[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15257139#comment-15257139
]
Zhitao Li commented on MESOS-5155:
----------------------------------
[~alexr] [~adam-mesos] I noticed that previous handling of deprecation for
shutdown_framework -> teardown_framework followed more with option 2 from
Adam's list (warn instead of fail if value are specified in both fields, and
ignore values from deprecated field).
The benefit of this option is a clear upgrade path for operator w/o losing ACL
guard at any moment:
1. Rollout values for both old and new fields (I assume new field will be
dropped in {{protobuf::parse<ACLs>}} because it's unknown value);
2. Rollout new binary version, new value will take effect instead of the old
one;
3. Once stabilized, remove old value within deprecation cycle.
In option 1, I don't think there is a way to do this w/o either turning off ACL
for quota in upgrade window, or forcing coordinated upgrade for both --acls
flag and binary version (which is not easy if operator has multiple clusters).
What do you think?
> Consolidate authorization actions for quota.
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: MESOS-5155
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5155
> Project: Mesos
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Alexander Rukletsov
> Assignee: Zhitao Li
> Labels: mesosphere
>
> We should have just a single authz action: {{UPDATE_QUOTA_WITH_ROLE}}. It was
> a mistake in retrospect to introduce multiple actions.
> Actions that are not symmetrical are register/teardown and dynamic
> reservations. The way they are implemented in this way is because entities
> that do one action differ from entities that do the other. For example,
> register framework is issued by a framework, teardown by an operator. What is
> a good way to identify a framework? A role it runs in, which may be different
> each launch and makes no sense in multi-role frameworks setup or better a
> sort of a group id, which is its principal. For dynamic reservations and
> persistent volumes, they can be both issued by frameworks and operators,
> hence similar reasoning applies.
> Now, quota is associated with a role and set only by operators. Do we need to
> care about principals that set it? Not that much.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
