Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2727
---
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/NIFI-5220
---
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
Once I prove out my fix and update my pr, I'll guess I'll do a PR against
master with that fix?
---
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
I found a bug in this in the aws implementation, I am not sure how you
would see it in the other processors, I found it when bringing this code into
my Gateway Api PR.
The issue is
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@MikeThomsen Thanks for merging this. Although my original intent was
keeping commits made by @trixpan separated (not squashed) to retain his
credits, it looks good to me because the original PR
Github user MikeThomsen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@trixpan @ijokarumawak There are two other tickets referenced, 4196 and
4175(?) in the commit list for this PR. Before I keep squashing, I want to
confirm that you want me to keep going and put 3
Github user MikeThomsen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@ijokarumawak I'm going to start reviewing this. Once we get this done, I
could use a hand with a review on
[this](https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2723) lookup service I wrote which
I'm
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
Should the tests for InvokeHTTP be updated to test with the changes?
---
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
I really stop updating this PR. No more addition from my side. Let's wrap
this up. Thanks for reviewing!
---
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
Added 3 more commits.
1. Added proxy support to Azure processors.
2. Adding more explicit Proxy spec check and doc. Due to the restrictions
of underlying libraries, Proxy support
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
I've summarized current capabilities on this PR's description. Please check
the table. We can keep expanding the list of processors, but I'd stop here and
finish reviewing these processors as
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
Now this PR also includes AWS related processors. I've tested following
processors can utilize HTTP forward proxies and support authentication:
- PutS3Object
- ListS3
-
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@ottobackwards You are talking about these code specifically?
```
HTTPUtils.setProxy(context, clientBuilder, credentialsProvider);
```
Then yes, the above util method accepts
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@ijokarumawak I'm talking about passing around an HttpClientBuilder when
not everyone uses that.
---
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
Elasticsearch processors are also included in this PR now.
I'm researching on AWS and Azure processors now, but those can be done
separately.
---
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
Now this PR includes SFTP processors and SOCKS proxy support for SFTP as
well.
---
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@MikeThomsen We can combine ProxyConfigurationService into ES or Solr, the
CS just let users manage proxy settings in a centralized place. I will take a
look on #2094 to see how I can help
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@jugi92 FTPTransfer supports SOCKS proxy. Specifically at these lines:
```
if (proxyType == Proxy.Type.HTTP) {
-client = new FTPHTTPClient(proxyHost, proxyPort,
Github user ijokarumawak commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@ottobackwards I assume you were talking about this, #2016. That one adds
user/password for proxy authentication at abstract AWS processor. This PR adds
ProxyConfigurationService, which can be
Github user ottobackwards commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
How will this work with the AWS components? They have proxy as well (
although there is a PR for full support ), but a different builder I think
---
Github user jugi92 commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
It would be very nice if the initial proxy service also includes a SOCKS
Proxy example. Other processors that implement the Proxy Service can then reuse
the existing implementation even better. For
Github user MikeThomsen commented on the issue:
https://github.com/apache/nifi/pull/2704
@ijokarumawak haven't had a chance to take a look at this, but have you
tried it against Solr and Elastic yet? I think the latter's APIs do their own
proxy management so that might need a little
22 matches
Mail list logo
