open-consul/agent/consul/fsm/commands_oss.go

538 lines
20 KiB
Go
Raw Normal View History

package fsm
import (
"fmt"
"time"
metrics "github.com/armon/go-metrics"
"github.com/hashicorp/consul/agent/structs"
"github.com/hashicorp/consul/api"
)
func init() {
registerCommand(structs.RegisterRequestType, (*FSM).applyRegister)
registerCommand(structs.DeregisterRequestType, (*FSM).applyDeregister)
registerCommand(structs.KVSRequestType, (*FSM).applyKVSOperation)
registerCommand(structs.SessionRequestType, (*FSM).applySessionOperation)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
// DEPRECATED (ACL-Legacy-Compat) - Only needed for v1 ACL compat
registerCommand(structs.ACLRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLOperation)
registerCommand(structs.TombstoneRequestType, (*FSM).applyTombstoneOperation)
registerCommand(structs.CoordinateBatchUpdateType, (*FSM).applyCoordinateBatchUpdate)
registerCommand(structs.PreparedQueryRequestType, (*FSM).applyPreparedQueryOperation)
registerCommand(structs.TxnRequestType, (*FSM).applyTxn)
registerCommand(structs.AutopilotRequestType, (*FSM).applyAutopilotUpdate)
registerCommand(structs.IntentionRequestType, (*FSM).applyIntentionOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ConnectCARequestType, (*FSM).applyConnectCAOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLTokenSetRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLTokenSetOperation)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
registerCommand(structs.ACLTokenDeleteRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLTokenDeleteOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLBootstrapRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLTokenBootstrap)
registerCommand(structs.ACLPolicySetRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLPolicySetOperation)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
registerCommand(structs.ACLPolicyDeleteRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLPolicyDeleteOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ConnectCALeafRequestType, (*FSM).applyConnectCALeafOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ConfigEntryRequestType, (*FSM).applyConfigEntryOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLRoleSetRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLRoleSetOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLRoleDeleteRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLRoleDeleteOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLBindingRuleSetRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLBindingRuleSetOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLBindingRuleDeleteRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLBindingRuleDeleteOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLAuthMethodSetRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLAuthMethodSetOperation)
registerCommand(structs.ACLAuthMethodDeleteRequestType, (*FSM).applyACLAuthMethodDeleteOperation)
}
func (c *FSM) applyRegister(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
defer metrics.MeasureSince([]string{"fsm", "register"}, time.Now())
var req structs.RegisterRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
// Apply all updates in a single transaction
if err := c.state.EnsureRegistration(index, &req); err != nil {
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: EnsureRegistration failed: %v", err)
return err
}
return nil
}
func (c *FSM) applyDeregister(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
defer metrics.MeasureSince([]string{"fsm", "deregister"}, time.Now())
var req structs.DeregisterRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
// Either remove the service entry or the whole node. The precedence
// here is also baked into vetDeregisterWithACL() in acl.go, so if you
// make changes here, be sure to also adjust the code over there.
if req.ServiceID != "" {
if err := c.state.DeleteService(index, req.Node, req.ServiceID); err != nil {
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: DeleteNodeService failed: %v", err)
return err
}
} else if req.CheckID != "" {
if err := c.state.DeleteCheck(index, req.Node, req.CheckID); err != nil {
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: DeleteNodeCheck failed: %v", err)
return err
}
} else {
if err := c.state.DeleteNode(index, req.Node); err != nil {
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: DeleteNode failed: %v", err)
return err
}
}
return nil
}
func (c *FSM) applyKVSOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.KVSRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "kvs"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case api.KVSet:
return c.state.KVSSet(index, &req.DirEnt)
case api.KVDelete:
return c.state.KVSDelete(index, req.DirEnt.Key)
case api.KVDeleteCAS:
act, err := c.state.KVSDeleteCAS(index, req.DirEnt.ModifyIndex, req.DirEnt.Key)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
case api.KVDeleteTree:
return c.state.KVSDeleteTree(index, req.DirEnt.Key)
case api.KVCAS:
act, err := c.state.KVSSetCAS(index, &req.DirEnt)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
case api.KVLock:
act, err := c.state.KVSLock(index, &req.DirEnt)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
case api.KVUnlock:
act, err := c.state.KVSUnlock(index, &req.DirEnt)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
default:
err := fmt.Errorf("Invalid KVS operation '%s'", req.Op)
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: %v", err)
return err
}
}
func (c *FSM) applySessionOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.SessionRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "session"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case structs.SessionCreate:
if err := c.state.SessionCreate(index, &req.Session); err != nil {
return err
}
return req.Session.ID
case structs.SessionDestroy:
return c.state.SessionDestroy(index, req.Session.ID)
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: Invalid Session operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid Session operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
// DEPRECATED (ACL-Legacy-Compat) - Only needed for legacy compat
func (c *FSM) applyACLOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
// TODO (ACL-Legacy-Compat) - Should we warn here somehow about using deprecated features
// maybe emit a second metric?
