mesos-reviews mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Till Toenshoff" <toensh...@me.com>
Subject Re: Review Request 33295: Added firewall mechanism to control access on libprocess http endpoints.
Date Fri, 05 Jun 2015 14:53:40 GMT

-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#review86800
-----------------------------------------------------------

Ship it!



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/firewall.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138884>

    First of all, sorry for leading you in the wrong direction here - but could you please
start the description with a capital letter here and everywhere else as it has just decided
and documented in our styleguides?



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/firewall.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138885>

    s/requiered/required/



3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/firewall.hpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138886>

    s/considering/considered/?



3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138887>

    I see that you copied this from the above but once you get rid of the duplication, could
you also make sure that this comment really adds value (or gets killed)?



3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138888>

    Let make this a std::move.



3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138889>

    Could you move this comment three lines down before the actual request?



3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138891>

    Could you please adjust the style of this comment towards those above?



3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp
<https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/#comment138893>

    s/a null pointer/an empty vector/


- Till Toenshoff


On June 2, 2015, 9:57 a.m., Alexander Rojas wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated June 2, 2015, 9:57 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Adam B, Benjamin Hindman, Bernd Mathiske, and Till Toenshoff.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-2620
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2620
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Introduces the interface `FirewallRule` which will be matched against incoming connections
in order to allow them to be served or being blocked. For details, check the [design doc](https://docs.google.com/document/d/1JSJTJMJ6ZXLkCSmvOIabTLrjtqqr0E-u99Rx2BHR1hs/edit).
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/Makefile.am 8aab0593f296c7aae71289f9bd6cf3eb3578a721 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/firewall.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/include/process/process.hpp 79d1719932a3fdc90b6247d3a77adee123e72435

>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/process.cpp e3de3cd6b536aaaf59784360aed546512dd04dc9 
>   3rdparty/libprocess/src/tests/process_tests.cpp 67e582cc250a9767a389e2bd0cc68985477f3ffb

> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/33295/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Alexander Rojas
> 
>


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