|Re: [ecf-dev] about capabilities|
On 10/30/2014 1:47 PM, Cristiano Gavião wrote:
I would like to understand what you are looking to get here. With what you are saying above, I'm thinking that what you are looking for is DS-based full start of the org.eclipse.ecf.osgi.services.distribution bundle (and the start of the BTM). Is that right? If it is, I do understand the desire for this, and I have been thinking about how this could be done with the BTM (or some other TM) for my own DS-based OSGi server environments.
But I do have some concerns about DS-based activation of BTM/distribution that I will share so we can all discuss: In Eclipse (and perhaps other environments) such auto start could create a potentially dangerous security hole. What I mean is this: If the o.e.e.osgi.service.distribution bundle were auto-started by DS in Eclipse, that would mean that upon startup a promiscuous topology manager (like BTM) would be exporting any remote services, but more importantly also *importing* any remote services that were made available to it...e.g. via zeroconf, slp, zookeeper, etc. Such a promiscuous approach to import could be very dangerous.
Perhaps it's time to consider creating other/additional topology managers (additional to BTM) that are intended for appropriate environments, or having some configuration or system property that allows the existing BTM to be started via DS (e.g. referring to IDistributionConstants in BTMC activate)...or perhaps both are warranted to match different environment use cases. If this seems like the direction you are interested in, would you please open an enhancement request and we can discuss technical details there? I'm quite open to adding something to deal with the DS auto start of BTM, but do want to make sure that it does not cause security problems.
I see. There's not very much to this RFC around topology managers at this point, but if it moves forward there probably will be.
I don't think the osgi.remoteserviceadmin.discovery namespace has a 'configs' attribute (as opposed to the osgi.remoteserviceadmin.distribution namespace). Did you mean to require for the osgi.remoteserviceadmin.distribution namespace?
The discovery namespace does exist, but it has a 'protocols' attribute...e.g.
So do you mean the osgi.remoteserviceadmin.distribution namespace?