What does '0.0.0.0:2888:3888' mean exactly in terms of bindind? Listen on all available interfaces?
In which case I think it would be better to advise using quorumListenOnAllIPs to customers instead. We could also detect and alert if configured with wildcard address. Andor On Tue, 2020-02-18 at 18:00 +0100, Enrico Olivelli wrote: > I feel it would be better to simply have a "local bind address" and > an > "advertised address" > > server.1=advertisedaddress:port:port.... > localBindAddress=0.0.0.0 > > it is clearer > Enrico > > Il giorno mar 18 feb 2020 alle ore 11:29 Szalay-Bekő Máté > <[email protected]> ha scritto: > > also, we have the same 0.0.0.0 config suggested in the description > > of the > > zookeeper 'docker official' image: > > https://hub.docker.com/_/zookeeper > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 10:59 AM Szalay-Bekő Máté < > > [email protected]> wrote: > > > > > A quote from the Jira ticket where Sebastian tries to explain > > > their setup: > > > (see > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-2164?focusedCommentId=17037941&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-17037941 > > > ) > > > > > > "We are using 0.0.0.0 in our config of the 3-node-cluster as the > > > nodes are > > > running in separate docker-instances not directly connected to > > > each other. > > > Which means the zookeeper-container doesn't have its real IP > > > assigned only > > > using port-forwardings from the docker host to the container to > > > make it > > > accessible and so using the external IP or the FQDN doesn't allow > > > zookeeper > > > to start as it complains about not finding that IP in the > > > container. Which > > > is of course correct. Using the internal Network-IP instead of > > > 0.0.0.0 > > > would result in the same problem as using 0.0.0.0 as all internal > > > networks > > > of the three docker hosts are using the same network-range in > > > their > > > internal networks." > > > > > > re-reading it, I think he meant a bit different config than what > > > I wrote > > > as an example before... I think he basically connects separate > > > hosts with > > > tunnels maybe and running ZK in docker in each host without any > > > container > > > orchestration tool. (?) > > > > > > On Tue, Feb 18, 2020 at 10:49 AM Enrico Olivelli < > > > [email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > > > > > Honestly I think that using 0.0.0.0 is not so useful. > > > > I find it very useful that the configuration is the same on > > > > every peer, > > > > except from myid file > > > > What's the real gain in such configuration? > > > > > > > > > > > > Enrico > > > > > > > > > > > > Il Mar 18 Feb 2020, 10:32 Szalay-Bekő Máté < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > ha > > > > scritto: > > > > > > > > > Hi All, > > > > > > > > > > in a recent PR I try to fix an issue we found with Suhas > > > > > Dantkale in > > > > > ZOOKEEPER-2146 (see > > > > > https://github.com/apache/zookeeper/pull/1254). The > > > > > problem is that in ZooKeeper 3.5+ some quorum members can not > > > > > rejoin to > > > > the > > > > > quorum after a restart if the server configs are set like > > > > > this: > > > > > > > > > > zoo.cfg in server 1: > > > > > server.1=0.0.0.0:2888:3888 > > > > > server.2=some.fqdn-2.com:2888:3888 > > > > > server.3=some.fqdn-3.com:2888:3888 > > > > > > > > > > zoo.cfg in server 2: > > > > > server.1=some.fqdn-1.com:2888:3888 > > > > > server.2=0.0.0.0:2888:3888 > > > > > server.3=some.fqdn-3.com:2888:3888 > > > > > > > > > > I am not exactly sure about the use case behind this config, > > > > > but people > > > > > claim they need it for specific dockerized environments (see > > > > > the > > > > comments > > > > > in the jira ticket). Is anyone familiar with such use cases? > > > > > We never > > > > used > > > > > such configs in production as far as I can tell. > > > > > > > > > > The above config worked without a problem in ZooKeeper 3.4.x, > > > > > but not > > > > > perfectly for 3.5.x. It would be logical to keep supporting > > > > > it. Still, I > > > > > think after the introduction of the dynamic reconfig, we kind > > > > > of assume > > > > > that all the servers have the same server address > > > > > configurations. So > > > > maybe > > > > > the config is not even valid anymore? > > > > > > > > > > Using the 'quorumListenOnAllIPs' config property instead the > > > > > 0.0.0.0 in > > > > the > > > > > configs might solve the issue. But if it is the case, then we > > > > > definitely > > > > > should highlight this in the wiki / documentation. Maybe even > > > > > printing > > > > out > > > > > a warning during ZooKeeper startup. > > > > > > > > > > What do you think? > > > > > > > > > > Kind regards, > > > > > Mate > > > > >
