On Jun 25, 2014, at 6:16 PM, Jon Maron <[email protected]> wrote:
> Spent today trying to get the approach indicated in the link below to work, > but the version of Guice in yarn pre-dates a required change. Moving on to > Plan B: creating a completely separate jetty embedded instance w/o the > reliance on guice. Or the GuiceFilter, with its static pipeline, to be more exact... > > — Jon > > On Jun 25, 2014, at 11:18 AM, Jon Maron <[email protected]> wrote: > >> For the curious, this appears to be the issue: >> >> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/9074704/embedded-jetty-different-ports-for-internally-and-externally-visible-endpoints >> >> I may undertake to implement the specified approach (though the package >> scope constructor trick is a little…hokey?) just to see if: >> >> 1) It does in fact solve the issue and >> 2) Allows for leveraging the existing HTTP yarn infrastructure pending a >> potential fix in guice >> >> Alternatively, I imagine the ambari server exposes multiple endpoints, some >> secure, some not, so if the approach above proves troublesome we many need >> to go down a similar path of instantiating a separate HTTP stack. >> >> — Jon >> >> On Jun 25, 2014, at 11:05 AM, Jon Maron <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I would agree as well. My concern is introducing yet another HTTP layer >>> that ultimately would need to be tracked for alignment with any security >>> layers introduced (knox, cert stores, credential stores, etc). I think the >>> ideal is to have a single HTTP implementation that can be leveraged by AM >>> developers that fulfills expected requirements (multiple listeners, secure >>> listeners) >>> >>> — Jon >>> >>> On Jun 25, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Josh Elser <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Totally agree. Writing code that makes it more "amenable" to accepting the >>>> objects it's operating on is much easier in the long run. >>>> >>>> FWIW, I have recently been playing with Dropwizard[1] and really like it >>>> from a perspective of staying out of the way and just letting me write a >>>> REST service. I know that's not an answer to the question you asked, but >>>> thought it might be relevant :) >>>> >>>> [1] https://github.com/dropwizard/dropwizard >>>> >>>> On 6/24/14, 7:59 PM, Steve Loughran wrote: >>>>> I always find Injection troublesome too. It helps with mocking, it helps >>>>> if >>>>> you want spring-style config wiring up of an app from components, but the >>>>> classic "pass things as constructors" strategy often works too -and its >>>>> essentially what I've resorted to in places >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 24 June 2014 12:36, Jon Maron <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> I am attempting to split out the Slider agent-based HTTP resources into >>>>>> a separate web application in order to explicit secure those interactions >>>>>> (SSL etc). In doing so I am leveraging the Jersey/Guice/Jetty based web >>>>>> app infrastructure in Yarn. >>>>>> >>>>>> It appears that even though I have split off a separate yarn web app >>>>>> instance, configured with the associated agent resources, those new >>>>>> resources can not be reached/found (the other non-agent resources still >>>>>> managed by the SliderAMWebApp still work). In other words, even though >>>>>> each WebApp instance is configured with its own GuiceContainer, for some >>>>>> reason the agent web app can not return those resources when requested >>>>>> (my >>>>>> understanding is that a GuiceContainer will scan the classes bound to the >>>>>> servlet module to identify configured resources and providers. In a >>>>>> debugger I’ve also seen that that scan appears to take place). >>>>>> >>>>>> A successful, non-agent request looks like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: REQUEST /ws/v1/slider/mgmt/app on >>>>>> org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection@d2c5c4d >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> sessionManager=org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.HashSessionManager@6602b61b >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: session=null >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: servlet=default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> chain=NoCacheFilter->safety->AM_PROXY_FILTER->guice->default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: servlet holder=default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter NoCacheFilter >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter safety >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter AM_PROXY_FILTER >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:28 DEBUG web.SliderAmIpFilter: Remote address for request >>>>>> is: 192.168.64.1 >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:30 WARN web.SliderAmIpFilter: Could not find proxy-user >>>>>> cookie, so user will not be set >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:31 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter guice >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:26:31 DEBUG mortbay.log: RESPONSE /ws/v1/slider/mgmt/app 200 >>>>>> >>>>>> Whereas an unsuccessful agent request looks like this: >>>>>> >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: REQUEST >>>>>> /ws-agent/v1/slider/agents/register on >>>>>> org.mortbay.jetty.HttpConnection@1ad901b1 >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> sessionManager=org.mortbay.jetty.servlet.HashSessionManager@372cab4 >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: session=null >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: servlet=default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> chain=NoCacheFilter->safety->AM_PROXY_FILTER->guice->default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: servlet holder=default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter NoCacheFilter >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter safety >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter AM_PROXY_FILTER >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:46 DEBUG web.SliderAmIpFilter: Remote address for request >>>>>> is: 192.168.64.1 >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:47 DEBUG mortbay.log: EOF >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:49 WARN web.SliderAmIpFilter: Could not find proxy-user >>>>>> cookie, so user will not be set >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: call filter guice >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: call servlet default >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> RESOURCE=file:/tmp/Jetty_0_0_0_0_36606_slideragent____.aojpr6/webapp/ws-agent/v1/slider/agents/register.gz >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> RESOURCE=file:/tmp/Jetty_0_0_0_0_36606_slideragent____.aojpr6/webapp/ws-agent/v1/slider/agents/register >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> RESOURCE=file:/tmp/Jetty_0_0_0_0_36606_slideragent____.aojpr6/webapp/ws-agent/v1/slider/agents/register >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: >>>>>> resource=file:/tmp/Jetty_0_0_0_0_36606_slideragent____.aojpr6/webapp/ws-agent/v1/slider/agents/register >>>>>> 14/06/24 17:11:50 DEBUG mortbay.log: RESPONSE >>>>>> /ws-agent/v1/slider/agents/register 404 >>>>>> >>>>>> The second request shows that the guice interaction did not yield a >>>>>> response and the next filter (default) is attempted. >>>>>> >>>>>> Anyone have any experience with this sort of configuration (multiple >>>>>> instantiated web apps/guice containers)? >>>>>> >>>>>> — Jon >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE >>>>>> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity >>>>>> to >>>>>> which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, >>>>>> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader >>>>>> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified >>>>>> that >>>>>> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or >>>>>> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have >>>>>> received this communication in error, please contact the sender >>>>>> immediately >>>>>> and delete it from your system. Thank You. >>>>>> >>>>> >>> >> > -- CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may contain information that is confidential, privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, disclosure or forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please contact the sender immediately and delete it from your system. Thank You.
