Hi Mickael,

I also thought over the issue thoroughly and would like to propose a minor
change to your proposal:

1. Deprecate log4j-appender now
2. Document how to migrate into logging-log4j2
3. (Changed) Replace the log4j-appender (in turn log4j 1.x) dependencies in
tools, trogdor, and shell and upgrade to log4j2 in 3.x, removing log4j 1.x
dependencies.
4. (Changed) Remove log4j-appender in Kafka 4.0

What we need to do for the log4j2 upgrade is just removing the log4j
dependencies only, for they can cause a classpath error. And actually, we
can do it without discontinuing publishing the log4j-appender artifact. So,
I suggest separating the upgrade to log4j2 and removing the log4j-appender
module.

How do you think? If you agree, I will update the KIP and the PR
accordingly ASAP.

Thanks,
Dongjin

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 8:06 PM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Hi Dongjin,
>
> Thanks for the clarifications.
>
> I wonder if a simpler course of action could be:
> - Deprecate log4j-appender now
> - Document how to use logging-log4j2
> - Remove log4j-appender and all the log4j dependencies in Kafka 4.0
>
> This delays KIP-653 till Kafka 4.0 but (so far) Kafka is not directly
> affected by the log4j CVEs. At least this gives us a clear and simple
> roadmap to follow.
>
> What do you think?
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 12:12 PM Dongjin Lee <dong...@apache.org> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Mickael,
> >
> > I greatly appreciate you for reading the proposal so carefully! I wrote
> it
> > quite a while ago and rechecked it today.
> >
> > > Is the KIP proposing to replace the existing log4-appender or simply
> add
> > a new one for log4j2? Reading the KIP and with its current title, it's
> not
> > entirely explicit.
> >
> > Oh, After re-reading it, I realized that this is not clear. Let me
> clarify;
> >
> > 1. Provide a lo4j2 equivalent of traditional log4j-appender,
> > log4j2-appender.
> > 2. Migrate the modules depending on log4j-appender (i.e., tools, trogdor,
> > shell) into log4j2-appender, removing log4j-appender from dependencies.
> > 3. Entirely remove log4j-appender from the project dependencies, along
> with
> > log4j.
> >
> > I think log4j-appender may be published for every new release like
> before,
> > but the committee should make a decision on the policy.
> >
> > > Under Rejected Alternative, the KIP states: "the Kafka appender
> provided
> > by log4j2 community stores log message in the Record key". Looking at the
> > code, it looks like the log message is stored in the Record value:
> >
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/blob/master/log4j-kafka/src/main/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/kafka/appender/KafkaManager.java#L135
> > Am I missing something?
> >
> > It's totally my fault; I confused it with another appender. The
> > compatibility problem in the logging-log4j2 Kafka appender is not the
> > format but the configuration. logging-log4j2 Kafka appender supports
> > `properties` configuration, which will be directly used to instantiate a
> > Kafka producer. However, log4j-appender has been using non-producer
> config
> > names like brokerList (=bootstrap.servers), requiredNumAcks (=acks).
> > Instead, logging-log4j2 Kafka appender supports retryCount,
> > sendEventTimestamp.
> >
> > On second thought, using logging-log4j2 Kafka appender internally and
> > making log4j2-appender to focus on compatibility facade only would be a
> > better approach; As I described above, the goal of this module is just
> > keeping the backward-compatibility, and (as you pointed out) the current
> > implementation has little value. Since
> org.apache.logging.log4j:log4j-core
> > already includes Kafka appender, we can make use of the 'proven wheel'
> > without adding more dependencies. I have not tried it yet, but I think it
> > is well worth it. (One additional advantage of this approach is
> providing a
> > bridge to the users who hope to move from/into logging-log4j2 Kafka
> > appender.)
> >
> > > As the current log4j-appender is not even deprecated yet, in theory we
> > can't remove it till Kafka 4. If we want to speed up the process, I
> wonder
> > if the lack of documentation and a migration guide could help us. What do
> > you think?
> >
> > In fact, this is what I am doing nowadays. While working with
> > log4j-appender, I found that despite a lack of documentation,
> considerable
> > users are already using it[^1][^2][^3][^4][^5]. So, I think providing a
> > documentation to those who are already using log4j-appender is
> > indispensable. It should include:
> >
> > - What is the difference between log4j-appender vs. log4j2-appender.
> > - Which options are supported and deprecated.
> > - Exemplar configurations that show how to migrate.
> >
> > Here is the summary:
> >
> > 1. The goal of this proposal is to replace the traditional log4j-appender
> > for compatibility concerns. But log4j-appender may be published after the
> > deprecation.
> > 2. As of present, the description about logging-log4j2 Kafka appender is
