Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add "client" section to router configs #75

Closed
klingerf opened this issue Feb 4, 2016 · 4 comments
Closed

Add "client" section to router configs #75

klingerf opened this issue Feb 4, 2016 · 4 comments
Milestone

Comments

@klingerf
Copy link
Member

klingerf commented Feb 4, 2016

Once #73 ships, we'll have a few configuration options at the top level of our router config that are also available within the servers section of the same router config. The options at the top level apply to clients that are dynamically created by the router, whereas the options in the servers section apply to servers that are created when the router starts. For clarity, we should move the client-only top level options into a client config section.

Previously:

routers:
- protocol: thrift
  baseDtab: |
    /thrift => /io.l5d.fs/aservice;
  thriftFramed: false
  tls:
    kind: io.l5d.NoValidationTlsClient
  servers:
  - port: 4114
    ip: 0.0.0.0
    thriftFramed: false
    tls:
      certPath: /foo/cacert.pem
      keyPath: /foo/private/cakey.pem

Proposed future:

routers:
- protocol: thrift
  baseDtab: |
    /thrift => /io.l5d.fs/aservice;
  client:
    thriftFramed: false
    tls:
      kind: io.l5d.NoValidationTlsClient
  servers:
  - port: 4114
    ip: 0.0.0.0
    thriftFramed: false
    tls:
      certPath: /foo/cacert.pem
      keyPath: /foo/private/cakey.pem
@klingerf
Copy link
Member Author

klingerf commented Feb 4, 2016

Maybe we should call the new section clients: instead of client:? I could go either way.

@olix0r
Copy link
Member

olix0r commented Feb 4, 2016

i'd prefer client because in my mind plural "clients" means it's a list

@klingerf
Copy link
Member Author

klingerf commented Feb 4, 2016

Yep, makes sense to me.

@klingerf klingerf added this to the 0.0.10 milestone Feb 5, 2016
@wmorgan wmorgan added the ready label Feb 8, 2016
@wmorgan
Copy link
Member

wmorgan commented Feb 8, 2016

Nice to have in 0.0.10 but not critical.

@olix0r olix0r modified the milestones: 0.0.11, 0.0.10 Feb 9, 2016
@adleong adleong added reviewable and removed ready labels Feb 9, 2016
@gtcampbell gtcampbell modified the milestones: 0.0.11, 0.0.12 Feb 22, 2016
Tim-Brooks pushed a commit to Tim-Brooks/linkerd that referenced this issue Dec 20, 2018
* Prepare the repo for the v0.1.1 release

* Add changelog

* Changelog updates, wrap at 100 characters
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants