qpid-users mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gordon Sim <g...@redhat.com>
Subject Re: default SASL mech in JMS examples (was Re: [VOTE] Release Qpid JMS client 0.10.0)
Date Wed, 29 Jun 2016 18:38:11 GMT
On 29/06/16 16:52, Robbie Gemmell wrote:
> I think I misinterpreted your use of "predefined" earlier. I was only
> really considering whether I think it makes sense for a client example
> to use user credentials by default (I do, but also like the
> flexibility of your patch, so will overlook that :P), I dont actually
> think the "guest" (or whatever that name it is easily changed to) user
> always needs to be pre-defined on the server from the get go. Other
> than perhaps implicitly by overlooking what you were actually saying,
> I don't think I've said it needs to be.

Indeed, I think we are in complete agreement on the client side. The 
change I've made keeps the significant educational value of showing how 
the username and password are specified, but allows them to be chosen by 
the user.

> Adding a user [of any name you
> choose] seems a valuable exercise to me, I've have no problem in
> requiring users do that themselves, and many servers ship in such
> fully locked down states for that reason (I used two yesterday).
> Regardless I'd say its as easy to overlook disabling anonymous as it
> is to overlook changing a user account used / added while at the basic
> stage of running an example, particularly if the things using it dont
> necessarily stop working once you do add authentication later.

(This is where we have a minor disagreement, which is not really 
relevant to the main purpose of the thread. However... just for the 
enjoyment of the debate... my view, which may be biased by the servers 
I'm more familiar with, is that the enablement of anonymous is fairly 
obvious from reading the appropriate config, whereas the existence of a 
dummy user is only apparent if you query the userbase *and* are aware 
that the user was added on install. Admittedly the name 'guest' is 
something of a clue. However e.g. the 'authenticatePeer: no' in a router 
config is in my view a more visible signal of the current status.)

>> However, my focus at present is really just about the client side and
>> whether the examples could be made more flexible. That would make them more
>> useful against different servers with different views on default
>> configurations.
>> More complete patch for comments: https://reviews.apache.org/r/49380/
> Looks good to me (I was actually doing the same before I spotted your
> mail :P), feel free to push it in.

Done, thanks!

To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@qpid.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@qpid.apache.org

View raw message