Lioy, I’ve already sent a link yesterday in this thread, but here you go: https://git.allseenalliance.org/gerrit/#/c/9339.
From: Josh Spain [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2016 10:33 To: Hertel, Carrie Lynn <[email protected]> Cc: Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]>; Arvind Padole <[email protected]>; Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]>; Kevin Kane <[email protected]>; [email protected]; Gilbert, Tyler R <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Release note ASACORE-3464 Yes, I'm fine with including it. [https://s3.amazonaws.com/ucwebapp.wisestamp.com/12898986-6b24-4785-b392-dfd3cd5cdd09/Affinegylogo201450px.format_png.resize_200x.png#logo] Josh Spain Director of Engineering Affinegy, Inc. t.512-535-1700 x1006<tel:512-535-1700%20x1006> a. 1705 S Capital of Texas Hwy, Suite 310, Austin, TX 78746 USA Website<http://affinegy.com> Email<mailto:[email protected]> [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons_32/linkedin.png]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/joshspain> [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons_32/twitter.png] <http://twitter.com/affinegy> [https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png]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://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/email-apps/twitter_button/twitter-white.png]<https://twitter.com/Affinegy> On Wed, Nov 9, 2016 at 12:12 PM, Hertel, Carrie Lynn <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Wednesday, November 9, 2016 9:14 AM To: Arvind Padole; Pawel Winogrodzki Cc: Kevin Kane; Hertel, Carrie Lynn; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; 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]] Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 6:11 PM To: Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Arvind Padole <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[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]] Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 16:47 To: Arvind Padole <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[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]] Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 4:45 PM To: Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[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]] Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 4:02 PM To: Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Arvind Padole <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> 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 removed by sender.] Josh Spain Director of Engineering Affinegy, Inc. t.512-535-1700 x1006<tel:512-535-1700%20x1006> a. 1705 S Capital of Texas Hwy, Suite 310, Austin, TX 78746 USA Website<http://affinegy.com> Email<mailto:[email protected]> [Image removed by sender.]<http://www.linkedin.com/in/joshspain> [Image removed by sender.] <http://twitter.com/affinegy> [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 removed by sender.]<https://twitter.com/Affinegy> On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:49 PM, Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]<mailto:[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]<mailto:[email protected]>] Sent: Tuesday, November 08, 2016 2:59 PM To: Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Arvind Padole <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: '[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Lioy, Marcello <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: '[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Pawel Winogrodzki <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: '[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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]] Sent: Tuesday, November 8, 2016 10:49 AM To: Arvind Padole <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Josh Spain <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Carrie Hertel <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>>; Kevin Kane <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> Cc: '[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>' <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> 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
![https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png]Latest](https://s3.amazonaws.com/images.wisestamp.com/icons/twitter.png]Latest){kind=link}