> > entirely wrong. The problem is interface compatibility, not record
> format.
> > Focusing on the compatibility facade is a good approach.
> > 3. A documentation focus on migration should be provided.
> >
> > If you have any questions or suggestions, don't hesitate to tell me.
> Thanks
> > again for your comments!
> >
> > Best,
> > Dongjin
> >
> > [^1]:
> >
> https://docs.cloudera.com/csa/1.2.0/monitoring/topics/csa-kafka-logging.html
> > [^2]:
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/22034895/how-to-use-kafka-0-8-log4j-appender
> > [^3]:
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32402405/delay-in-kafka-log4j-appender
> > [^4]:
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/32301129/kafka-log4j-appender-not-sending-messages
> > [^5]:
> >
> https://stackoverflow.com/questions/35628706/kafka-log4j-appender-0-9-does-not-work
> >
> > On Mon, Nov 8, 2021 at 9:04 PM Mickael Maison <mickael.mai...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Dongjin,
> > >
> > > Thanks for working on the update to log4j2, it's definitively
> > > something we should complete.
> > > I have a couple of comments:
> > >
> > > 1) Is the KIP proposing to replace the existing log4-appender or
> > > simply add a new one for log4j2? Reading the KIP and with its current
> > > title, it's not entirely explicit. For example I don't see a statement
> > > under the proposed changes section. The PR seems to only add a new
> > > appender but the KIP mentions we want to fully remove dependencies to
> > > log4j.
> > >
> > > 2) Under Rejected Alternative, the KIP states: "the Kafka appender
> > > provided by log4j2 community stores log message in the Record key".
> > > Looking at the code, it looks like the log message is stored in the
> > > Record value:
> > >
> https://github.com/apache/logging-log4j2/blob/master/log4j-kafka/src/main/java/org/apache/logging/log4j/kafka/appender/KafkaManager.java#L135
> > > Am I missing something?
> > > Comparing it with the proposed new appender, apart from their
> > > configuration format (hence the backwards compatibility issues), they
> > > both work pretty much the same way, so it's not clear it would add a
> > > ton a value.
> > >
> > > At a glance, _I've not extensively looked at it_, it does not look
> > > very hard to migrate to the appender from the logging team. I was
> > > wondering if we should mention it in our documentation but I was not
> > > able to find any references to the log4j-appender in the Kafka docs:
> > > https://github.com/apache/kafka-site/search?q=KafkaLog4jAppender
> > >
> > > As the current log4j-appender is not even deprecated yet, in theory we
> > > can't remove it till Kafka 4. If we want to speed up the process, I
> > > wonder if the lack of documentation and a migration guide could help
> > > us. What do you think?
> > >
> > > Thanks,
> > > Mickael
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 4:57 PM Boojapho O <booja...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Continuing to use log4j would leave several known security
> > > vulnerabilities in Apache Kafka, including
> > > https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2019-17571.  The Apache log4j
> team
> > > will not fix this vulnerability and is urging an upgrade to log4j2.
> See
> > > https://logging.apache.org/log4j/1.2/ for further information.
> > > >
> > > > This is desperately needed in Apache 3.0 to keep the software secure.
> > > >
> > > > On 2021/05/26 12:31:20, Dongjin Lee <dong...@apache.org> wrote:
> > > > > CC'd the +1ers of KIP-653 with detailed context:
> > > > >
> > > > > When I submitted and got the approval of KIP-653: Upgrade log4j to
> > > log4j2
> > > > > <
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-653%3A+Upgrade+log4j+to+log4j2
> > > >,
> > > > > I thought the log4j2-appender should not be the scope of the work.
> But
> > > it
> > > > > was wrong.
> > > > >
> > > > > Since the VerifiableLog4jAppender tool is built upon
> log4j-appender,
> > > log4j
> > > > > 1.x artifact will co-exist with log4j2 artifact in the classpath
> within
> > > > > this scheme. Since the log4j 1.x code is not called anymore, I
> thought
> > > it
> > > > > is not problematic but actually, it was not - when I started to
> > > provide a
> > > > > preview of KIP-653
> > > > > <http://home.apache.org/~dongjin/post/apache-kafka-log4j2-support/
> >,
> > > some
> > > > > users reported that sometimes slf4j fails to find the appropriate
> > > binding
> > > > > within the classpath, resulting fail to append the log message.
> > > > >
> > > > > To resolve this problem, I subtly adjusted the scope of the work; I
> > > > > excluded Tools and Trogdor from KIP-653 and extended KIP-719 to
> take
> > > care
> > > > > of them instead, along with providing log4j2-appender. It is why
> the
> > > > > current WIP implementations include some classpath logic in the
> shell
> > > > > script and *why KIP-653 only can't complete the log4j2 migration*.
> > > > >
> > > > > I hope you will check this proposal out.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best,
> > > > > Dongjin