var req structs.ACLRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case structs.ACLBootstrapInit:
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
enabled, _, err := c.state.CanBootstrapACLToken()
if err != nil {
return err
}
return enabled
case structs.ACLBootstrapNow:
2018-11-02 17:00:39 +00:00
// This is a bootstrap request from a non-upgraded node
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
if err := c.state.ACLBootstrap(index, 0, req.ACL.Convert(), true); err != nil {
return err
}
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
// No need to check expiration times as those did not exist in legacy tokens.
if _, token, err := c.state.ACLTokenGetBySecret(nil, req.ACL.ID, nil); err != nil {
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
return err
} else {
acl, err := token.Convert()
if err != nil {
return err
}
return acl
}
case structs.ACLForceSet, structs.ACLSet:
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
if err := c.state.ACLTokenSet(index, req.ACL.Convert(), true); err != nil {
return err
}
return req.ACL.ID
case structs.ACLDelete:
return c.state.ACLTokenDeleteBySecret(index, req.ACL.ID, nil)
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: Invalid ACL operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid ACL operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
func (c *FSM) applyTombstoneOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.TombstoneRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "tombstone"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case structs.TombstoneReap:
return c.state.ReapTombstones(req.ReapIndex)
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: Invalid Tombstone operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid Tombstone operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
// applyCoordinateBatchUpdate processes a batch of coordinate updates and applies
// them in a single underlying transaction. This interface isn't 1:1 with the outer
// update interface that the coordinate endpoint exposes, so we made it single
// purpose and avoided the opcode convention.
func (c *FSM) applyCoordinateBatchUpdate(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var updates structs.Coordinates
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &updates); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode batch updates: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSince([]string{"fsm", "coordinate", "batch-update"}, time.Now())
if err := c.state.CoordinateBatchUpdate(index, updates); err != nil {
return err
}
return nil
}
// applyPreparedQueryOperation applies the given prepared query operation to the
// state store.
func (c *FSM) applyPreparedQueryOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.PreparedQueryRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "prepared-query"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case structs.PreparedQueryCreate, structs.PreparedQueryUpdate:
return c.state.PreparedQuerySet(index, req.Query)
case structs.PreparedQueryDelete:
return c.state.PreparedQueryDelete(index, req.Query.ID)
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: Invalid PreparedQuery operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid PreparedQuery operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
func (c *FSM) applyTxn(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.TxnRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSince([]string{"fsm", "txn"}, time.Now())
results, errors := c.state.TxnRW(index, req.Ops)
return structs.TxnResponse{
Results: results,
Errors: errors,
}
}
func (c *FSM) applyAutopilotUpdate(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.AutopilotSetConfigRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSince([]string{"fsm", "autopilot"}, time.Now())
if req.CAS {
act, err := c.state.AutopilotCASConfig(index, req.Config.ModifyIndex, &req.Config)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
}
return c.state.AutopilotSetConfig(index, &req.Config)
}
// applyIntentionOperation applies the given intention operation to the state store.
func (c *FSM) applyIntentionOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.IntentionRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"consul", "fsm", "intention"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "intention"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case structs.IntentionOpCreate, structs.IntentionOpUpdate:
return c.state.IntentionSet(index, req.Intention)
case structs.IntentionOpDelete:
return c.state.IntentionDelete(index, req.Intention.ID)
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: Invalid Intention operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid Intention operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
// applyConnectCAOperation applies the given CA operation to the state store.
