Yes, I'm fine with including it.
Josh Spain Director of Engineering Affinegy, Inc. t.512-535-1700 x1006 a. 1705 S Capital of Texas Hwy, Suite 310, Austin, TX 78746 USA Website <http://affinegy.com> Email <[email protected]> <http://www.linkedin.com/in/joshspain> <http://twitter.com/affinegy> Latest Tweet: <https://twitter.com/Affinegy> It's not all about #TheCloud. <https://twitter.com/TheCloud.> Intelligence at #TheEdge <https://twitter.com/TheEdge> and in #TheFog <https://twitter.com/TheFog> matter. Distributed computing will continue a… https://t.co/6gwm8lsyIK Read More <https://twitter.com/Affinegy/statuses/794704825367887874> <https://twitter.com/Affinegy> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Hertel, Carrie Lynn < [email protected]> wrote: > I’m ok including this as well. > > > > *Carrie Hertel, PMP* > > Software Dev Group & Test Lab Director > > Center for Applied Systems & Software > > Oregon State University > > > > *From:* Lioy, Marcello [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Wednesday, November 9, 2016 9:14 AM > *To:* Arvind Padole; Pawel Winogrodzki > *Cc:* Kevin Kane; Hertel, Carrie Lynn; allseen-core@lists. > allseenalliance.org; Josh Spain > > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > I am OK with that as well assuming other committers and release leads are > on board. Sounds like Arvind you are open to it. Carrie, Josh? > > > > Pawel, if you haven’t done so, please point your commit to RB16.10 and put > the link on this mail thread. > > > > *From:* Arvind Padole [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 08, 2016 6:11 PM > *To:* Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]>; Lioy, Marcello < > [email protected]> > *Cc:* Kevin Kane <[email protected]>; Carrie Hertel < > [email protected]>; [email protected]; > Josh Spain <[email protected]> > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > If you have the fix ready and it is a simple fix in a sample, I wouldn’t > mind considering it for 16.10 given it is important to ship correct samples > and fixes in sample add no new risk to Core. So, if you have the fix > ready, go ahead and upload it to gerrit. We can discuss more and make the > final determination based on the change. > > > > Thanks, > > Arvind > > > > *From:* Pawel Winogrodzki > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2016 5:09 PM > *To:* Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]>; Arvind Padole < > [email protected]> > *Cc:* Kevin Kane <[email protected]>; Carrie Hertel < > [email protected]>; [email protected]; > Josh Spain <[email protected]> > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > Yes, that’s correct. I don’t have a fix for the C sample yet (although, it > should be done soon), but locally I’ve confirmed, that the C sample fails > similarly (it may fail in a different call, depending on when the sample > changed its security settings) and the C++ samples work without issues. I > haven’t checked the Linux/Windows mix, but I doubt this has anything to do > with it. > > > > I’ve added a comment to the ticket with my description. Should I post a > gerrit code review with the fix in master or RB16.10? > > > > Thanks, > > Pawel > > > > *From:* Lioy, Marcello [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2016 16:47 > *To:* Arvind Padole <[email protected]>; Pawel Winogrodzki < > [email protected]> > *Cc:* Kevin Kane <[email protected]>; Carrie Hertel < > [email protected]>; [email protected]; > Josh Spain <[email protected]> > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > My understanding from Pawel is that it is a problem with a C sample > (possibly door). Once Pawel confirms this I will add to release note, and > slide the bug out. > > > > *From:* Arvind Padole [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 08, 2016 4:45 PM > *To:* Josh Spain <[email protected]>; Lioy, Marcello < > [email protected]> > *Cc:* Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]>; Kevin Kane < > [email protected]>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]>; > [email protected] > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > Pawel, please add your analysis to the bug. > > > > Its not clear to me if we are all talking about same things. Is Tyler > running the C sample or C++ sample? > > > > But otherwise, I agree with the idea that if the issue is limited to > sample only, we should address it with a relnote. > > > > Thanks, > > Arvind > > > > *From:* Josh Spain [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2016 4:02 PM > *To:* Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]> > *Cc:* Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]>; Kevin Kane < > [email protected]>; Arvind Padole <[email protected]>; > Carrie Hertel <[email protected]>; allseen-core@lists. > allseenalliance.org > *Subject:* Re: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > Yes, if it is only the sample it is not blocking. I would call it critical > though since it would be much better if we didn't have samples with > incorrect code. > > -Josh > > > > [image: Image removed by sender.] > > Josh Spain > Director of Engineering Affinegy, Inc. > t.512-535-1700 x1006 > a. 1705 S Capital of Texas Hwy, Suite 310, Austin, TX 78746 USA > Website <http://affinegy.com> Email <[email protected]> > > [image: Image removed by sender.] <http://www.linkedin.com/in/joshspain> > [image: > Image removed by sender.] <http://twitter.com/affinegy> > > [image: Image removed by sender.]Latest Tweet: > <https://twitter.com/Affinegy> It's not all about #TheCloud. > <https://twitter.com/TheCloud.