Return-Path: 
 <hdfs-issues-return-97556-apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive=hadoop.apache.org@hadoop.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B9C2A177FF
	for <apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@minotaur.apache.org>;
 Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:20:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 51199 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2014 15:20:34 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-hadoop-hdfs-issues-archive@hadoop.apache.org
Received: (qmail 51145 invoked by uid 500); 26 Sep 2014 15:20:34 -0000
Mailing-List: contact hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:hdfs-issues-help@hadoop.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:hdfs-issues-unsubscribe@hadoop.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org>
List-Id: <hdfs-issues.hadoop.apache.org>
Reply-To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Received: (qmail 51127 invoked by uid 99); 26 Sep 2014 15:20:34 -0000
Received: from arcas.apache.org (HELO arcas.apache.org) (140.211.11.28)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:20:34 +0000
Date: Fri, 26 Sep 2014 15:20:34 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Yongjun Zhang (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: hdfs-issues@hadoop.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.12740318.1410328618000.131614.1411744834412@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.12740318.1410328618000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.12740318.1410328618000@Atlassian.JIRA>
 <JIRA.12740318.1410328618611@arcas>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (HDFS-7036) HDFS-6776 fix requires to upgrade
 insecure cluster, which means quite some user pain
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7036?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14149283#comment-14149283 ] 

Yongjun Zhang commented on HDFS-7036:
-------------------------------------

My understanding is that the main point of disagreement here is about whether there is real damage. I have been asking for *concrete* example of damage, which I don't see in any prior comments. I'd appreciate it if it's provided. Thanks.




> HDFS-6776 fix requires to upgrade insecure cluster, which means quite some user pain
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: HDFS-7036
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HDFS-7036
>             Project: Hadoop HDFS
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: webhdfs
>    Affects Versions: 2.5.1
>            Reporter: Yongjun Zhang
>            Assignee: Yongjun Zhang
>         Attachments: HDFS-7036.001.patch
>
>
> Issuing command
> {code}
>  hadoop fs -lsr webhdfs://<insecureCluster>
> {code}
> at a secure cluster side fails with message "Failed to get the token ...", similar symptom as reported in HDFS-6776.
> If the fix of HDFS-6776 is applied to only the secure cluster, doing 
> {code}
> distcp webhdfs://<insecureCluster> <secureCluster>
> {code}
> would fail same way.
> Basically running any application in secure cluster to access insecure cluster via webhdfs would fail the same way, if the HDFS-6776 fix is not applied to the insecure cluster.
> This could be quite some user pain. Filing this jira for a solution to make user's life easier.
> One proposed solution was to add a msg-parsing mechanism in webhdfs, which is a bit hacky. The other proposed solution is to do the same kind of hack at application side, which means the same hack need to be applied in each application.
> Thanks [~daryn], [~wheat9], [~jingzhao], [~tucu00] and [~atm] for the discussion in HDFS-6776.
>  



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)