func (c *FSM) applyConnectCAOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.CARequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"consul", "fsm", "ca"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "ca"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
2018-04-07 00:58:45 +00:00
case structs.CAOpSetConfig:
if req.Config.ModifyIndex != 0 {
act, err := c.state.CACheckAndSetConfig(index, req.Config.ModifyIndex, req.Config)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
}
return c.state.CASetConfig(index, req.Config)
case structs.CAOpSetRoots:
act, err := c.state.CARootSetCAS(index, req.Index, req.Roots)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
case structs.CAOpSetProviderState:
act, err := c.state.CASetProviderState(index, req.ProviderState)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
case structs.CAOpDeleteProviderState:
if err := c.state.CADeleteProviderState(req.ProviderState.ID); err != nil {
return err
}
return true
case structs.CAOpSetRootsAndConfig:
act, err := c.state.CARootSetCAS(index, req.Index, req.Roots)
if err != nil {
return err
}
if !act {
return act
}
act, err = c.state.CACheckAndSetConfig(index+1, req.Config.ModifyIndex, req.Config)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return act
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN] consul.fsm: Invalid CA operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid CA operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
func (c *FSM) applyConnectCALeafOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.CALeafRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "ca", "leaf"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: string(req.Op)}})
switch req.Op {
case structs.CALeafOpIncrementIndex:
if err := c.state.CALeafSetIndex(index); err != nil {
return err
}
return index
default:
c.logger.Printf("[WARN consul.fsm: Invalid CA Leaf operation '%s'", req.Op)
return fmt.Errorf("Invalid CA operation '%s'", req.Op)
}
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLTokenSetOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLTokenBatchSetRequest
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "token"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
return c.state.ACLTokenBatchSet(index, req.Tokens, req.CAS, req.AllowMissingLinks, req.ProhibitUnprivileged)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLTokenDeleteOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLTokenBatchDeleteRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "token"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "delete"}})
return c.state.ACLTokenBatchDelete(index, req.TokenIDs)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLTokenBootstrap(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLTokenBootstrapRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "token"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "bootstrap"}})
return c.state.ACLBootstrap(index, req.ResetIndex, &req.Token, false)
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLPolicySetOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLPolicyBatchSetRequest
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "policy"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
return c.state.ACLPolicyBatchSet(index, req.Policies)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLPolicyDeleteOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLPolicyBatchDeleteRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "policy"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "delete"}})
return c.state.ACLPolicyBatchDelete(index, req.PolicyIDs)
New ACLs (#4791) This PR is almost a complete rewrite of the ACL system within Consul. It brings the features more in line with other HashiCorp products. Obviously there is quite a bit left to do here but most of it is related docs, testing and finishing the last few commands in the CLI. I will update the PR description and check off the todos as I finish them over the next few days/week. Description At a high level this PR is mainly to split ACL tokens from Policies and to split the concepts of Authorization from Identities. A lot of this PR is mostly just to support CRUD operations on ACLTokens and ACLPolicies. These in and of themselves are not particularly interesting. The bigger conceptual changes are in how tokens get resolved, how backwards compatibility is handled and the separation of policy from identity which could lead the way to allowing for alternative identity providers. On the surface and with a new cluster the ACL system will look very similar to that of Nomads. Both have tokens and policies. Both have local tokens. The ACL management APIs for both are very similar. I even ripped off Nomad's ACL bootstrap resetting procedure. There are a few key differences though. Nomad requires token and policy replication where Consul only requires policy replication with token replication being opt-in. In Consul local tokens only work with token replication being enabled though. All policies in Nomad are globally applicable. In Consul all policies are stored and replicated globally but can be scoped to a subset of the datacenters. This allows for more granular access management. Unlike Nomad, Consul has legacy baggage in the form of the original ACL system. The ramifications of this are: A server running the new system must still support other clients using the legacy system. A client running the new system must be able to use the legacy RPCs when the servers in its datacenter are running the legacy system. The primary ACL DC's servers running in legacy mode needs to be a gate that keeps everything else in the entire multi-DC cluster running in legacy mode. So not only does this PR implement the new ACL system but has a legacy mode built in for when the cluster isn't ready for new ACLs. Also detecting that new ACLs can be used is automatic and requires no configuration on the part of administrators. This process is detailed more in the "Transitioning from Legacy to New ACL Mode" section below.
