qpid-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Andrew Stitcher" <astitc...@apache.org>
Subject Review Request: Improve qpid-route handling for interbroker ssl connections
Date Mon, 14 Jan 2013 20:35:28 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/8943/
-----------------------------------------------------------

Review request for qpid, Gordon Sim and Ted Ross.


Description
-------

This change addresses 2 issues I found while using qpid-route to setup and inspect ssl federation
routes:

1. It allows the source URL to use the amqps scheme and for this to be interpreted to use
the ssl transport between the brokers.

2. It allows qpid-route itself to deal sensibly if it gets an amqps scheme from a broker during
the "qpid-route route map" command.

I think the fix to 2. is a clear improvement over the previous behaviour as now qpid-route
can at least try to contact the broker at the end of the URL (even if it won't always succeed
due to authentication failure). Before it would always try to use the ssl port with a tcp
transport which would almost never succeed (unless the broker was using multiplexed TCP/SSL).

It's not clear to me if the change to fix 1. is good or not. As it relies on the user understanding
that that the Source URL is really the URL used by the destination to contact the source and
so is the actual federation link. This is really not clear from the command itself. You can
still use the --transport option to specify the protocol, so this is an additional way to
specify the link.

So I'm seeking some confirmation (or not) that I should commit this change.


Diffs
-----

  /trunk/qpid/tools/src/py/qpid-route 1433061 

Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/8943/diff/


Testing
-------


Thanks,

Andrew Stitcher


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message