Plans for opt-in OpenTelemetry attribute implementation and configuration?

[matt-hensley]

Opening this against the runtime repo as it covers ASP.NET Core and HttpClient but may have further implications, please let me know if this is the wrong location.

For opt-in OpenTelemetry attributes, what is the strategy for implementation and configuration?

A good example is the http.server.request.duration metric which has two opt-in attributes: server.address and server.port.

As noted in the .NET-specific OTel semantic conventions, these opt-in attributes are not reported and do not have an opt-in mechanism.

It is possible use tag enrichment via IHttpMetricsTagsFeature to add both attributes. Any user interested in opt-in attributes would need to write enrichment code to populate the values.

I am interested if there are plans for the addition of opt-in OpenTelemety attributes, and if consideration has been given to a common opt-in pattern.

[cijothomas]

open-telemetry/opentelemetry-dotnet#3373 (comment) This maybe a good option to consider.

[cijothomas]

If dotnet/aspnetcore#52439 is not landing in .NET9 timeframe, then probably a good idea to implement something in OTel Instrumentation libraries itself: open-telemetry/opentelemetry-dotnet-contrib#1786

[ericstj]

cc @tarekgh

[tarekgh]

CC @antonfirsov @JamesNK @noahfalk @lmolkova

[tarekgh]

CC @samsp-msft

[JamesNK]

There are other things to configure, such as the list of available HTTP method values in metrics.

This configuration is difficult because I don't think it should be static (yuck), but there also isn't anywhere good to place it. The http handler maybe?

It's not urgent and can be considered based on demand.

[CarnaViire]

Triage: Not urgent, already marked as Future.

If you need the feature, please upvote the top post to help us prioritize. Thanks!

[antonfirsov]

Weird, #94829 states that server.port should be Required. @lmolkova has this changed since open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#459?

I agree with #103302 (comment). This needs an API, for that we are already too late in the release cycle for .NET 9.

[lmolkova]

Weird, #94829 states that server.port should be Required. @lmolkova has this changed since open-telemetry/semantic-conventions#459?

@antonfirsov the port used to be opt-in when .NET semconv were stabilized and then was changed to required right before OTel HTTP was stabilized.

[antonfirsov]

Nevermind my #103302 (comment), I was looking at the server metric.

[antonfirsov]

Duplicate of #104738 and #94829.