Re: Smarter blacklisting?

[Josh Durgin <jdurgin@redhat.com>]

On 04/19/2017 06:16 AM, Sage Weil wrote:
> On Wed, 19 Apr 2017, John Spray wrote:
>> I was already pondering where the more detailed blacklist info (e.g.
>> ids of clients) should go, as it's not something that actually needs
>> to be shared with all the normal OSDMap subscribers (it's only the
>> entity that does the blacklist removal that needs to see that).  It's
>> already not ideal imho that we expose the list of all blacklisted
>> clients to all the other clients -- in general they shouldn't be able
>> to e.g. learn one another's addresses like this.
>
> We already break the OSDMap encoding into two sections: the first part
> that clients care about, and the second part that is only used by OSDs.
> (The kernel client doesn't bother to decode the second half.)
>
> I suspect it wouldn't take much to send abbreviated maps (and
> incrementals) to clients that don't include that second half at all...

I was talking to Jason and Mike about another use of more generalized
blacklisting at Vault, but I can't remember the details - do you guys?

IIRC it sounded like that use would make sense as a separate map that
osds and clients would subscribe to.

Josh