
      <mac>01:80:C2:00:00:00</mac>
+
      <id0>3fPkIs1eG0doeDj8uscIZQ==</id0>
+
    </fauxmachine>
+
    <fauxmachine id="9_0">
+
      <mac>01:80:C2:00:00:01</mac>
+
      <id0>3fPkIs1eG0doeDj8uscIZQ==</id0>
+
    </fauxmachine>
+
    <fauxmachine id="9_0">
+
      <mac>01:80:C2:00:00:00</mac>
+
      <id0>4EahsGwT/GYg9uBSQeKcNA==</id0>
+
    </fauxmachine>
+
    <fauxmachine id="9_0">
+
      <mac>01:80:C2:00:00:01</mac>
+
      <id0>4EahsGwT/GYg9uBSQeKcNA==</id0>
+
    </fauxmachine>
+
  </fauxmachines>
+
  <id0blacklist>
+
    <id0 id="10_0">4EahsGwT/GYg9uBSQeKcNA==</id0>
+
  </id0blacklist>
+
  <macblaclist>
+
    <mac id="11_0">01:80:C2:00:00:01</mac>
+
  </macblacklist>
+
</fixtures>
+
  
 +
    <key>first_name</key>
 +
    <string>Arthur</string>
 +
 +
    <key>last_name</key>
 +
    <string>Crimthande</string>
 +
 +
    <key>authenticator</key>
 +
    <string>hash</string>
 +
 +
    <key>algorithm</key>
 +
    <string>md5</string>
 +
 +
    <key>secret</key>
 +
    <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
 +
  </map>
 +
</llsd>
 
</pre>
 
</pre>
  
= Base Tests =
 
  
== REST Tests ==
+
= Authentication Tests ( Test 2.* ) =
 +
 
 +
== Authentication Test 2.0 - Successful Authentication of an Agent Identifier and a Hashed Authenticator ==
 +
 
 +
Test 2.0 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the agent defined in fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'agent' type identifier, a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).
  
== LLSD (Linden Lab Structured Data) ==
+
== Authentication Test 2.1 - Unsuccessful Authentication of an Agent Identifier and a Hashed Authenticator ==
  
== Event Queue ==
+
Test 2.1 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the agent defined in fixture 1.1 (Bertha Crimthande) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'agent' type identifier, a 'key' condition response is returned with the salt, count and duration items undefined.
  
== Capabilities ==
 
  
= Resource Tests =
+
== Authentication Test 2.2 - Successful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Single Agent and a Hashed Authenticator ==
  
== Agent Credential ==
+
Test 2.2 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.0 (cristobal@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).
  
== Account Credential ==
+
== Authentication Test 2.3 - Unsuccessful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Single Agent and a Hashed Authenticator ==
  
= Login Tests =
+
Test 2.3 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.1 (dolly@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, a 'key' condition response is returned with the salt, count and duration items undefined.
  
Login is the process of associating a viewer with an agent domain, then placing the user's avatar in a region managed by a (potentially separate) region domain. The spec describes logging in as the sequence:
+
== Authentication Test 2.4 - Successful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents with the Selected Agent in the Request and a Hashed Authenticator ==
  
# The viewer authenticates to an agent domain for the authorized control of a particular agent.
+
Test 2.4 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.2 (edouard@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, with the agent defined in fixture 1.4 (Edouard Crimthande) a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).
# The viewer directs the agent domain to to place the agent in a region.
+
# The agent domain contacts the region domain for the region, and negotiates placement of the agent.
+
# The region grants access to the agent domain, which in turn passes some of that granted access on to the viewer.
+
  
Testing the login process means logging each of these steps, in order. We should also test that executing them out of order leads to an error.
+
== Authentication Test 2.5 - Unsuccessful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents with the Selected Agent in the Request and a Hashed Authenticator ==
  
We assume the code providing underlying services (such as the event queue, LLSD serialization / deserialization, MD5 Hash production, etc.) is reliable and has been tested.
+
Test 2.5 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.3 (gustav@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, with the agent defined in fixture 1.6 (Gustav Crimthande) a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).
  
