Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/#review184986 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Hitesh Khamesra On Sept. 7, 2017, 5:43

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/ --- (Updated Sept. 7, 2017, 10:43 a.m.) Review request for geode, Alexander

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

> On Sept. 5, 2017, 11 a.m., Hitesh Khamesra wrote: > > Ship It! I've had to do more work on this & would appreciate another review. - Bruce --- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/ --- (Updated Sept. 7, 2017, 10:32 a.m.) Review request for geode, Alexander

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

Ah, I see. Makes sense. On Sep 6, 2017 12:23 PM, "Bruce Schuchardt" wrote: I think we will want to remove this property in the next major release and have the behavior it enables be how the servers always act. On 9/6/17 10:23 AM, Brian Baynes wrote: In this case, won't

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

I think we will want to remove this property in the next major release and have the behavior it enables be how the servers always act. On 9/6/17 10:23 AM, Brian Baynes wrote: In this case, won't we be changing the default of this property with the next major release?  So perhaps the choice is

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

In this case, won't we be changing the default of this property with the next major release? So perhaps the choice is to follow the default=false convention now, or with the next major release..? On Wed, Sep 6, 2017 at 8:47 AM, Bruce Schuchardt wrote: > > > > On Sept.

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

> On Sept. 5, 2017, 5:09 p.m., Galen O'Sullivan wrote: > > I prefer config option names to be as unambiguous as possible. I think > > `allow` would be clearer than `disallow` because it avoids > > double-negatives. Can we use > > `allow-internal-messages-without-credentials` and have it

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/#review184608 --- I prefer config option names to be as unambiguous as possible. I

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/#review184602 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Udo Kohlmeyer On Sept. 5, 2017, 5:57

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/#review184591 --- Ship it! I am rather disappointed that this required no test

Re: Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/#review184565 --- Ship it! Ship It! - Hitesh Khamesra On Sept. 5, 2017, 5:57

Review Request 62088: GEODE-3249 Validate internal client/server messages

--- This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit: https://reviews.apache.org/r/62088/ --- Review request for geode, Alexander Murmann, Galen O'Sullivan, Hitesh Khamesra,