kafka-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Harsha Chintalapani <ka...@harsha.io>
Subject RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-383 Pluggable interface for SSL Factory
Date Fri, 19 Oct 2018 22:51:14 GMT
SslFactory is not a public interface for others to use.  EchoServer is internal testing.
We should make these as proposed in rejected alternatives to SslFactory and DefaultSslFactory.
I don’t see any one using a internal class as public API.

-Harsha
On Oct 19, 2018, 3:47 PM -0700, Pellerin, Clement <Clement_Pellerin@ibi.com>, wrote:
> > > Can you explain why calling SslFactory and DefaultSslFactory cause any issues.
>
> When you say "calling", I guess you mean "naming".
>
> Renaming SslFactory will only cause backwards compatibility issues for applications that
refer to it directly. EchoServer is an example, but maybe that is just an artificial test.
> You make it sound like SslFactory was never part of the public API. I cannot make that
judgement just by looking at the code.
>
> I don't mind using the better names if the Kafka community thinks no Kafka application
calls SslFactory directly. I would like more opinions on this though.
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Harsha Chintalapani [mailto:kafka@harsha.io]
> Sent: Friday, October 19, 2018 5:55 PM
> To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> Subject: RE: [DISCUSS] KIP-383 Pluggable interface for SSL Factory
>
> Hi,
>      Overall the KIP looks good to me.
>
> "Ideally, the interface should be called SslFactory and the built-in implementation should
be called DefaultSslFactory. This was rejected to improve backwards compatibility for applications
that call the SslFactory directly.”
>
> Can you explain why calling SslFactory and DefaultSslFactory cause any issues.  For
clients the config will point to DefaultSslFactory and similarly on broker side as well.
 Not sure which cases it will break the backward compatability.
>
> -Harsha
> On Oct 19, 2018, 1:48 PM -0700, Pellerin, Clement <Clement_Pellerin@ibi.com>, wrote:
> > I have updated the KIP to use a default constructor in the pluggable SSL Factory
implementation.
> > I also changed the name of the config to ssl.sslfactory.class and fixed a typo in
the constant names.
> > I would like your feedback on this version of the KIP.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Pellerin, Clement
> > Sent: Wednesday, October 17, 2018 3:11 PM
> > To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> > Subject: [DISCUSS] KIP-383 Pluggable interface for SSL Factory
> >
> > I would like feedback on this proposal to make it possible to replace SslFactory
with a custom implementation.
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-383%3A++Pluggable+interface+for+SSL+Factory
> >

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message