[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-919?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Ashish Vaidya updated OOZIE-919:
--------------------------------
Attachment: OOZIE-919.WIP.patch
This is a work in progress. I'm trying to use java.net.URI to validate the
JT/NN syntax. I'm, however, finding it inadequate and perhaps misleading to get
the job done. Or may be it's just that I'm getting back to Java after a while!
>From the current usage I see that we should honor the following formats:
a. scheme://host:port
b. scheme://host
c. host:port
d. host
... and anything else should be rejected.
java.net.URI seems not a perfect choice to get the above job done. If there are
better alternatives, suggestions for those are certainly welcome.
For future proofing we should also look at including IPv6 host addresses in the
mix.
> Notify user correctly of NN and JT hostname validity
> ----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: OOZIE-919
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OOZIE-919
> Project: Oozie
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: core
> Reporter: Ashish Vaidya
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: OOZIE-919.WIP.patch
>
> Original Estimate: 48h
> Remaining Estimate: 48h
>
> When value provided for JT and/or NN is malformed (incorrect
> scheme://hostname:port syntax), we throw the following error:
> 'Jobtracker/namenode not in whitelist.'
> This is misleading to the user. We should let the user know that the input
> for those is malformed and the hostname:port syntax needs to be corrected.
> Above doesn't (and shouldn't) affect the tallying of those values against the
> respective white lists.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
