[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-5155?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Artem Harutyunyan updated MESOS-5155: ------------------------------------- Sprint: Mesosphere Sprint 33, Mesosphere Sprint 34, Mesosphere Sprint 35 (was: Mesosphere Sprint 33, Mesosphere Sprint 34) > 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)