== Tests From Client to Agent Domain ==
+
== Authentication Test 2.6 - Select Failure of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents and a Hashed Authenticator ==
  
{|style="background:white" width="100%" cellpadding="5"
+
Test 2.6 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.4 (ana@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, without an agent selected in the response, a 'select' condition response is returned with the 'agents' list set to: [ 'Ana', 'Crimthande', 'Bil', 'Crimthande' ].
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''0. test agent authentication'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" | 0. authenticate agents in fixtures 4.[0-3] with correct authenticator
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect seed cap
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''1. test failures in agent authentication'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. authenticate agents in fixtures 4.[0-3] with incorrect authenticator
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''2. test account authentication'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. authenticate accounts in fixtures 3.[0-3] with correct authenticator
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect seed cap
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |1. authenticate accounts in fixture 5.0 with one of of the agent names from fixture 6.0 or 6.1
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect seed cap
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''3. test non-existent agent'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. attempt to authenticate with fixture 3.4
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "notice" with url fixture 8.0
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''4. test non-existent account'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. attempt to authenticate with fixture 2.0
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "notice" with url fixture 8.0
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''5. test non-existing agent in existent account'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. attempt to authenticate with fixture 3.4 and name from 2.0
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "notice" with url fixture 8.0
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''6. test existing account with no agent specified in account with one agent'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. attempt to authenticate with fixtures 3.[0...3] with no name specified
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect seed cap
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''7. test existing account with no agent specified in account with multiple agents'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. attempt to authenticate with fixtures 5.[0...9] with no name specified
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "select_agent"
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" colspan="3"| '''8. test existing account which has been blacklisted'''
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |0. attempt to authenticate with fixture 4.0 and faux machine 9.1
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "blacklisted"
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |1. attempt to authenticate with fixture 4.0 and faux machine 9.2
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "blacklisted"
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" colspan="2" |2. attempt to authenticate with fixture 4.0 and faux machine 9.3
+
|- style="background:lightgrey;"
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" width="10%" |
+
| valign="top" | expect reason "blacklisted"
+
|}
+
  
= Teleport Tests =
+
[[Category: Pyogp]]
 +
[[Category:Pyogp_Kitchen_Sink]]
 +
[[Category:AW Groupies]]
 +
[[Category:Grid Interoperability]]
 +
[[Category:AW Groupies User Pages]]

Latest revision as of 15:44, 18 January 2009

  • note: this is a brief note for informational purposes. it's eventually going to be "cleaned up" and moved to a more appropriate place on this wiki.
  • note: this is a branch from the original "OGP" Test Case page. PyOGP Test Cases are defined at User:Saijanai_Kuhn/OGP_Test_Cases

Contents

Introduction

What is This?

In the development of the Open Grid Protocol and the PyOGP project, it became obvious that there were no canonical lists of use cases and things to test. This page is the first effort to remediate this omission. While we don't go as far as providing use cases here, we do list common functionality and interoperability tests.

About the OGP Test Cases

The objective of the Open Grid Protocol is to specify syntax and semantics of SL Grid messages to the degree that interoperable viewers, agent domains, region domains and regions may be coded without resort to close examination of open source code from Linden Lab or peeking into the interaction between running clients and servers. The Second Life Grid has been developed sufficiently, the reasoning goes, that it should be possible to shine the bright light of inquiry on the process and document the living heck out of how the system works. Moving forward we should see advantages as software developers code to documented requirements and standards. The "OGP Test Cases" are a catalog of tests that demonstrate compatibility with the written spec.

Well... that's how it's supposed to be... In the real world, "running code" trumps written specifications, and probably will continue to do so. And that's one of the reasons we have the interop tests; properly written test cases succinctly communicate abstractions introduced in written specifications. So rather than viewing the SLGOGP spec and these tests as separate, think of them as being two sections of the same document.

