Github user ottobackwards commented on a diff in the pull request:
https://github.com/apache/metron/pull/530#discussion_r123291122
--- Diff: metron-analytics/metron-maas-service/README.md ---
@@ -138,7 +138,7 @@ Now that we have a deployed model, let's adjust the
configurations for the Squid
* Edit the squid parser configuration at
`$METRON_HOME/config/zookeeper/parsers/squid.json` in your favorite text editor
and add a new FieldTransformation to indicate a threat alert based on the model
(note the addition of `is_malicious` and `is_alert`):
```
{
- "parserClassName": "org.apache.metron.parsers.GrokParser",
+ "parserClassName": "org.apache.metron.parsers.grok.GrokParser",
--- End diff --
Yes that is my thinking. They, along with JSONMap provide base
capabilities to be extended by other parsers, or to be used with configurations
to make they themselves useful. So if we added an XML or scripting parser, it
would go in here as well.
The extensions - in the context of these types - are the bundling of
specific configurations of these base parsers ( indexing, parser, enrichment,
ES ) into a single installable unit.
You could also do this manually by pushing configurations to the right
places in zookeeper and changing ambari etc, and you can still do this in a
post 777 world.
Extensions also give a project structure for implementing and executing
unit and integration tests, on even configuration only parsers ( SEE: YAF,
SQUID ). This I think should be the recommended way, even the supported way
for production.
Along with METRON-942 that is.
---
If your project is set up for it, you can reply to this email and have your
reply appear on GitHub as well. If your project does not have this feature
enabled and wishes so, or if the feature is enabled but not working, please
contact infrastructure at infrastruct...@apache.org or file a JIRA ticket
with INFRA.
---
