Hello Jun,
On Fri, Apr 1, 2016 at 9:57 PM, Jun Rao <j...@confluent.io> wrote: > Ashish, > > Thanks for the KIP. > > It seems that a specific implementation of Authorizer can reject invalid > user type in addAcl/removeAcl without needing the new > getSupportedPrincipalTypes() > method, right? It's probably useful to provide the supported user types as > information through CLI (e.g., when --help is specified). Then, there may > other information that a specific authorizer may want to provide. So, if > this is just informational, would it be better to add sth like > getDescription() in the Authorizer interface and expose that through CLI? > Providing information is definitely an important reason, some other reasons were to fail fast and to avoid same check in all implementations. I agree having a generic getDescription() will be handy for authorizer implementations to provide more implementation specific info, including supported principal types and more. However, do you think other two reasons I mentioned can convince you for current proposal? > > Jun > > On Wed, Mar 30, 2016 at 11:02 AM, Ashish Singh <asi...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > Hi Guys, > > > > I would like to open the vote for KIP-50. > > > > KIP: > > > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/KAFKA/KIP-50+-+Enhance+Authorizer+interface+to+be+aware+of+supported+Principal+Types > > > > Discuss thread: here > > < > > > http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/kafka-dev/201603.mbox/%3CCAGQG9cUCLDO0owdziDcL9iStXNF1wURyVNcEZedQJg%3DUuC7j%3DQ%40mail.gmail.com%3E > > > > > > > JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/KAFKA-3186 > > > > PR: https://github.com/apache/kafka/pull/861 > > > > -- > > > > Regards, > > Ashish > > > -- Regards, Ashish
