Hi Chia-Ping ,

As discussed I have updated my KIP with 1316 and 1317.

Regards,
Viquar Khan

On Mon, 6 Apr 2026 at 00:32, Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]> wrote:

> hi Viquar
>
> > It is each owner’s responsibility to ensure their KIP number does not
> override an existing one.
>
> Just a gentle reminder that the process mentions we should "Update the next
> available KIP number below". You can find the details here:
>
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=50859233#KafkaImprovementProposals-Process
>
> It is totally fine to have an occasional conflict with one KIP. However, it
> seems several KIPs were created without incrementing the number, which has
> unfortunately caused conflicts for several other contributors.
>
> Would you mind updating your KIP numbers instead? If you have any questions
> or concerns, please let me know.
>
> Best,
> Chia-Ping
>
> vaquar khan <[email protected]> 於 2026年4月6日週一 下午12:49寫道:
>
> > ​Hi Kaun,
> >
> > ​Please search(search box) the current KIP list to verify that your
> > assigned number does not already exist. If you find a conflict, check the
> > creation dates; if your KIP was created later, please update it to a
> > unique, available number.
> >
> > ​It is each owner’s responsibility to ensure their KIP number does not
> > override an existing one.
> >
> >
> > ​Regards,
> >
> > ​Viquar Khan
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Apr 5, 2026, 11:24 PM Chia-Ping Tsai <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > > hi all,
> > >
> > > Just a gentle reminder: please remember to increment the "Next KIP
> > Number"
> > > after taking a number. This will help avoid potential conflicts.
> > >
> > > Best,
> > > Chia-Ping
> > >
> > > Kuan-Po Tseng <[email protected]> 於 2026年4月6日週一 下午12:18寫道:
> > >
> > > > Hi Vaquar — I checked the Kafka Improvement Proposals
> > > > <
> > > >
> > >
> >
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/Kafka+Improvement+Proposals
> > > > >
> > > > page and don't see another KIP using 1298.
> > > > Could you pick the next available KIP number and update accordingly?
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Apr 6, 2026 at 12:10 PM vaquar khan <[email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Could you please correct Kip 1298 , we already have same no , I
> > created
> > > > few
> > > > > weeks back.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Viquar Kha
> > > > >
> > > > > On Sun, Apr 5, 2026, 10:34 PM Kuan Po Tseng <[email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks again for the input!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > chia_01: Sure, we can add a debug message on the server side when
> > > > > response
> > > > > > is empty and using v2 with only DESCRIBE_CONFIGS on CLUSTER and
> > > > DESCRIBE
> > > > > on
> > > > > > CLUSTER not set. Additionally, I think it would be helpful to
> add a
> > > > > warning
> > > > > > message in ConfigCommand when the LIST_CONFIG_RESOURCE API
> response
> > > is
> > > > > > empty, to let users know they may need to update their ACL.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On 2026/04/05 08:55:06 Chia-Ping Tsai wrote:
> > > > > > > chia_01: Regarding the migration plan, I have a concern about
> > > > potential
> > > > > > user confusion. Since clients using v2 with only DESCRIBE_CONFIGS
> > > will
> > > > > > receive an empty response rather than an authorization error,
> this
> > > > silent
> > > > > > failure might be very hard to debug. Should we consider logging a
> > > > warning
> > > > > > message in this specific scenario to help users identify the
> > missing
> > > > > > DESCRIBE ACL?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > On 2026/04/05 03:48:16 Kuan-Po Tseng wrote:
> > > > > > > > Thanks for the feedback, Chia-Ping!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > chia_00: That's a fair point. I'm a bit hesitant to handle
> > > > > > DESCRIBE_CONFIGS
> > > > > > > > in handleTopicMetadataRequest and handleListGroupsRequest,
> > > > > > > > since those APIs return more than just names. Exposing
> > > topic/group
> > > > > > names
> > > > > > > > based on a config-oriented permission feels semantically
> > > > misaligned,
> > > > > > > > and I'm not sure it adds much value.
> > > > > > > > Another approach worth considering: we could bump the API
> > version
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > LIST_CONFIG_RESOURCES and switch to DESCRIBE instead of
> > > > > > > > DESCRIBE_CONFIGS, aligning it with other resource-related
> APIs.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > I’ll update the KIP later, and would love to hear others'
> > > thoughts
> > > > on
> > > > > > this!
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > On Sun, Apr 5, 2026 at 12:52 AM Chia-Ping Tsai <
> > > > [email protected]>
> > > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > chia_00: For the sake of consistency, if we permit
> > > > DESCRIBE_CONFIGS
> > > > > > to
> > > > > > > > > expose topic and group names in LIST_CONFIG_RESOURCES,
> should
> > > we
> > > > > > also align
> > > > > > > > > handleTopicMetadataRequest and handleListGroupsRequest?
> > > > Currently,
> > > > > > they
> > > > > > > > > strictly require DESCRIBE.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > On 2026/04/04 16:40:08 Kuan-Po Tseng wrote:
> > > > > > > > > > Hello everyone,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I would like to start a discussion thread on KIP-1298
> which
> > > > fixes
> > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > > authorization inconsistency in LIST_CONFIG_RESOURCES.
> Today
> > > the
> > > > > RPC
> > > > > > > > > > requires DESCRIBE_CONFIGS on CLUSTER for all resource
> > types,
> > > > > which
> > > > > > is
> > > > > > > > > > stricter than comparable RPCs like LIST_GROUPS and
> > METADATA.
> > > > The
> > > > > > > > > practical
> > > > > > > > > > impact is that `kafka-configs.sh --describe --entity-type
> > > > groups`
> > > > > > > > > silently
> > > > > > > > > > returns incomplete results for users holding DESCRIBE but
> > not
> > > > > > > > > > DESCRIBE_CONFIGS on CLUSTER.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > More details, please check
> > > > > > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/x/ZJI8G
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks,
> > > > > > > > > > Kuan-Po Tseng
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

Reply via email to