On Qui, 2013-05-09 at 14:02 +0100, Gordon Sim wrote:
> On 05/09/2013 01:52 PM, Bruno Matos wrote:
> > Finally I have some time to test domains.
>
> Excellent, thanks!
>
> > I'm trying to create a link between two Brokers 0.22 RC2, but I'm having
> > two errors, with the same origin, creating the outgoing link that I
> > don't know how to solve. I'm using qpid-ctrl as you suggested.
> >
> > 1. If I set --auth yes (on both), I receive the error "SASL layer
> > required!", I took a look to the code and it seams the it was expecting
> > SASL as the protocol and it has AMQP.
>
> Was this from the connection made by qpid-ctrl itself, or the
> inter-broker connection? If auth is on then the broker will not accept a
> connection that does not have a sasl layer setup first. You can specify
> the mechanism(s) to use for the inter-broker link (NONE means no SASL
> layer, which would not work if the remote broker requires SASL as is the
> case for qpidd with auth = true)
It was from the inter-broker connection. I will reproduce the last try:
I have two brokers, b1 and b2 with --auth yes on different machines, I
run the following on b1's machine:
1. qpid-ctrl create type=domain name=my-domain
properties="{'url':'b2','mechanisms':'PLAIN'}"
b1 logs:
notice Created domain my-domain with url amqp:tcp:b2:5672 from
{mechanisms:PLAIN, url:b2}
b2 logs:
-- empty --
2. ./qpid-ctrl create type=outgoing name=my-outgoing-link
properties="{'domain':'my-domain','source':'amq.topic','target':'amq.topic'}"
b1 logs:
notice Creating interconnect my-outgoing-link, {domain:my-domain,
source:amq.topic, target:amq.topic}
notice Interconnect deleted
b2 logs:
error SASL layer required!
>
> > 2. If I set --auth no (on both), the connection closes by timeout (10s)
> > on the destination broker and it gives "No protocol received closing",
> > which produces a "Interconnect deleted" notice on the source broker.
>
> This is due to a 'feature' in the broker intended to prevent idle
> connections prior to authentication. The problem is that it does this in
> a very crude way, merely counting the number of distinct read operations
> from the socket and requiring there to be 3 in a given time.
>
> If you set a larger --max-negotiate-time you can avoid this (e.g. 600000).
Now the error message doesn't show up, but I send a message to b1 with a
subject binded by a queue on b2 and no messages are received in that
queue.
>
> Do let me know how you get on (especially if this doesn't help :-)
Thank you very much for your time,
Regards.
--
Bruno Matos
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
