Hey Colin, thanks for the KIP. One question I have about AlterScramUsers RPC is whether we could consolidate the deletion list and alteration list, since in response we only have a single list of results. The further benefit is to reduce unintentional duplicate entries for both deletion and alteration, which makes the broker side handling logic easier. Another alternative is to add DeleteScramUsers RPC to align what we currently have with other user provided data such as delegation tokens (create, change, delete).
For my own education, the salt will be automatically generated by the admin client when we send the SCRAM requests correct? Best, Boyang On Fri, Jul 10, 2020 at 8:10 AM Rajini Sivaram <rajinisiva...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1 (binding) > > Thanks for the KIP, Colin! > > Regards, > > Rajini > > > On Thu, Jul 9, 2020 at 8:49 PM Colin McCabe <cmcc...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Hi all, > > > > I'd like to call a vote for KIP-554: Add a broker-side SCRAM > configuration > > API. The KIP is here: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/ihERCQ > > > > The previous discussion thread is here: > > > > > https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/r69bdc65bdf58f5576944a551ff249d759073ecbf5daa441cff680ab0%40%3Cdev.kafka.apache.org%3E > > > > best, > > Colin > > >
