Hi,

As agreed, we implemented the feature. You can only close "local
subscriptions" from management console. You cannot close subscriptions on
any other node.

Management console is displayed as below.

[image: Inline image 1]

Thanks

On Fri, Dec 4, 2015 at 2:57 PM, Hasitha Hiranya <[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> While implementing the feature we have this permission problem w:r:t
> permission tree. We want to restrict following two operations
>
> >> subscription browse
> >> subscription close (this new feature)
>
> Following are possible permission scenarios
>
> 1. One should be able to browse without close permission
> 2. To be able to close subscription, user must have browse permission
> (close button is in browse page)
>
> Currently we cannot cater for this requirement. We cannot de-select
> "Close" when "Queue" is selected (browse permission given by "Queue")
>
> Please consider following image
>
> [image: Inline image 1]
>
> Is there any better way to do this other than using same level permissions
> for subscription browse and subscriptions close (no dependency can be
> enforced)?
>
> Thanks
>
> On Thu, Dec 3, 2015 at 7:10 PM, Frank Leymann <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> +1
>> I would even say stronger "...we MUST give a way..."
>>
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Frank
>>
>> 2015-12-03 11:01 GMT+01:00 Srinath Perera <[email protected]>:
>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Architecture mailing list
>> [email protected]
>> https://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/architecture
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> *Hasitha Abeykoon*
> Senior Software Engineer; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com
> *cell:* *+94 719363063*
> *blog: **abeykoon.blogspot.com* <http://abeykoon.blogspot.com>
>
>


-- 
*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

Reply via email to