If the user must go to the node where subscription is made to disconnect
the subscription, we might need to give a way for a user to find which node
has what subscriptions.

--Srinath

On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 11:36 AM, Ramith Jayasinghe <[email protected]> wrote:

> I propose,
>  1) user cant disconnect consumers in another nodes. ( simplifies the
> approach).
>  2) there need to be a permission around it.
>  3) it could for any subscriber ( may be lets leave out MQTT for a bit)
> whose misbehaving.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 11:31 AM, Sajini De Silva <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Hasitha,
>>
>> We haven't implemented the MQTT UI yet. Therefore IMO its better not to
>> implement this feature for MQTT for now. We can consider it when
>> implementing MQTT UI in our major release. WDYT?
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Sajini
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 11:19 AM, Hasitha Hiranya <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> There is a feature request that Message Broker should support to
>>> forcefully disconnect a subscriber. This means, server should be able to
>>> disconnect misbehaving subscribers. Server has a control over it.
>>>
>>> Steps to do this would be
>>>
>>> 1. Find a way to disconnect the socket from mina transport level.
>>> 2. Send a message to Andes core to delete (disconnect) the subscriber.
>>>
>>> At step two the node that is disconnecting  the socket, will broadcast a
>>> Hazelcast message that this subscriber is closed.
>>>
>>> With above implementation steps, a limitation is introduced as "you can
>>> only disconnect the subscribers originated to that node only". For example,
>>> say there is a MB cluster MB1, MB2, MB3. There is sub1 for MB1 and sub2 for
>>> MB2. You need to go to MB1's web console to disconnect sub1 and MB2's web
>>> console to disconnect sub2. So cluster aspect is lost there.
>>>
>>> Thus two implementation approaches are there
>>>
>>> 1. Forceful disconnection can be done only from the node subscriber is
>>> connected to.
>>> 2. Forceful disconnection can be done from any node (this is bit
>>> complex. Involves Hazelcast notifications)
>>>
>>> As our end goal for implementation would option 1 be adequate?
>>> Or do we need to reach out for option 2 as well?
>>> Do we need to facilitate this for any subscription type
>>> (queue/topic/durable topic/shared durable topic) ? What about MQTT
>>> subscribers?
>>>
>>> Also what are the permissions a user should have to perform this action?
>>> Are we going to introduce a new permission type?
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> --
>>> *Hasitha Abeykoon*
>>> Senior Software Engineer; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
>>> *cell:* *+94 719363063*
>>> *blog: **abeykoon.blogspot.com* <http://abeykoon.blogspot.com>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Architecture mailing list
>>> [email protected]
>>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Sajini De SIlva
>> Software Engineer; WSO2 Inc.; http://wso2.com ,
>> Email: [email protected]
>> Blog: http://sajinid.blogspot.com/
>> Git hub profile: https://github.com/sajinidesilva
>>
>> Phone: +94 712797729
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> Ramith Jayasinghe
> Technical Lead
> WSO2 Inc., http://wso2.com
> lean.enterprise.middleware
>
> E: [email protected]
> P: +94 777542851
>
>


-- 
============================
Blog: http://srinathsview.blogspot.com twitter:@srinath_perera
Site: http://people.apache.org/~hemapani/
Photos: http://www.flickr.com/photos/hemapani/
Phone: 0772360902
_______________________________________________
Architecture mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture

Reply via email to