I merged in gossip-4 and could use a second set of eyes. On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Edward Capriolo <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Please review: > https://github.com/edwardcapriolo/incubator-gossip/tree/uri > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-2 > > This is half of the plumbing.The rest will be added when we actually build > 2 protocols. > > On Sat, May 28, 2016 at 1:06 PM, Edward Capriolo <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> I created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GOSSIP-2. I am creating >> the tickets in scrum style. I do not want anyone to think that this means >> the issue is locked for discussion once it lands in Jira, because we still >> charge course at any time. @Josh as to your point, I typically call this >> 'guy who does the work choice' . During the coding the developer will be >> closer to the problem and make the call that makes the most sense. I think >> we should only use whatever RFC guidance is out there. 'udp' is a lower >> level protocol than http, but I would be ok with either. >> >> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 5:45 PM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Right, I get that. I was more pointing out why not just "udp://" >>> instead of "gossip:udp://". It looks like java.net.URI can still parse >>> it, just doesn't quite parse as I'd expect :). >>> >>> On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 1:19 PM, Edward Capriolo <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > "At first glance, what is the leading "gossip:" buying you over a >>> normally >>> > parsable URI?" >>> > First not everything will be http so: >>> > >>> > My thinking is: >>> > >>> > firstpart:secondpart://host:port/?params >>> > >>> > gossip:udp://host -> cluster using the current UDP protocol >>> > >>> > gossip:tcp://host -> cluster using tcp protocol >>> > >>> > gossip:http://host -> cluster using http over tcp >>> > >>> > Basically clusters would ONLY speak one protocol, and the parts of a >>> URI >>> > are a build in "configuration" system. Otherwise we need to have a >>> separate >>> > parameter that must be part of the gossip messages for all the options. >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 9:47 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> > >>> >> (yay, mailing lists!) >>> >> >>> >> At first glance, what is the leading "gossip:" buying you over a >>> >> normally parsable URI? Might it be better to embed that in the path? >>> >> My thinking is that is might also make it easier to deploy this into >>> >> existing web containers/appservers as well as allow you to deploy some >>> >> normal informational webserver alongside the gossip "service" (e.g. >>> >> /gossip is the service, while / is some metrics/monitoring service). >>> >> >>> >> - Josh >>> >> >>> >> On Mon, May 16, 2016 at 6:46 PM, Edward Capriolo < >>> [email protected]> >>> >> wrote: >>> >> > Hello all, >>> >> > >>> >> > There are two connection related items in the proposal ( >>> >> > https://wiki.apache.org/incubator/GossipProposal) >>> >> > >>> >> > - Explore HTTP transport as an alternative to UDP >>> >> > - Secure communications >>> >> > - Transport security using a pre-shared key >>> >> > - Public Key Infrastructure >>> >> > >>> >> > Currently the message sent over the wire sends two connection >>> related >>> >> > parameters host and port. Each time a message is send a UDP >>> connection is >>> >> > established. Also one interesting bit is that the messages do not >>> have an >>> >> > ACK, the active gossip thread picks a partner and sends a message. >>> >> > >>> >> > My thinking is we would like a few things >>> >> > 1) a UDP service that keeps connections alive or TCP? >>> >> > 2) an http service (Ie run gossip as a tomcat/jetty webapp) >>> >> > 3) Encryption >>> >> > >>> >> > I think an interesting way to go about this would be URI's that >>> will give >>> >> > us more flexibility than (host, port) >>> >> > >>> >> > gossip:udp://host:port >>> >> > gossip:tcp://host:port >>> >> > gossip:http://host:port >>> >> > >>> >> > I believe now that protocols like http(S) are out of favor vs start >>> TLS. >>> >> > >>> >> > That could be something like >>> >> > >>> >> > gossip:http://host:port;tls=true >>> >> >>> >> >> >
