On Mon, 2015-05-11 at 10:32 -0400, Vincent Batts wrote: > On 09/05/15 00:31 +0200, Pavel Odvody wrote: > >On Fri, 2015-05-08 at 14:33 -0400, Vincent Batts wrote: > >> On 08/05/15 11:31 +1000, Daurnimator wrote: > >> >On 8 May 2015 at 01:46, Pavel Odvody <podv...@redhat.com> wrote: > >> >> - To access the V2 registry we need to send a special User-Agent > >> >> docker/1.6.0 > >> > > >> >Is this really required? > >> >Can we request they change something server side? > >> > >> I would have to double check the behavior on their docker hub, but for > >> local registries this user agent header is not required. It is the > >> expectation that a docker registry can always be served as a static file > >> tree (pull only). > >> > >> vb > > > >Hey, > > > >$ curl -XGET https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/library/node/manifests/latest > ><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2 Final//EN"> > ><title>404 Not Found</title> > ><h1>Not Found</h1> > ><p>The requested URL was not found on the server. If you entered the URL > >manually please check your spelling and try again.</p> > > > >$ curl -XGET -H"User-Agent: docker/1.6.0" > >https://registry-1.docker.io/v2/library/node/manifests/latest > >{"errors":[{"code":"UNAUTHORIZED","message":"access to the requested > >resource is not > >authorized","detail":[{"Type":"repository","Name":"library/node","Action":"pull"}]}]} > > > >I actually added a little clarification in my 5th patch: > > > >"User-Agent: do" /* otherwise we get load-balanced(!) to a V1 registyry */ > >(I got this information from Andy G.) > > > >The second request obviously fails due to the bearer token not being > >provided, > >but at least we can see that we're hitting the correct endpoint here. > > > >I think that this is the correct behavior, since the original systemd-pull > >workflow was to check the Hub first and obtain the token, which I'm simply > >following here, however the token is now obtained from a separate endpoint. > > > >The thing is that the argument is --dkr-index-url, so we're actually > >specifying > >the Hub URL here and there's no way to specify a registry alone. > >(the "mirror" registry is received in HTTP headers from the Hub) > > > >Sounds like a topic for another patch? > > > >I hope that the pull-only policy will be relaxed soon :) A lot of roundtrips > >... > > I understand they've done this on their hub, to route client versions > < 1.6.0 which can not do the v2 api. There ought to be a way not no > require UA headers. Will see what I can do. > > vb
I find that solution rather unfortunate, since the endpoints are already versioned /v1/ and /v2/ respectively. The clients before 1.6.0 have hardcoded the /v1/ endpoints so really no additional reason for this. (oh, didn't 1.5.0 ship half-assed implementation of v2 with old header names?) -- Pavel Odvody <podv...@redhat.com> Software Engineer - EMEA ENG Developer Experience 5EC1 95C1 8E08 5BD9 9BBF 9241 3AFA 3A66 024F F68D Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkyňova 99/71, 612 45, Brno
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
