-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 135
Support for service accounts, HTTPS and CA certs #443
Conversation
build failure
|
42d825a
to
dd11b15
Compare
lint fail:
|
refactor/repackage security changes and fix problems reported by linter
func TLSConfig(enabled bool, caPool *x509.CertPool) (scheme string, config *tls.Config) { | ||
scheme = "http" | ||
if enabled { | ||
scheme = "https" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
would be great to get rid of scheme entirely
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
agreed
On Tue, Jun 21, 2016 at 8:50 PM, Albert Strasheim [email protected]
wrote:
In httpcli/doer.go
#443 (comment):
return nil, err
- }
- if req.Header == nil {
req.Header = make(http.Header)
- }
- req.Header.Set("Authorization", "token="+authResp.Token)
- return a.client.Do(req)
+}
+// TLSConfig generates and returns a recommended protocol scheme ("http" or "https") and TLS configuration.
+func TLSConfig(enabled bool, caPool *x509.CertPool) (scheme string, config *tls.Config) {
- scheme = "http"
- if enabled {
scheme = "https"
would be great to get rid of scheme entirely
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
https://github.com/mesosphere/mesos-dns/pull/443/files/00e2c3a5bbcc291550b5d0707072d2359f991fbb#r67978748,
or mute the thread
https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe/ACPVLGfoO2tHjZCWuhxhljON0XzwocpPks5qOIbqgaJpZM4I6PXJ
.
reuse http transport/client across generator instances
@@ -3,6 +3,12 @@ | |||
"ignore": "test", | |||
"package": [ | |||
{ | |||
"checksumSHA1": "+al5Z5nU/8wGul4Yo9WHdL6WocE=", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this snuck in there, not intentional. didn't see what the changes here imply
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Was it not intentional? It seems like a new dep we must vendor.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
yeah, we need this for web tokens or something - should have recognized it. going to blame it on low blood sugar
Reasonable. |
return a more generic url-builder option (vs scheme) from TLSConfig
Managed to start a DC/OS cluster succesfully with this. |
🎉 |
No description provided.