-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/26931/#review57766
-----------------------------------------------------------


A couple of design thoughts... Good start!


client/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/client/request/ResourceRequest.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/26931/#comment98740>

    If Kerberos is not enabled, will this work? Also, if Authentication is 
disabled, will this work?



client/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/client/request/ResourceRequest.java
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/26931/#comment98743>

    This may not be necessary with Kerberos. Also, re-authentication seems kind 
of forced. Maybe tokenization would be useful? Maybe in a follow up Jira?


- Abraham Elmahrek


On Oct. 20, 2014, 2:56 p.m., richard zhou wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/26931/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Oct. 20, 2014, 2:56 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for Sqoop.
> 
> 
> Repository: sqoop-sqoop2
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> SQOOP-1527: Kerberos support (SPNEGO) in communication between server and 
> client
> This is an initial patch.
> This patch depends on SQOOP-1526, which is under reviewing 
> (https://reviews.apache.org/r/26678/diff/#)
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   client/pom.xml b2e221ec3b5398c05fa081989e73cf1f2c4d43e5 
>   client/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/client/request/ResourceRequest.java 
> c84a83e3fd7c550645bda8cf5a0ecc844ef7721d 
>   server/pom.xml 67baaa57da9f69f2e8795107ca1b6186eaef2b9c 
>   server/src/main/java/org/apache/sqoop/filter/SqoopAuthenticationFilter.java 
> PRE-CREATION 
>   server/src/main/webapp/WEB-INF/web.xml 
> d31120a367329a7868e64e4215c168bedaf3aac7 
>   shell/pom.xml 947eab02b229f734640c30de3a7d45ba86656d58 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/26931/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> richard zhou
> 
>

Reply via email to