Using bearer token to call recurring integration of D365FnO using logic apps




This article talks about using bearer token to authenticate recurring integration URIs to talk to D365FnO. For our example, we are using an XML based input, which we need to feed into D365FnO (for example: you can think of a feeding an XML to a composite entity). Assuming that we already have an enqueuing URL in place, we can go to logic apps designer to declare a variable called 'token' for our ease of calculations:


We can call the token generating URL, through a HTTP POST request connecter in our Logic apps, as follows:



Here the URI implies: the token generator URI, from "https://login.microsoftonline.com" 
Header: set 'Content-type' as 'application/x-www-form-urlencoded'
In Queries set: 'Grant_Type' = 'client_credentials'
And in the body, set Client_Id = <Client Id from your App registration>, add your client_Secret by appending '&'. Client_Secret = <from your app registration>, add grant_type= 'Client_credentials' by appending a '&' and finally append scope which is = <base URL of D365FnO> 
Alternately: you can save these parameters in an Azure Key Vault, and then fetch them here to avoid writing these variables as open literals. 

Typically the output looks like this:

You need to get the value of 'Access_token' from the above JSON. This could be done by parsing the Json like this:

You can now set the value of the bearer token in the 'token' variable which you have declared above:

Finally you can call the enqueue/dequeue URLs,  by using a HTTP request as follows:

In the Header, you need yo pass on: 'Authorization' value as 'Bearer <token variable value obtained from above>' (Don't forget to include a space between 'Bearer' and the token value). In the body, you need to send the XML content which you receive as an input. This will do the needful of insert/update, based on the recurrence time, which you have set for your batch execution.  

Additionally you can keep the last step inside a loop, so as to wait till the execution gets completed or throw error on failure. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Make your menu items visible on main menu, conditionally,, using this cool feature of D365FO

Image
  Wassup guys? I am sure you must have encountered this situation where you needed to display your menuItems, on main menu, based on some condition, haven't you? This was only possible by using config keys and flights. Things get a bit tricky,  when suppose you have a requirement like this: you need to make it dynamic, by introducing a toggle switch on a field on a paremeter form.  Suppose on Accounts Receivables Parameters >> You have a field called ' Show US customer '. You have a requirement that says when you turn on this toggle, then only the menuItem ' Input SSN details ', under AR module. This is now highly acheivable by leveraging subscription to 'SysMenuNavigationObjectFactory' class, simply by saying a. Create a new class USMenuItemsVisibilityManager b. Copy the following method, with proper documentation (don't change signature/anything else) [SubscribesTo(classstr(SysMenuNavigationObjectFactory), staticdelegatestr(SysMenuNavigationObjec...
Read more

X++ : mistakes which developers commit the most

Image
   The most important thing is to remember where and when to write the code. a. Developers have an inherent habit of writing erratic select statements: select * from custTable where custTable.AccountNum == <SomeValue> Where in essence we need to make use of optimized choice of fields in the select statement. b. Making use of 'continue' keywords: While select custTrans where <someConditions> { if (cusTTrans.CustGroup != mappingTable.CustGroup) { continue; } } 'Continue' statements are precisely a very unhygienic way of designing your code. The above statement could have been easily ornamented by using exists/not exists joins. Using Continue statements would eventually result in a high performance impact. Also select statements should be made punctuated with a 'firstonly' clause -- just not from best practise standpoint, but also from performance considerations. c. Writing nested loops: This is a common mistake that perha...
Read more

Are you still using macros? Be sure you read this.

Image
  You still use a lot of macros in your code, don't you? Of course you should: Macros, as per Microsoft,  are p recompiler directives are processed before the code is compiled. The directives declare and handle macros and their values. The directives are removed by the precompiler so that the X++ compiler never encounters them. The X++ compiler only sees the sequence of characters written into the X++ code by the directives. However macros, are not quite recomended by Microsoft. They are slow, they can be subsequently deorectaed at any later time.  The Macros are  actually  a type of classes, only that they are not instantiated and not need be defined as classes. Hence runtime garbage collection could be a huge issue, consquently (a class when gets out of scope, gets garbage-collected owing to the destructor classes of DOT net instrumentation classes). Summing up, macrros are a bit old way of writing code. Use static classes instead. public static class MyIdenti...
Read more