> Intelligence at #TheEdge > <https://twitter.com/TheEdge> and in #TheFog <https://twitter.com/TheFog> > matter. Distributed computing will continue a… https://t.co/6gwm8lsyIK > > Read More <https://twitter.com/Affinegy/statuses/794704825367887874> > > [image: Image removed by sender.] <https://twitter.com/Affinegy> > > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]> > wrote: > > So it sounds like the issue is with the C door sample? If so that doesn’t > seem like it is release blocking, but worth calling out the bug in a > release note. Pawel, could you add your analysis to the issue indicating > what the problem is so that the release notes give a sense of what should > actually be happening. > > > > Josh, Arvind, do you agree it’s not blocking but we do want to add to the > release notes? > > > > *From:* Pawel Winogrodzki [mailto:[email protected]] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 08, 2016 2:59 PM > *To:* Kevin Kane <[email protected]>; Arvind Padole < > [email protected]>; Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]>; > Josh Spain <[email protected]>; Carrie Hertel < > [email protected]> > > > *Cc:* '[email protected]' <allseen-core@lists. > allseenalliance.org> > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > I’ve looked into the Security Manager’s code a bit and it seems to be > doing the right thing. The C samples on the other hand (so my code, > unfortunately) seem to have a bug – they wait for their status to change to > “CLAIMED” and proceed with modifying the accepted authentication methods. > They do this in two steps: > > > > QStatus status = alljoyn_busattachment_enablepeersecurity(doorData->bus, > "", nullptr, nullptr, QCC_TRUE); > > if (ER_OK != status) { > > fprintf(stderr, "Failed to clear peer security - status (%s)\n", > QCC_StatusText(status)); > > return status; > > } > > > > status = alljoyn_busattachment_enablepeersecurity(doorData->bus, > KEYX_ECDHE_DSA, doorData->authListener, nullptr, QCC_FALSE); > > if (ER_OK != status) { > > fprintf(stderr, "Failed to set peer security for claimed mode - > status (%s)\n", QCC_StatusText(status)); > > return status; > > } > > > > In the meantime the Security Manager will try to establish another > connection and call “EndManagement()”, so it might happen, that the > connection is established before or in between these two API calls. > > > > I’ll try to change the samples locally and verify this fixed the issue. > The C++ samples should be fine, because they are waiting for an event set > in the “EndManagement” callback. > > > > *From:* Kevin Kane > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2016 14:29 > *To:* Arvind Padole <[email protected]>; Lioy, Marcello < > [email protected]>; Josh Spain <[email protected]>; Carrie Hertel < > [email protected]>; Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]> > *Cc:* '[email protected]' <allseen-core@lists. > allseenalliance.org> > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > This looks like a real bug. The “Old application state/New application > state” output is from the security manager. I’m not as familiar with this > code but I’m guessing it’s changing its internal database that tracks the > work it has to do, but when it attempts to actually claim the door > provider, it fails to do so. 0x9032 is ER_BUS_REPLY_IS_ERROR_MESSAGE. > > > > SecurityApplicationProxy.cc:1035 is calling EndManagement, which suggests > the Claim call itself was successful, and EndManagement for some reason is > failing. *Pawel*, I seem to recall you changed Claim such that the app > was in the managementStarted state, so this shouldn’t be failing. Any ideas? > > > > *From:* Arvind Padole > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2016 12:54 PM > *To:* Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]>; Josh Spain < > [email protected]>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]>; > Kevin Kane <[email protected]>; Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected] > > > *Cc:* '[email protected]' <allseen-core@lists. > allseenalliance.org> > *Subject:* RE: Release note ASACORE-3464 > > > > We should probably investigate and understand what’s going on here before > we can decide if it’s a blocking bug that must be fixed or just relnoted. > From the output, it looks like a minor issue in the secmgr sample in that > the provider is claimed but somehow the error is displayed. > > > > Adding Pawel as well. Kevin/Pawel – can you take a look to see if my > theory above is correct or if there is a different issue here? > > > > Please enter the password provided by the application: > A02D04 > Claiming application ... > 110.300 ****** ERROR ALLJOYN_OBJ lepDisp2_0 .../router/AllJoynObj.cc:4466 > | 0x9029 > 110.300 ****** ERROR ALLJOYN_OBJ lepDisp2_0 .../router/AllJoynObj.cc:4466 > | 0x9029 > 110.300 ****** ERROR ALLJOYN_OBJ lepDisp2_0 .../router/AllJoynObj.cc:4466 > | 0x9029 > >> Old application state : OnlineApplication: Busname: :1E7cCe4y.40, Claim > state: CLAIMABLE, Sync state: SYNC_UNMANAGED > >> New application state : OnlineApplication: Busname: :1E7cCe4y.40, Claim > state: CLAIMED, Sync state: SYNC_UNMANAGED > >> Application id : 9d3d951a5784efa7f84a2eafeb963f5d > >> Application name : DoorProvider (CASS-IOT-WIN10) > > 135.375 ****** ERROR ALLJOYN_SECURITY external > ...tyApplicationProxy.cc:1035 | 0x9032 > 135.375 ****** ERROR SECMGR_AGENT external .../ProxyObjectManager.cc:340 | > 0x9032 > 135.375 ****** ERROR SECMGR_AGENT external ...c/SecurityAgentImpl.cc:516 | > 0x9032 > Failed to claim application ... > > > > > > *From:* Lioy, Marcello [mailto:[email protected] > <[email protected]>] > *Sent:* Tuesday, November 8, 2016 10:49 AM > *To:* Arvind Padole <[email protected]>; Josh Spain < > [email protected]>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]>; > Kevin Kane <[email protected]> > *Cc:* '[email protected]' <allseen-core@lists. > allseenalliance.org> > *Subject:* Release note ASACORE-3464 > *Importance:* High > > > > Do people thing that we should include ASACORE-3464 > <https://jira.allseenalliance.org/browse/ASACORE-3464> (Security 2.0 Door > Provider on windows 10 must be claimed first > <https://jira.allseenalliance.org/browse/ASACORE-3464>) in the release > notes? Or is that expected behavior? > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Allseen-core mailing list [email protected] https://lists.allseenalliance.org/mailman/listinfo/allseen-core
