ignite-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mikhail Petrov <pmgheap....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Joining node validation failure event.
Date Tue, 03 Dec 2019 11:32:28 GMT
Nikolay, Ivan,

I understood the possible problem. It seems that it can be solved using 
EventStorageSpi which starts before DiscoveryManager.

As for me, ClusterNode is enough. It contains all info about joining 
node including its attributes.

Discovery events such as (join/left/failed) are connected with a 
topology version change. In my case that not happens and may be 
misleading. That's why the new event type was chosen.

The cause of the failure is also presented in the event.

Regards,
Mikhail.

On 03.12.2019 13:19, Николай Ижиков wrote:
> Exception(s) from component(s) that don’t want node joined.
>
>> 3 дек. 2019 г., в 12:39, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo100@gmail.com> написал(а):
>>
>> How that reason will look like? Actually, I mostly thinking about
>> general API here. What I would like to avoid is exposing something not
>> general but needed only for a particular extension (plugin).
>>
>> вт, 3 дек. 2019 г. в 12:31, Николай Ижиков <nizhikov@apache.org>:
>>> I think we also should provide the reason why join failed.
>>>
>>>> 3 дек. 2019 г., в 12:22, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo100@gmail.com>
написал(а):
>>>>
>>>> Mikhail,
>>>>
>>>> So, I suppose there should be ordering guarantees that listener is
>>>> registered before first validation failure can occur. Hope
>>>> GridComponent#onKernalStart is the right place. Is it enough to pass
>>>> only problematic node id (or ClusterNode) with an event? Actually such
>>>> event seems to fit naturally node join/left/failed events.
>>>>
>>>> вт, 3 дек. 2019 г. в 10:38, Mikhail Petrov <pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com>:
>>>>> Hi Ivan.
>>>>>
>>>>> No other lifecycle events are needed in my case.
>>>>>
>>>>> We can register a listener in the security component's
>>>>> GridComponent#onKernalStart method and listen locally to every failed
>>>>> joining attempt. Am I missing something?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>> Mikhail.
>>>>>
>>>>> On 03.12.2019 8:48, Ivan Pavlukhin wrote:
>>>>>> Mikhail,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Do you need some ordering guarantees among node lifecycle events
and
>>>>>> listener notifications. For example, I can imagine that it is good
to
>>>>>> notify security component about every node failed validation. How
can
>>>>>> we achieve it with events (I assume dynamic listener registration)?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> пн, 2 дек. 2019 г. в 18:09, Mikhail Petrov <pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>> Hi, Andrey.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It doesn't influence on authentication or authorization process.
There
>>>>>>> is a security requirement that demands to notify some outer security
>>>>>>> subsystems in a specific way when joining node validation failed
in any
>>>>>>> Ignite component (e.g. GridCacheProcessor) not only in
>>>>>>> IgniteSecurityProcessor. So PluginProvider#validateNewNode is
not
>>>>>>> acceptable for me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>> Mikhail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 02.12.2019 16:35, Andrey Gura wrote:
>>>>>>>> Mikhail,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't understand how node validation on join affects security.
But
>>>>>>>> it seems that you can use
>>>>>>>> PluginProvider#validateNewNode(org.apache.ignite.cluster.ClusterNode,
>>>>>>>> java.io.Serializable) method. Does it fit for your needs?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 2, 2019 at 12:54 PM Mikhail Petrov <pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com>
wrote:
>>>>>>>>> Hi, Ivan.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Unfortunately, we came to no decision yet. As I mentioned
above this
>>>>>>>>> event is disabled by default and no node will receive
this event without
>>>>>>>>> an explicit subscription. In my case, that event is assumed
to be used
>>>>>>>>> on node locally to share joining node info between security
and
>>>>>>>>> discovery components. I have no idea how to solve this
problem without
>>>>>>>>> publishing a new event too. But I'm concerned about the
acceptance of
>>>>>>>>> that solution. Maybe it can be solved some other way?
I will appreciate
>>>>>>>>> any suggestion or review PR [1] with event implementation.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> [1] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7057
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Mikhail.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 02.12.2019 10:38, Ivan Pavlukhin wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> Mikhail, Andrey,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Have you come to a common decision here? As for me,
it sounds useful
>>>>>>>>>> to expose node join failure details somehow. The
thing to decide on is
>>>>>>>>>> a mechanism to expose it. Unfortunately, immediately
have no idea
>>>>>>>>>> better than using events.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> What is purpose of the special cluster wide event?
Node is not joined
>>>>>>>>>>> to the topology. Why topology nodes should know
something about this
>>>>>>>>>>> node?
>>>>>>>>>> Was this question answered? I suppose that at least
coordinator will
>>>>>>>>>> receive the event, will not it?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> чт, 28 нояб. 2019 г. в 10:10, Mikhail Petrov
<pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com>:
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Ivan.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm sorry that the discussion was moved in private
channel. The problem
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to solve is described below in the
thread. The security
>>>>>>>>>>> plugin in my case stores and analyzesinfo about
a node that failed to join.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Mikhail.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> -------- Forwarded Message --------
>>>>>>>>>>> Subject:        Re: Joining node validation failure
event.
>>>>>>>>>>> Date:   Thu, 21 Nov 2019 21:43:33 +0300
>>>>>>>>>>> From:   Mikhail Petrov <pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>> To:     Andrey Gura <agura@apache.org>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Andrey.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In my task security plugin running on the coordinator
must locally
>>>>>>>>>>> handle the situation when some node is trying
to join the topology with
>>>>>>>>>>> the invalid configuration. I can't handle the
response on a node that
>>>>>>>>>>> failed to connect because it's untrusted.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Actually I'm only concerned about one validation
-- when all Ignite
>>>>>>>>>>> components validate new node.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> In my case plugin must be able to obtain general
and security subject
>>>>>>>>>>> information from joining TcpDiscoveryNode attributes.
But I have no idea
>>>>>>>>>>> how to share information between the security
and discovery components
>>>>>>>>>>> without recording event and listening it locally.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> This event is assumed to be disable by default
and in my case used only
>>>>>>>>>>> on local node so it's not look like "cluster
wide event".
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Also I propose to record this event in dedicated
utilityPool so it can't
>>>>>>>>>>> stuck discovery thread.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I will appreciate any thoughts on this problem.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>> Mikhail.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 21.11.2019 19:40, Andrey Gura wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Mikhail,
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> It is still not enough details to me. What
is expected behavior if the
>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> There are a different validations during
node join. Many of them
>>>>>>>>>>>> placed in RingMessageWorker#processJoinRequestMessage
method. If
>>>>>>>>>>>> validation will fail then corresponding message
will be sent to the
>>>>>>>>>>>> joining node (including TcpDiscoveryAuthFailedMessage)
and node will
>>>>>>>>>>>> not joined to topology.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> What is purpose of the special cluster wide
event? Node is not joined
>>>>>>>>>>>> to the topology. Why topology nodes should
know something about this
>>>>>>>>>>>> node?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 9:54 AM Mikhail Petrov
<pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Andrey.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> I take part in the development of a custom
security plugin for Apache
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ignite. There is an information security
requirement for which node
>>>>>>>>>>>>> joining failures due to invalid configuration
must be handled by the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> plugin.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is where my case comes from. Are
there any objections to the
>>>>>>>>>>>>> proposed approach?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mikhail.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 20.11.2019 19:38, Andrey Gura wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi, Mikhail!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Could you please describe the case
for this new event?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 20, 2019 at 12:45 PM
Mikhail Petrov
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <pmgheap.sbt@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello, Igniters.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There is a case which requires
to handle joining node validation
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> failure
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> in Ignite components and obtain
information of the node that tried to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> join and the reason for the failure.
Now, as I see, there is no way to
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do it. I propose to implement
a new event -- NodeValidationFailedEvent
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -- and record it in case the
validation fails. I have created Tiket [1]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and PR [2], which shows an example
of implementation. Could anyone take
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a look at it, please?
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/IGNITE-12380
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [2] https://github.com/apache/ignite/pull/7057
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Ivan Pavlukhin
>>
>> -- 
>> Best regards,
>> Ivan Pavlukhin

Mime
View raw message