Conversation
Signed-off-by: Adam Saponara <as@php.net>
| return | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| // GetW is part of the Conn interface. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
these comments obviously add no value but I'm pretty sure some linter or the other (maybe gofmt) will complain about this.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I deleted the comments because, afaict, they are not part of the Conn interface from go/vt/topo/conn.go although I may be missing something.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
These should have generated lint errors. These comments are required by go coding standards: https://github.com/golang/go/wiki/CodeReviewComments#doc-comments. I know it's silly, but we'll need to add them back in.
| return fmt.Errorf("addAuth: expected args <scheme> <auth>") | ||
| } | ||
| scheme, auth := subFlags.Arg(0), subFlags.Arg(1) | ||
| return zconn.AddAuth(ctx, scheme, []byte(auth)) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
are there any assumptions about the args that should be validated here?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we can only validate if we limit the schemes -- e.g., digest scheme should have format user:pass, ip scheme should have format addr/mask. However, ZooKeeper's auth system is pluggable, so someone could write scheme foobar with some unknown format which we cannot validate.
Signed-off-by: Adam Saponara <as@php.net>
|
@sougou can you take a look one more time? if it looks good, I can merge it. |
3 participants
If the flag is specified, Vitess clients will send an auth packet at connect time. This allows for the use of ACLs on the ZooKeeper side. We are using this for basic
digest:user:passauthentication. Relevant ZooKeeper docs:https://zookeeper.apache.org/doc/r3.4.13/zookeeperProgrammers.html#sc_BuiltinACLSchemes