Hi Tamás - Thanks for the discussion. I don't think we should MOVE anything from gateway level to topology level. These decisions were made explicitly. Breaking existing deployments with a move like this should be avoided.
Adding things that could also be done at the topology level would be fine. Some things may require machinery setup that is engaged prior to topology deployment and not able to be altered at that time. These will reveal themselves as you try to do them though. thanks! --larry On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 2:09 PM Sandeep Moré <[email protected]> wrote: > Hello Tamas, > This would be great to have. Another use case would be group mappings > which are defined in gateway-xml. > > Best, > Sandeep > > On Mon, Nov 17, 2025 at 1:08 PM Tamás Hanicz <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hey Folks, > > > > Knox has a few use-cases where topology specific configuration is stored > in > > the gateway-site.xml. It would be beneficial if these were moved into the > > actual topologies for better understanding and readability. > > > > Current use-cases I can think of (there might be more): > > > > - Topology port mapping > > - Client auth needed exclusion for specific topologies > > - Async-support for specific topologies > > > > These changes could break things in existing environments, especially > port > > mapping. What are your opinions on this change? > > > > JIRA: http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KNOX-3213 > > > > Regards, Tamas > > >