Base Tests ( Test 0.* )

Many OGP messages take the form of an LLSD message serialized to XML and POSTed to an URL somewhere via HTTP (or HTTPS.) In the ideal world, HTTP would be free from error. But as it turns out there are many ways in which a HTTP request could fail, especially if your implementation of OGP uses proxies, load balancers, n-tier service architectures, etc. These tests are intended to ensure your client library properly communicates HTTP errors, assuming your client library has a standard technique for handling and recovering from such errors.

It is entirely possible that your client library does not handle such errors cleanly. This is not a failure, per se, but we strongly encourage implementers to expose an interface to client applications allowing exceptional events to be communicated through the client library and to the application.

Base Test 0.0 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Non-Existent Resource

This test simply posts a properly formatted login request to an URL that does not exist. We anticipate a HTTP 404 result code, or at least that's what we would return if you sent a request to an undefined URL. In an ideal world we would test a resource from each resource class to ensure client library code handling each message properly propagates the "Not Found" exception. However, in the interests of alacrity we're only describing this test in terms of the agent_login resource class.

So, test 0.0 is considered "successful" if after attempting to access the agent_login resource defined for fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) at the agent domain described in fixture 0.404 (the canonical undefined agent domain), the client library produces a "HTTP Not Found" exception.

Base Test 0.1 - Return an Exception when Accessing a "Broken" Resource

This test posts a properly formatted login request to an URL that has been preconfigured to return a HTTP 500 result code.

So, test 0.1 is considered "successful" if after attempting to access the agent_login resource defined for fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) at the agent domain described in fixture 0.500 (the canonical broken agent domain), the client library produces a "HTTP Internal Server Error" exception.

Base Test 0.2 - Return an Exception when Accessing an "Unavailable" Resource

This test posts a properly formatted login request to an URL that has been preconfigured to return a HTTP 503 result code.

So, test 0.2 is considered "successful" if after attempting to access the agent_login resource defined for fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) at the agent domain described in fixture 0.503 (the canonical unavailable agent domain), the client library produces a "HTTP Service Not Available" exception.

LLSD Tests ( Test 1.* )

These tests exercise concepts introduced in the "LLSD" section of the OGP spec.

LLSD Test 1.0 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource with the Wrong HTTP Method

If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request using an unsupported HTTP method, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 405 result code.

Test 1.0 is considered "successful" if, after attempting sending a HTTP GET to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain), the client library produces a "LLSD Method Not Allowed" exception.

LLSD Test 1.1 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource via GET with an Improper Media Type in Accept

If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP GET, and the requester uses the 'Accept:' header to specify the media type it will accept, and that media type is not supported by the resource, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 415 result code.

hmm... need to define a canonical resource that accepts GET.

LLSD Test 1.2 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource via POST with an Improper Media Type in Accept Header

If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and the requester uses the 'Accept:' header to specify the media type it will accept, and that media type is not supported by the resource, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 415 result code.

Test 1.2 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+xml' and the 'Accept:' header is set to 'application/llsd+foo', the client library produces a "LLSD Unsupported Media Type" exception.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<llsd>
  <key>agent_login</key>
  <map>
    <key>credential</key>
    <map>
      <key>identifier</key>
      <map>
        <key>type</key>
        <string>agent</string>
        <key>first_name</key>
        <string>Arthur</string>
        <key>last_name</key>
        <string>Crimthande</string>
      </map>
      <key>authenticator</key>
      <map>
        <key>type</key>
        <string>hash</string>
        <key>algorithm</key>
        <string>md5</string>
        <key>secret</key>
        <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
      </map>
    </map>
  </map>
</llsd>

LLSD Test 1.3 - Return an Exception when Accessing a Resource via POST with an Improper Media Type in Content-Type Header

If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and the requester uses the 'Content-Type:' header to identify the media type of the the request body, and that media type is not supported by the resource, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 415 result code.

