-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 381
Define a strategy for certs for brokers #606
Comments
@vaikas-google do you consider the following to be a solution:
I haven't closely followed the discussion on what exactly hasn't worked for the various brokers, so please let me know if I'm missing something here. |
Punting this to beta to decide. |
Yeah, so I think that this works for certs from roots. I'd be curious if there are organizations that would be running with their own CAs and in that case how we would be adding additional certs for those. |
Idea: control insecure-skip-verify like so: type BrokerSpec struct {
// other fields omitted
Insecure *bool
} |
Moving to 1.0.0, since we can already support brokers with root CAs now |
I have a strong need for this in beta. Adding to the agenda to discuss in the July 24 2017 SIG meeting. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
/remove-lifecycle rotten |
This project is being archived, closing open issues and PRs. |
Some brokers (especially internal ones, or testing ones) do not have proper certs and we probably do not even install proper roots in our containers. This issue tracks defining a procedure for doing this:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: