-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 174
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
add http.request.synthetic
attribute to server spans and metrics
#1523
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Changes from all commits
e579479
984fbee
4d1b110
f925b65
6b48773
5837106
b4686ff
568cefc
d52bde9
40a7d3b
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
@@ -0,0 +1,22 @@ | ||
# Use this changelog template to create an entry for release notes. | ||
# | ||
# If your change doesn't affect end users you should instead start | ||
# your pull request title with [chore] or use the "Skip Changelog" label. | ||
|
||
# One of 'breaking', 'deprecation', 'new_component', 'enhancement', 'bug_fix' | ||
change_type: enhancement | ||
|
||
# The name of the area of concern in the attributes-registry, (e.g. http, cloud, db) | ||
component: user_agent | ||
|
||
# A brief description of the change. Surround your text with quotes ("") if it needs to start with a backtick (`). | ||
note: Add the user_agent.synthetic.type attribute to track if spans and metrics are the result of real users, testing, or bots. | ||
|
||
# Mandatory: One or more tracking issues related to the change. You can use the PR number here if no issue exists. | ||
# The values here must be integers. | ||
issues: [1127] | ||
|
||
# (Optional) One or more lines of additional information to render under the primary note. | ||
# These lines will be padded with 2 spaces and then inserted directly into the document. | ||
# Use pipe (|) for multiline entries. | ||
subtext: |
Original file line number | Diff line number | Diff line change |
---|---|---|
|
@@ -35,3 +35,20 @@ groups: | |
using a user-agent for non-browser products, such as microservices with multiple names/versions inside the | ||
`user_agent.original`, the most significant version SHOULD be selected. In such a scenario it should align | ||
with `user_agent.name` | ||
- id: user_agent.synthetic.type | ||
stability: experimental | ||
brief: > | ||
Specifies the category of synthetic traffic, such as monitoring, crawler, bot, or another automation. | ||
note: > | ||
This flag can primarily be determined by the contents of the `user_agent.original` attribute. Instrumentations should determine what they consider synthetic or bot traffic, | ||
There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. It there any prior art we can refer to? E.g. a well-known database of crawlers/bots? There was a problem hiding this comment. Choose a reason for hiding this commentThe reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more. There are a number sites that maintain lists of the most popular. So far, the best I've found is Data Dome's list of those most popular in 2024 https://datadome.co/bot-management-protection/crawlers-list/. |
||
and set this attribute accordingly. This attribute is useful for distinguishing between genuine client traffic and synthetic traffic generated by bots or tests. | ||
type: | ||
members: | ||
- id: bot | ||
value: "bot" | ||
brief: 'Bot source.' | ||
stability: experimental | ||
- id: test | ||
value: "test" | ||
brief: 'Synthetic test source.' | ||
stability: experimental |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Asked this in chat, but also asking here.
Should this (also) be added to client spans so synthetic agents can self-identify in a trace?
e.g. https://opentelemetry.io/blog/2023/synthetic-testing/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Makes sense to me to allow agents to self-identify and allow for propagation of
user_agent.synthetic.type
to any server spans created in response to the remote client span from the synthetic agent.There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
these sound like two different (though potentially both useful) things:
and
I'd suggest sticking to just the first in this PR