That's correct.
David
On Fri, Jun 3, 2022 at 2:11 AM José Armando García Sancio
<jsan...@confluent.io.invalid> wrote:
>
> David Jacot wrote:
> > At the moment, the KIP stipulates that the broker remains in
> > InControlledShutdown state until it is re-registered with a new
> > incarnation id. This implies that a broker can be both fenced and in
> > controlled shutdown state. We could make them mutually exclusive but I
> > think that there is value in the current proposal because we are able
> > to differentiate if a broker was fenced due to the controlled shutdown
> >or not.
>
> Thanks David. Is this the reason why the BrokerRegistrationChangeRecord says:
>
> > { "name": "InControlledShutdown", "type": "int8", "versions": "1+",
> > "taggedVersions": "1+", "tag": 1,
> > "about": "0 if no change, 1 if the broker is in controlled shutdown." }
>
> In other words the only way to change the InControlShutdown to false
> is to create a new registration with a new incarnation id.
>
> > The broker will leave this state when it registers itself with a new
> > incarnation id.
>
> -José