2018-10-19 16:04:07 +00:00
}
func (c *FSM) applyConfigEntryOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
req := structs.ConfigEntryRequest{
Entry: &structs.ProxyConfigEntry{},
}
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
switch req.Op {
case structs.ConfigEntryUpsertCAS:
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "config_entry", req.Entry.GetKind()}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
updated, err := c.state.EnsureConfigEntryCAS(index, req.Entry.GetRaftIndex().ModifyIndex, req.Entry)
if err != nil {
return err
}
return updated
case structs.ConfigEntryUpsert:
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "config_entry", req.Entry.GetKind()}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
Centralized Config CLI (#5731) * Add HTTP endpoints for config entry management * Finish implementing decoding in the HTTP Config entry apply endpoint * Add CAS operation to the config entry apply endpoint Also use this for the bootstrapping and move the config entry decoding function into the structs package. * First pass at the API client for the config entries * Fixup some of the ConfigEntry APIs Return a singular response object instead of a list for the ConfigEntry.Get RPC. This gets plumbed through the HTTP API as well. Dont return QueryMeta in the JSON response for the config entry listing HTTP API. Instead just return a list of config entries. * Minor API client fixes * Attempt at some ConfigEntry api client tests These don’t currently work due to weak typing in JSON * Get some of the api client tests passing * Implement reflectwalk magic to correct JSON encoding a ProxyConfigEntry Also added a test for the HTTP endpoint that exposes the problem. However, since the test doesn’t actually do the JSON encode/decode its still failing. * Move MapWalk magic into a binary marshaller instead of JSON. * Add a MapWalk test * Get rid of unused func * Get rid of unused imports * Fixup some tests now that the decoding from msgpack coerces things into json compat types * Stub out most of the central config cli Fully implement the config read command. * Basic config delete command implementation * Implement config write command * Implement config list subcommand Not entirely sure about the output here. Its basically the read output indented with a line specifying the kind/name of each type which is also duplicated in the indented output. * Update command usage * Update some help usage formatting * Add the connect enable helper cli command * Update list command output * Rename the config entry API client methods. * Use renamed apis * Implement config write tests Stub the others with the noTabs tests. * Change list output format Now just simply output 1 line per named config * Add config read tests * Add invalid args write test. * Add config delete tests * Add config list tests * Add connect enable tests * Update some CLI commands to use CAS ops This also modifies the HTTP API for a write op to return a boolean indicating whether the value was written or not. * Fix up the HTTP API CAS tests as I realized they weren’t testing what they should. * Update config entry rpc tests to properly test CAS * Fix up a few more tests * Fix some tests that using ConfigEntries.Apply * Update config_write_test.go * Get rid of unused import
2019-04-30 23:27:16 +00:00
if err := c.state.EnsureConfigEntry(index, req.Entry); err != nil {
return err
}
return true
case structs.ConfigEntryDelete:
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "config_entry", req.Entry.GetKind()}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "delete"}})
return c.state.DeleteConfigEntry(index, req.Entry.GetKind(), req.Entry.GetName())
default:
return fmt.Errorf("invalid config entry operation type: %v", req.Op)
}
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLRoleSetOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLRoleBatchSetRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "role"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
return c.state.ACLRoleBatchSet(index, req.Roles, req.AllowMissingLinks)
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLRoleDeleteOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLRoleBatchDeleteRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "role"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "delete"}})
return c.state.ACLRoleBatchDelete(index, req.RoleIDs)
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLBindingRuleSetOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLBindingRuleBatchSetRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "bindingrule"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
return c.state.ACLBindingRuleBatchSet(index, req.BindingRules)
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLBindingRuleDeleteOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLBindingRuleBatchDeleteRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "bindingrule"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "delete"}})
return c.state.ACLBindingRuleBatchDelete(index, req.BindingRuleIDs)
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLAuthMethodSetOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLAuthMethodBatchSetRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "authmethod"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "upsert"}})
return c.state.ACLAuthMethodBatchSet(index, req.AuthMethods)
}
func (c *FSM) applyACLAuthMethodDeleteOperation(buf []byte, index uint64) interface{} {
var req structs.ACLAuthMethodBatchDeleteRequest
if err := structs.Decode(buf, &req); err != nil {
panic(fmt.Errorf("failed to decode request: %v", err))
}
defer metrics.MeasureSinceWithLabels([]string{"fsm", "acl", "authmethod"}, time.Now(),
[]metrics.Label{{Name: "op", Value: "delete"}})
return c.state.ACLAuthMethodBatchDelete(index, req.AuthMethodNames, &req.EnterpriseMeta)
}