I agree that named provider config should suffice. HA and AclsAuth
reference services within the topology and therfore will present a
challenge for reuse across topologies.

We'll need to figure that out.

On Aug 31, 2017 9:12 AM, "Philip Zampino" <pzamp...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Concerning the externalized provider configuration, the idea is to have
> sets of "named" (unique ID'd) config, which can be referenced by any Knox
> topology.
> So, you could have a single provider configuration that is applied (by
> reference) to all your cluster topologies, if that made sense for your
> deployment.
> This will allow a change to a single config (externalized provider config)
> to affect all the clusters topologies that reference it; rather than what
> is required today, which is to make the same change in every affected
> cluster topology config.
> Does that answer your question?
>
> I'll defer the HA question because I'm not yet familiar enough with it.
>
> Thanks for the feedback,
>    Phil
>
> On Thu, Aug 31, 2017 at 3:42 AM, Krishna Pandey <krish.pande...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > >
> > > As a result, I'm wondering if Knox should support provider
> configuration
> > > references in topology.xml, rather than having to duplicate it across
> > > descriptors.
> >
> >
> > +1 to Phil's remark above. Adding to that as Knox provides multi-cluster
> > support, can we have external provider config cluster-wise? Or we can
> > define multiple external provider config in single "global" provider
> config
> > file and refer them with some key?
> >
> > Also, when services are deployed in HA, we specify HaProvider and
> multiple
> > Service URLs in the topology. Will it make sense to use Load balancer IP
> > address / External URL for those services in topology instead of multiple
> > service URLs and using HaProvider?
> >
> > Thanks,
> > Krishna Pandey
> >
> > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:05 PM, larry mccay <lmc...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Terrific, Phil!
> > >
> > >
> > > On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Philip Zampino <pzamp...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > After giving this KIP some thought, I would like to work on it. I've
> > > added
> > > > more detail to the wiki, and I'll create a JIRA for it.
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 10:03 AM, larry mccay <lmc...@apache.org>
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Wonderful details, Phil!
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 9:40 AM, Philip Zampino <
> pzamp...@gmail.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks! I've added the Ambari API details to the wiki.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Fri, Aug 25, 2017 at 8:27 AM, larry mccay <lmc...@apache.org>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > HI Phil -
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Thank you for digging into this topic!
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I've added you as a contributor to the wiki and you should be
> > able
> > > to
> > > > > > edit
> > > > > > > the KIP now.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --larry
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On Thu, Aug 24, 2017 at 3:45 PM, Philip Zampino <
> > > pzamp...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I've put together a quick python POC targeting Ambari as the
> > > > > discovery
> > > > > > > > source, just to prove that we can indeed get the necessary
> > > details
> > > > > via
> > > > > > > > Ambari's REST API.
> > > > > > > > It generates a proper topology.xml descriptor based on a
> simple
> > > > > > > descriptor
> > > > > > > > (I chose YAML for this POC), which has a reference to what
> I've
> > > > > called
> > > > > > a
> > > > > > > > policy descriptor (the <gateway/> portion of the topology
> > > > > descriptor).
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I am currently unable to update the KIP, but I can share the
> > REST
> > > > > APIs
> > > > > > > I've
> > > > > > > > employed if there is interest.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > As a result, I'm wondering if Knox should support provider
> > > > > > configuration
> > > > > > > > references in topology.xml, rather than having to duplicate
> it
> > > > across
> > > > > > > > descriptors.
> > > > > > > > So, instead of <gateway><provider>...</gateway> in each
> > > > > topology.xml,
> > > > > > > have
> > > > > > > > a single element that points to an external provider config
> > > (e.g.,
> > > > > > > > <policy-ref>$GATEWAY_HOME/conf/policy/my-named-provider-
> > > > > > > > config.xml</policy-ref>).
> > > > > > > > I've already externalized it for input to the POC, but I'm
> > still
> > > > > > copying
> > > > > > > > the contents into the resulting topology descriptor; I think
> it
> > > > would
> > > > > > be
> > > > > > > > better to copy only the reference.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >  - Phil
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:55 PM, larry mccay <
> > lmc...@apache.org>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Good to hear, Phil.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Yes, I was looking to go back and add some of the API
> > specifics
> > > > and
> > > > > > > > > investigation details for at least Ambari and ZK.
> > > > > > > > > If others make sense to add such as Consul, etcd, etc that
> > > would
> > > > be
> > > > > > > good
> > > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > well and it would help to tease out some of what may be
> > needed
> > > > for
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > abstraction API and config.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Philip Zampino <
> > > > > pzamp...@gmail.com>
> > > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > This sounds like a good improvement from a usability
> > > > perspective.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I agree that Knox must continue its support for direct
> > > topology
> > > > > > (XML)
> > > > > > > > > > definitions, but for those deployments where there is a
> > > service
> > > > > > > > registry
> > > > > > > > > > (e.g., Ambari, Zookeeper, Consul, etc...) with knowledge
> of
> > > the
> > > > > > > > topology,
> > > > > > > > > > the simplified config coupled with the service discovery
> > > could
> > > > > > reduce
> > > > > > > > > > topology (especially ServiceConnectivity) errors.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I also agree that consolidating provider configurations
> > into
> > > > > named
> > > > > > > > sets,
> > > > > > > > > > which can be referenced from topology configurations,
> will
> > > be a
> > > > > > good
> > > > > > > > > > change, especially if there are commonly grouped
> providers
> > > > > employed
> > > > > > > by
> > > > > > > > > > multiple topologies.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Concerning the TODO sections, is your intention is that
> > they
> > > > > > contain
> > > > > > > > the
> > > > > > > > > > respective API facilities that will provide the
> information
> > > > > needed
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > populate a topology definition?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > - Phil
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Aug 18, 2017 at 12:39 PM, larry mccay <
> > > > lmc...@apache.org
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > All -
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I have published an initial stab at a proposal for
> > > > simplifying
> > > > > > > > topology
> > > > > > > > > > > management [1] - as I briefly mentioned on the 0.14.0
> > > > planning
> > > > > > > > thread.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > There are a couple TODO sections that need some
> > > investigation
> > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > Ambari
> > > > > > > > > > > API and Zookeeper Registry API as discovery plugins.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > Please give the KIP a read and let me know if it makes
> > > sense
> > > > or
> > > > > > if
> > > > > > > > you
> > > > > > > > > > > would like to take on specific pieces of this work. If
> > you
> > > > > would
> > > > > > > like
> > > > > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > > > add other options or ideas, etc.
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > I think that this will have a huge impact as usability
> > > > > > improvements
> > > > > > > > for
> > > > > > > > > > > management of the gateway!
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > --larry
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > > 1.
> > > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/
> confluence/display/KNOX/KIP-8+
> > > > > > > > > > > Service+Discovery+and+Topology+Generation
> > > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to