Test 1.3 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+foo', the client library produces a "LLSD Unsupported Media Type" exception.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<llsd>
  <key>agent_login</key>
  <map>
    <key>credential</key>
    <map>
      <key>identifier</key>
      <map>
        <key>type</key>
        <string>agent</string>
        <key>first_name</key>
        <string>Arthur</string>
        <key>last_name</key>
        <string>Crimthande</string>
      </map>
      <key>authenticator</key>
      <map>
        <key>type</key>
        <string>hash</string>
        <key>algorithm</key>
        <string>md5</string>
        <key>secret</key>
        <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
      </map>
    </map>
  </map>
</llsd>

LLSD Test 1.4 - Return an Exception when POSTing bad XML to a Resource

If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and Content-Type header of the request describes the body of the request as being a 'application/llsd+xml' media type, and the body is improperly formed XML, the resource SHOULD respond with a HTTP 400 result code.

Test 1.4 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+xml', the client library produces a "LLSD Bad Request" exception.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<llsd>
  <key>agent_login</key>
  <map
    <key>credential</key>
    <map>
      <key>identifier</key>
      <map>
        <key>type</key>
        <string>agent</string>
        <key>first_name</key>
        <string>Arthur</string>
        <key>last_name</key>
        <string>Crimthande</string>
      </map>
      <key>authenticator</key>
      <map>
        <key>type</key>
        <string>hash</string>
        <key>algorithm</key>
        <string>md5</string>
        <key>secret</key>
        <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
      </map>
    </map>
  </map>
</llsd>

LLSD Test 1.5 - Return an Exception when POSTing a misshaped request to a Resource

If an agent domain, region domain or region receives a resource request via a HTTP POST, and the requester uses the 'Content-Type:' header to identify the media type of the the request body, and request is "mis-shaped" with respect to the LLIDL definition of the resource, it (the resource) SHOULD respond with a HTTP 400 result code.

Test 1.5 is considered "successful" if, after POSTing the following message body to the authentication URL defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the 'Content-Type:' header set to 'application/llsd+xml', the client library produces a "LLSD Bad Request" exception.

<?xml version="1.0"?>
<llsd>
  <key>agent_login</key>
  <map>
    <key>identifier</key>
    <string>agent</string>

    <key>first_name</key>
    <string>Arthur</string>

    <key>last_name</key>
    <string>Crimthande</string>

    <key>authenticator</key>
    <string>hash</string>

    <key>algorithm</key>
    <string>md5</string>

    <key>secret</key>
    <binary encoding="base16">c169c172e7a5dafc74f69c476c0a4869</binary>
  </map>
</llsd>


Authentication Tests ( Test 2.* )

Authentication Test 2.0 - Successful Authentication of an Agent Identifier and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.0 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the agent defined in fixture 1.0 (Arthur Crimthande) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'agent' type identifier, a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).

Authentication Test 2.1 - Unsuccessful Authentication of an Agent Identifier and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.1 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the agent defined in fixture 1.1 (Bertha Crimthande) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'agent' type identifier, a 'key' condition response is returned with the salt, count and duration items undefined.


Authentication Test 2.2 - Successful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Single Agent and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.2 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.0 (cristobal@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).

Authentication Test 2.3 - Unsuccessful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Single Agent and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.3 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.1 (dolly@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, a 'key' condition response is returned with the salt, count and duration items undefined.

Authentication Test 2.4 - Successful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents with the Selected Agent in the Request and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.4 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.2 (edouard@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, with the agent defined in fixture 1.4 (Edouard Crimthande) a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).

Authentication Test 2.5 - Unsuccessful Authentication of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents with the Selected Agent in the Request and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.5 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.3 (gustav@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, with the agent defined in fixture 1.6 (Gustav Crimthande) a 'success' condition response is returned and the agent_seed_capability URI is subordinate to the seed root defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain).

Authentication Test 2.6 - Select Failure of an Account Identifier with a Multiple Agents and a Hashed Authenticator

Test 2.6 is considered "successful" if after requesting the agent_login resource defined in fixture 0.200 (a working agent domain) with the account defined in fixture 2.4 (ana@example.com) using a 'hash' type authenticator and an 'account' type identifier, without an agent selected in the response, a 'select' condition response is returned with the 'agents' list set to: [ 'Ana', 'Crimthande', 'Bil', 'Crimthande' ].