Hi Lukasz, > If this doesn't convince you I don't know what can :)
Actually, I understand your points and agree with some of them, but still think that we're doing that wrong way. But as I see, nobody cares and the team is ok with current approach. Let's keep things as they are, then. > we also will use keystone as service/endpoint discovery tool. Indeed, it's a cool possible usercase. > Do you now, that you are proposing to introduce backward > incompatible change? No, I don't know why it's backward incompatible change. If we add Nailgun auth logic which will use keystone inside - there's no incompatible changes, since we will still use keystone auth token. > Why do you need this in the first place? If you want to know when user is > using UI you can do it by adding special header in JavaScript client. > You can easly detect when user started and stopped using UI. > You can do the same with fuelclient. I'd prefer to refuse to count such metrics rather than use hacks in headers. :) Thanks, Igor On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 10:44 PM, Lukasz Oles <lo...@mirantis.com> wrote: > Hi Igor, > > On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 8:58 AM, Igor Kalnitsky <ikalnit...@mirantis.com> > wrote: >> >> In Fuel we need authentication only for Nailgun and we don't need it >> for other parts of Fuel, right? > > > Actually no. Currently nailgun and ostf are using keystone for > authentication/authorization. > In next release we will introduce Plugin Manager which will be separate > service. It will also require > keystone. > So for now I know about 3 services. > Some advanced plugins with their own API will also require keystone. > Currently we are also working[1] on testing Fuel on large scale and we may > use Rally[2] for this. Rally requires keystone. > It uses it to discover nailgun service. > In future we may add to fuelclient OSTF and Plugin support and we also will > use keystone as service/endpoint discovery tool. Anyone can use it this way, > as in OpenStack. > Also if someone comes to us from OpenStack world he already knows what to > do. After all we are building OpenStack installation tool here. > > If this doesn't convince you I don't know what can :) > >> >> For example, if we will decide >> to use Keystone v3 the only thing we will have to do is to change only >> Nailgun, not all clients. > > Actually keystone here is better than nailgun here because it can support > many API versions. Do you now, that you are proposing to introduce backward > incompatible change? > > Why do you need this in the first place? If you want to know when user is > using UI you can do it by adding special header in JavaScript client. You > can easly detect when user started and stopped using UI. You can do the same > with fuelclient. > I don't see any reason to make such change. > > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/119400/ > [2] https://github.com/stackforge/rally > > Regards, > >> > We are currently fixing some small issues with our implementation[1] >> >> Thank you for the link! I'll take a look. >> >> >> Thanks, >> Igor >> >> On Wed, Sep 24, 2014 at 12:48 AM, Lukasz Oles <lo...@mirantis.com> wrote: >> > Hi Igor, >> > >> > When we were designing this future (access control for Fuel) there was a >> > discussion about this. We decided to follow OpenStack approach where you >> > authenticate using keystone and then use only token to talk with >> > services. >> > If you are using fuelclient or UI it's hidden from you as in OpenStack. >> > >> > We are currently fixing some small issues with our implementation[1]. >> > Please >> > read the spec. You may suggest some changes which will help you with >> > statistics. Maybe cookies will help? Vitaly can comment on it. Changing >> > nailgun API for me is the worst solution. >> > >> > [1] https://review.openstack.org/#/c/118284/ >> > >> > Regards, >> > >> > >> > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 9:28 PM, Igor Kalnitsky >> > <ikalnit...@mirantis.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> Hi Lukasz, >> >> >> >> Thank you for the input. Actually I agree with you, but still I think >> >> there's something wrong with our current approach. >> >> >> >> I don't like that we work with keystone directly from UI and Fuel CLI. >> >> I believe there should be a Nailgun API for authenticating users. In >> >> deep of Nail Gun we can use Keystone for authenticating users and >> >> validating tokens, but not vice-versa. >> >> >> >> I mean there's something wrong if we don't provide authentication >> >> abstraction and use keystone directly in both server and client sides >> >> (Nailgun, CLI, UI, Upgrade Script, etc). >> >> >> >> What do you think about it? >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Igor >> >> >> >> On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 8:07 PM, Lukasz Oles <lo...@mirantis.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> > Guys, >> >> > >> >> > there is no "logout issue". This is REST API. It is stateless. >> >> > There is no such thing like login or logout in REST API. You can only >> >> > get >> >> > authentication token. This token is only valid for a while. After >> >> > some >> >> > time >> >> > it will be outdated and you need to get new one. It doesn't mean that >> >> > user >> >> > login and logout every time, it only means that token is not valid >> >> > anymore >> >> > and you need new one. >> >> > >> >> > In 6.0 token will be valid for 24h, so when you will see new token it >> >> > means >> >> > user started using API again. That's all. You can easily calculate >> >> > when >> >> > user >> >> > started using API and when he ended. You don't need to add >> >> > login/logut >> >> > handlers. It's broken. REST API doesn't work this way. >> >> > >> >> > If we need add new handlers to API because of collecting data it >> >> > means >> >> > you >> >> > are doing something wrong. Your code should't change anything in API >> >> > workflow. >> >> > >> >> > Regards, >> >> > >> >> > On Mon, Sep 22, 2014 at 12:59 PM, Igor Kalnitsky >> >> > <ikalnit...@mirantis.com> >> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >> Hi folks, >> >> >> >> >> >> Today I took a look over "logout issue" [1] and figured out that we >> >> >> cannot implement it with current approach. >> >> >> >> >> >> In current approach both login and logout actions are handled by Web >> >> >> UI with direct requests to Keystone server [2]. >> >> >> >> >> >> As far as I know, we want to track login/logout actions as a part of >> >> >> anonymous statistic [3], so we need to decide how to avoid this >> >> >> issue >> >> >> and make it fly. >> >> >> >> >> >> I think we need to implement login/logout handlers as a part of >> >> >> Nailgun API. A login handler should receive user credentials and >> >> >> make >> >> >> request to Keystone server in order to retrieve an auth token. A >> >> >> logout handler should mark the token as invalid and forbid any >> >> >> actions >> >> >> with this token. >> >> >> >> >> >> Fuel Web UI should work with login/logout handlers which are part of >> >> >> Nailgun, instead of working with Keystone directly. >> >> >> >> >> >> What do you think about it? Any ideas and suggestions are welcome! >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> [1]: https://bugs.launchpad.net/fuel/+bug/1370964 >> >> >> [2]: >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> https://github.com/stackforge/fuel-web/blob/master/nailgun/static/js/app.js#L70 >> >> >> [3]: https://blueprints.launchpad.net/fuel/+spec/send-anon-usage >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> - Igor >> >> >> >> >> >> -- >> >> >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >> >> >> Post to : fuel-dev@lists.launchpad.net >> >> >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev >> >> >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > -- >> >> > Łukasz Oleś >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > -- >> > Łukasz Oleś > > > > > -- > Łukasz Oleś -- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev Post to : fuel-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~fuel-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp