-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 602
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Discuss CHFW Server Configuration #25028
Comments
This comment used for things we want to include for configuration 'changes' in the "Service Transfer Education" |
After discussing with the team, we decided to follow option 2 keeping the same config item since the channelfw even if it internally means a different framework to developers, externally it really shouldn't affect/change for users. We will keep this issue open to verify all existing config items as documented in https://openliberty.io/docs/latest/reference/config/channelfw.html are valid for Netty. We should do the same for all other config options like TCPOptions, HTTPOptions, and SSLOptions which looks like #17989 is being used to verify. For now we will try to see how to parse the channelfw config parsed in Netty if possible without pulling in the channelfw bundle. |
After talking with @joe-chacko, there is a way to have multiple components consuming the same config by using the same configurationPid in the component annotation. Similar to what OutboundSecureFacetImpl and CommsOutboundChain do. I ran a quick test locally by changing the annotation in NettyFrameworkImpl to have the configurationPid point to
|
After going through a review of #21350, we noticed that the Netty bundle uses the CHFW bundle for config properties such as with DefaultChainQuiesceTimeout and some transport properties could be missing from implementation as stated in the CHFW server config documentation
To remove the dependency from the CHFW bundle we should probably change this to get the properties in another way. Discussing options with @mrsaldana we came up with
In the UFO we have the following points.
So in those terms I believe probably option 2 would be the one aimed better based on the UFOs perspective.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: