I have create a patch and upload to the JIRA, but can't change the assignee
to myself, maybe don't have assignment permission.

P.S. I created the patch using below command:
git diff master KNOX-1025 > ../knox-1025.patch
And the commit of master and KNOX-1025 are:
* KNOX-1025                               5808d5d KNOX-1025 - Topology
Domain Mapping
  master                                        c7cbd46 KNOX-962 - Add
signature validation tests for the JWT filters

Best,
Benjamin

On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 8:59 PM Sandeep More <[email protected]> wrote:

> Great, thanks Benjamin, I will review it soon.
> For now we do not do PRs, so can you create a patch and upload it to the
> JIRA KNOX-1025 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KNOX-1025>, we do
> it so we can track everything in JIRA and it will be easy to backport, also
> you can change the assignee filed to yourself !
>
> Again, thanks a lot and I will try to review it as soon as I can !
>
> Best,
> Sandeep
>
> On Fri, Sep 8, 2017 at 5:05 AM, Benjamin Tan <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hello Sandeep & Larry,
>>
>> Would you please review the PR for KNOX-1025?
>> https://github.com/apache/knox/pull/10
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:18 AM larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>> Excellent!
>>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Benjamin Tan <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks, I have filed a JIRA KNOX-1025
>>>> <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KNOX-1025>: Topology Domain
>>>> Mapping, and trying to prepare the patch.
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 12:00 AM larry mccay <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Sure, I can see a feature that maps an incoming request domain to a
>>>>> particular topology.
>>>>> Feel free to file a JIRA for it and even provide a patch.
>>>>>
>>>>> Make sure to provide enough details of the usecase in the JIRA.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, Sep 5, 2017 at 5:37 AM, Benjamin Tan <[email protected]>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello Larry,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks very much for your detail guide.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> We already designed a similar deployment, but want give
>>>>>> more convenience for user.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now the access path seems:
>>>>>> tenant-doamin.com -> apache virtual host -> proxy to
>>>>>> tenant-topology's port -> tenant-topology
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If Knox support some feature like domain mapping, the access path
>>>>>> will be:
>>>>>> tenant-doamin.com -> tenant-topology
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Does let knox support domain mapping make sense?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 10:20 AM larry mccay <[email protected]>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> There is no need for a separate reverse proxy in front of Knox -
>>>>>>> other than for load balancing if desired.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Basically, the typical approach for multi-tenant deployments is to:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 1. dedicate specific topologies to each tenant
>>>>>>> 2. have each topology authenticate against a specific LDAP server or
>>>>>>> some tenant specific OU within a single LDAP schema
>>>>>>> 3. have OS accounts for each user that is unique per tenant
>>>>>>> 4. use identity assertion providers to disambiguate the tenant by
>>>>>>> appending a tenant id or the like to the user name to match the tenant
>>>>>>> specific username in #3
>>>>>>> 5. you could use port mapping to remove the extra path
>>>>>>> "gateway/tenant-topology" from the tenant specific URLs
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> HTH
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --larry
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 9:34 PM, Benjamin Tan <[email protected]>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hello Sandeep,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Thanks for your information.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In our use case, we are designing hadoop security solution for a
>>>>>>>> big telecom company, and it have many corporation customers(tenant), 
>>>>>>>> so we
>>>>>>>> try to supply an unique access domain for every tenant, such as
>>>>>>>> cust1.the-hadoop-domain.com, cust2.the-hadoop-domain.com or
>>>>>>>> their's customized domain using CNAME.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I have got some information about topology port mapping from
>>>>>>>> 0.13.0, but it seems have to deploy a reverse proxy before knox.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In my opinion, many users of knox have the need to support tenant
>>>>>>>> deployment.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 12:23 AM Sandeep More <[email protected]>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Hello Tan,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Can you describe your use case in more detail so I could answer it
>>>>>>>>> more accurately. About, virtual hosts we do not have a virtual host 
>>>>>>>>> concept
>>>>>>>>> in Knox, although we we have Topology Port mapping
>>>>>>>>> <http://knox.apache.org/books/knox-0-13-0/user-guide.html#Topology+Port+Mapping>
>>>>>>>>>  feature
>>>>>>>>> (0.13.0) which uses virtual hosts under the hood. Let me know if that
>>>>>>>>> interests you.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>> Sandeep
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 11:48 PM, Benjamin Tan <
>>>>>>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I have to deploy many topologies, and don't know how to set
>>>>>>>>>> access domain for every topology.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Or knox doesn't support the feature like virtual host in apache
>>>>>>>>>> mod_proxy?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>

Reply via email to