Fixes#8755
Since I was updating the interface, i also added the missing `GetNamespace()`.
Depending upon how you look at it, this is a breaking change since it adds methods to the exported interface `api.ConfigEntry`. Given that you cannot define your own config entry kinds, and all of the machinery of the `api.Client` acts like a factory to construct the canned ones from the rest of the module, this feels like it's not a problematic change as it would only break someone who had reimplemented the `ConfigEntry` interface themselves for no apparent utility?
Whenever an upsert/deletion of a config entry happens, within the open
state store transaction we speculatively test compile all discovery
chains that may be affected by the pending modification to verify that
the write would not create an erroneous scenario (such as splitting
traffic to a subset that did not exist).
If a single discovery chain evaluation references two config entries
with the same kind and name in different namespaces then sometimes the
upsert/deletion would be falsely rejected. It does not appear as though
this bug would've let invalid writes through to the state store so the
correction does not require a cleanup phase.
Lots of constants were added for various tags that would concern users and are not already parsed out.
Additionally two methods on the AgentMember type were added to ask a member what its ACL Mode is and whether its a server or not.
During gossip encryption key rotation it would be nice to be able to see if all nodes are using the same key. This PR adds another field to the json response from `GET v1/operator/keyring` which lists the primary keys in use per dc. That way an operator can tell when a key was successfully setup as primary key.
Based on https://github.com/hashicorp/serf/pull/611 to add primary key to list keyring output:
```json
[
{
"WAN": true,
"Datacenter": "dc2",
"Segment": "",
"Keys": {
"0OuM4oC3Os18OblWiBbZUaHA7Hk+tNs/6nhNYtaNduM=": 6,
"SINm887hKTzmMWeBNKTJReaTLX3mBEJKriDyt88Ad+g=": 6
},
"PrimaryKeys": {
"SINm887hKTzmMWeBNKTJReaTLX3mBEJKriDyt88Ad+g=": 6
},
"NumNodes": 6
},
{
"WAN": false,
"Datacenter": "dc2",
"Segment": "",
"Keys": {
"0OuM4oC3Os18OblWiBbZUaHA7Hk+tNs/6nhNYtaNduM=": 8,
"SINm887hKTzmMWeBNKTJReaTLX3mBEJKriDyt88Ad+g=": 8
},
"PrimaryKeys": {
"SINm887hKTzmMWeBNKTJReaTLX3mBEJKriDyt88Ad+g=": 8
},
"NumNodes": 8
},
{
"WAN": false,
"Datacenter": "dc1",
"Segment": "",
"Keys": {
"0OuM4oC3Os18OblWiBbZUaHA7Hk+tNs/6nhNYtaNduM=": 3,
"SINm887hKTzmMWeBNKTJReaTLX3mBEJKriDyt88Ad+g=": 8
},
"PrimaryKeys": {
"SINm887hKTzmMWeBNKTJReaTLX3mBEJKriDyt88Ad+g=": 8
},
"NumNodes": 8
}
]
```
I intentionally did not change the CLI output because I didn't find a good way of displaying this information. There are a couple of options that we could implement later:
* add a flag to show the primary keys
* add a flag to show json output
Fixes#3393.
Issue and PR numbers do not overlap, they are based of the same counter.
A PR can be also linked to via issues, if it is a PR, Github will
redirect to it.
This change has the benefit that one can link to both - issues and PRs.
Daniel Nephin