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, May 25, 2021 at 10:43 PM Dongjin Lee <dong...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Bumping up the discussion thread.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Recently, I updated the document of KIP-653: Upgrade log4j to
> log4j2
> > > > > > <
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-653%3A+Upgrade+log4j+to+log4j2
> >
> > > (accepted)
> > > > > > and KIP-719: Add Log4J2 Appender
> > > > > > <
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-719%3A+Add+Log4J2+Appender
> >
> > > (under
> > > > > > discussion) reflecting the recent changes to our codebase.
> > > Especially:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > 1. KIP-653 document
> > > > > > <
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-653%3A+Upgrade+log4j+to+log4j2
> >
> > > now
> > > > > > explains which modules will be migrated and why.
> > > > > > 2. KIP-719 document
> > > > > > <
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-719%3A+Add+Log4J2+Appender
> >
> > > now
> > > > > > explains not only the log4j2-appender plan but also upgrading the
> > > omitted
> > > > > > modules in KIP-653 into log4j2.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As you can see here, those two KIPs are the different parts of
> the
> > > same
> > > > > > problem. I believe the community will have a good grasp on why
> both
> > > KIPs
> > > > > > are best if released altogether.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I will open the voting thread now, and please leave a vote if
> you are
> > > > > > interested in this issue.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Best,
> > > > > > Dongjin
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Tue, Mar 2, 2021 at 5:00 PM Dongjin Lee <dong...@apache.org>
> > > wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> Hi Kafka dev,
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I would like to start the discussion of KIP-719: Add Log4J2
> > > Appender.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-719%3A+Add+Log4J2+Appender
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> All kinds of feedbacks are greatly appreciated!
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> Best,
> > > > > >> Dongjin
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> --
> > > > > >> *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> *github:  <http://goog_969573159/>github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > > >> <https://github.com/dongjinleekr>keybase:
> > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > > >> <https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr>linkedin:
> > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > > >> <https://kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr>speakerdeck:
> > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > > >> <https://speakerdeck.com/dongjin>*
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > *github:  <http://goog_969573159/>github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > <https://github.com/dongjinleekr>keybase:
> > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > <https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr>linkedin:
> > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > > > <https://kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr>speakerdeck:
> > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > > > <https://speakerdeck.com/dongjin>*
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --
> > > > > *Dongjin Lee*
> > > > >
> > > > > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > *github:  <http://goog_969573159/>github.com/dongjinleekr
> > > > > <https://github.com/dongjinleekr>keybase:
> > > https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > > > > <https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr>linkedin:
> > > kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > > > > <https://kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr>speakerdeck:
> > > speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > > > > <https://speakerdeck.com/dongjin>*
> > > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> > --
> > *Dongjin Lee*
> >
> > *A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*
> >
> >
> >
> > *github:  <http://goog_969573159/>github.com/dongjinleekr
> > <https://github.com/dongjinleekr>keybase:
> https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
> > <https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr>linkedin:
> kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
> > <https://kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr>speakerdeck:
> speakerdeck.com/dongjin
> > <https://speakerdeck.com/dongjin>*
>


-- 
*Dongjin Lee*

*A hitchhiker in the mathematical world.*



*github:  <http://goog_969573159/>github.com/dongjinleekr
<https://github.com/dongjinleekr>keybase: https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr
<https://keybase.io/dongjinleekr>linkedin: kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr
<https://kr.linkedin.com/in/dongjinleekr>speakerdeck: speakerdeck.com/dongjin
<https://speakerdeck.com/dongjin>*

Reply via email to