[jira] [Commented] (BOOKKEEPER-631) Middleware Proposal

["Flavio Junqueira (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org>]

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-631?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13689808#comment-13689808 ] 

Flavio Junqueira commented on BOOKKEEPER-631:
---------------------------------------------

I like the abstraction this is trying to implement. Although the concept is slightly different and it is implemented differently, it reminds me of the request processors of zookeeper servers. Since I'm on the topic, I don't really like to call the abstraction "middleware". I think I understand your motivation to call it like that, but something like stage, layer, processor, seems more suitable to me. This is a just a suggestion, though.

I was also wondering about how one configures the sequence of middleware modules. I suppose that through configuration we learn what needs to be loaded and the bookie initialization loads the appropriate modules?
                
> Middleware Proposal
> -------------------
>
>                 Key: BOOKKEEPER-631
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/BOOKKEEPER-631
>             Project: Bookkeeper
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: bookkeeper-client, bookkeeper-server
>            Reporter: Sijie Guo
>
> This JIRA tries to propose a *Middleware* concept, which is a kind of request/response handler to intercept bookie request/response flow for different purposes.
> Different *middleware*s serve different purpose: 
> - *StatsMiddleware* is to collect stats of requests
> - *AuthMiddleware* is to authenticate requests
> - *ACLMiddleware* is to serve authorization.
> - any customized middleware could be added to serve their request intercepting.
> the middlewares are loaded from configuration to process request/response in order.
> request -> (middleware 1) -> (middleware 2) -> (middleware N) -> response 
> each middleware could decide: whether it could process the request or not? if it can't process, it passes the request to its downstream middleware. if it could, processes the request and decide whether to pass the request to downstream or not.
> for example, an auth bookie could load two middlewares:
> request -> AuthMiddleware -> BookieMiddleware -> response
> The *AuthMiddleware* could intercept *authenticate* requests or requests with *authenticate* information (such as Token). if the request is authenticated, pass it to BookieMiddleware to process the requests; otherwise, it stopped and respond with EUA response.
> A non-auth bookie could just load BookieMiddleware without any authentication.
> prototype of this idea in github. the interface in the prototype is not finalized, since the middleware concept is quite similar as netty channel handler. I am thinking how to consolidate them.
> https://github.com/sijie/bookkeeper/commit/d23df97b209170852f2ce6676a49c97e72ecb2ee
> a token-based authentication middleware example:
> https://github.com/sijie/bookkeeper/tree/middlewares/bookkeeper-server/src/main/java/org/apache/bookkeeper/security/token
> or if you want to make authentication flow like this:
> - client instantiates a connection
> - client sends credential first
> - after client verified the credential, all the following requests are authenticated.
> you could implement a middleware maintaining all incoming requests, if the first message is not credential, respond EUA and close the channel, if the first message is credential message and it is authenticated, mark this channel as authenticated and bypass all its following requests.

--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira