Like I said, it is extremely unlikely to have custom configs in your pluggable interface now because Kafka does not support custom configs at the moment.
Custom configs are desirable. I will change KIP-383 one more time assuming custom configs will be implemented one day. I will reuse your ssl alias config as an example. Even if I satisfy your concerns, that would still leave the KIP with only +2 votes. -----Original Message----- From: Rajini Sivaram [mailto:rajinisiva...@gmail.com] Sent: Friday, January 25, 2019 2:31 PM To: dev Subject: Re: [VOTE] [REMINDER] KIP-383 Pluggable interface for SSL Factory Hi Clement, I think my note was probably not clear. Having SslEngineFactory separate from SslFactory is good. It simplifies reconfiguration since at least some of the logic from SslFactory can be retained. My question was around what custom configs `SslEngineFactory` implementations may have in addition to standard Kafka configs and whether these are likely to need reconfiguration. If there are unlikely to be any custom configs for SslEngineFactory that need reconfiguration, then the existing interface is sufficient. When standard SSL configs change, SslFactory gets notified. But if you wanted to have custom reconfigurable configs for SslEngineFactory, then you need to make SslEngineFactory reconfigurable so that it can provide its custom configs to the broker and get notified when the config changes. For example, the current interface is sufficient to handle changes to `ssl,keystore.location`. But if your SslEngineFactory had a config named `my.keystore.alias`, then you cannot change it without restarting the broker unless SslEngineFactory extended Reconfigurable. If you don't think that we need to support custom configs, then it will be good to mention that in the KIP (and the interface doesn't need to change if that is the case),
