Github user mmiklavc commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/530#discussion_r123090723
--- Diff: metron-analytics/metron-maas-service/README.md ---
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ Now that we have a deployed model, let's adjust the
configurations for the Squid
* Edit the squid parser configuration at
`$METRON_HOME/config/zookeeper/parsers/squid.json` in your favorite text editor
and add a new FieldTransformation to indicate a threat alert based on the model
(note the addition of `is_malicious` and `is_alert`):
```
{
- "parserClassName": "org.apache.metron.parsers.GrokParser",
+ "parserClassName": "org.apache.metron.parsers.grok.GrokParser",
--- End diff --
I noticed GrokParser and CSVParser remain in the metron-parsers project. Is
there a general rule of thumb for what would be considered general vs what
should become a parser-extension? My intuition here says that since Grok and
CSV are more abstract concepts, they're kept in metron-parsers while more
concrete implementations of those types are realized as extensions, e.g. squid
is Grok. Is that your thinking here as well?
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
