Proxy Server Dynamic Expectation Validation

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing solutions for validating expectations based on specifications are limited by the inability to dynamically update response mappings, leading to 'stale stub' issues and are restricted to specific specifications and technology stacks, causing integration problems and increased development costs.

Innovation Solution

A method and system that continuously monitor specification changes, dynamically update scenarios, and validate expectations in real-time, supporting both synchronous and asynchronous protocols, and multiple specifications without requiring downtime.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If existing proxy servers use static response mapping setup, then the system is simple to configure, but the expectations become stale when specifications are updated

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesync between expectations and specificationVSAvoiddynamic update mechanism
Core Design Contradiction:
ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent implements dynamic expectation validation by continuously monitoring specification changes and automatically updating response mappings. The system transitions from static configuration to dynamic adaptation, where the proxy server can detect specification updates and regenerate expectations without manual intervention, ensuring expectations remain synchronized with the latest specification version.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The system establishes a feedback loop where the proxy server monitors specification changes, validates current expectations against updated specifications, and automatically updates expectations when mismatches are detected. This continuous validation mechanism ensures reliability by detecting stale expectations and triggering regeneration based on specification changes.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

2Adaptability or versatility

If proxy servers are restricted to single specification type, then the implementation is simpler, but the adaptability to different technology stacks is limited

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvemulti-specification supportVSAvoidspecification parsing and validation logic
Core Design Contradiction:
Adaptability or versatilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The patent creates a universal proxy server implementation that can handle multiple specification types (OpenAPI, AsyncAPI, etc.) through a unified expectation validation mechanism. The system uses specification-agnostic parsing and validation logic that adapts to different specification formats, allowing a single proxy server instance to serve multiple technology stacks without requiring separate implementations for each specification type.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The system manages complexity by parameterizing the specification handling logic, where the core validation mechanism remains constant but adapts to different specification types through configurable parameters and specification-specific parsers. This allows the system to support multiple specifications while maintaining a consistent underlying validation framework.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #35Parameter changes

3Loss of time

If expectations are updated manually after specification changes, then the system remains simple, but integration issues are detected late in the development lifecycle

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvedetection time of mismatchesVSAvoidautomatic expectation validation
Core Design Contradiction:
Loss of timeVSExtent of automation

Solution Approach 1:

The system performs preliminary validation by continuously checking expectations against specifications before integration issues manifest in production. The automatic validation mechanism proactively detects mismatches between expectations and updated specifications, allowing developers to address issues early in the development lifecycle rather than waiting for manual updates or production failures.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #10Preliminary action

Solution Approach 2:

The patent implements continuous expectation validation that operates throughout the software development lifecycle. Instead of periodic or manual validation checks, the system continuously monitors specification changes and validates expectations in real-time, ensuring ongoing synchronization between expectations and specifications without interrupting the development workflow.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #20Continuity of useful action

4Productivity

If the proxy server shuts down to update expectations, then the update process is simpler, but the system experiences downtime

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvesystem availabilityVSAvoidhot updating mechanism
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The system implements periodic validation cycles that update expectations in stages rather than all at once. The proxy server can validate and update expectations for different specification paths or service endpoints separately, allowing continuous operation while performing updates. This staged approach maintains system availability while managing the complexity of hot updating mechanisms.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #19Periodic action

Data Source

PatentUS20240406079A1Method and system for validating expectations on a proxy server based on a set of specifications
Publication Date: 2024.12.05 AGILE FAQS TECH PVT LTD
  • US20240406079A1 patent drawing
  • US20240406079A1 patent drawing
  • US20240406079A1 patent drawing

AI summary

A system and method for validating expectations based on a set of specifications is provided. The invention comprises receiving, a set of specifications, a set of expectations, and a set of requests. Further a set of scenarios are generated based on the set of specifications. The set of expectations are compared with the set of scenarios. A set of valid and invalid expectations from the set of expectations are identified based on the comparison and stored. The received requests are services based on the set of scenarios and the set of valid expectations. While servicing, the set of specifications are monitored to identify any changes and the set of scenarios are dynamically updated. The set of expectations are compared again with the updated scenarios, to identify updated set of valid expectations. Further set of new requests are serviced based on updated set of valid expectations and updated scenarios.