Allow passing Type and Uplink in registration requests

[nkinkade]

Currently, both Type and Uplink in v2.Registration are statically set to "unknown". This change allows (requires) that valid-looking values for those fields be passed in registration commands.

We will need to be sure that RNP has updated their configurations before we release this, and also that our own test instances. Alternatively, I could update these changes to make these fields optional. I chose to make them required because it puts autojoined machines at parity with every other machine on the platform, where those fields are always present.

---

This change is 

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 12059126093

Details

• 36 of 36 (100.0%) changed or added relevant lines in 2 files are covered.
• 10 unchanged lines in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.8%) to 98.142%

---

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
handler/handler.go	10	97.8%

Totals
Change from base Build 12041337049:	-0.8%
Covered Lines:	1215
Relevant Lines:	1238

---

💛 - Coveralls

[stephen-soltesz]

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 approvals obtained (waiting on @nkinkade)

---

handler/handler.go line 187 at r1 (raw file):

	param.Type = req.URL.Query().Get("type")
	if !isValidType(param.Type) {
		fmt.Printf("bad machine type")

Prefer log if necessary. For log messages include more context; here for example the provided type value.

---

handler/handler.go line 189 at r1 (raw file):

		fmt.Printf("bad machine type")
		resp.Error = &v2.Error{
			Type:   "?machine-type=<machine-type>",

This error message references a parameter that is different from the one named in Get() above. What is the parameter name?

[nkinkade]

PTAL?

Reviewable status: 0 of 1 approvals obtained (waiting on @stephen-soltesz)

---

handler/handler.go line 187 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, stephen-soltesz (Stephen Soltesz) wrote…

Prefer log if necessary. For log messages include more context; here for example the provided type value.

Sorry. This statement was actually just a debug line I added while updating the unit tests, and I never meant for it to make it through to the PR. It is removed now.

---

handler/handler.go line 189 at r1 (raw file):

Previously, stephen-soltesz (Stephen Soltesz) wrote…

This error message references a parameter that is different from the one named in Get() above. What is the parameter name?

Another good catch. I originally has this defined as Param.MachineType, since "type" is so generic. But after the fact I decided that if Type was good enough for v2.Registration, than it was good enough in the Param struct` too, and that having them equal made it easier to understand. I missed modifying this, but it is updated now.

[stephen-soltesz]

Reviewable status: complete! 1 of 1 approvals obtained