From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by lists.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 63F44C57C
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:12:54 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4D98C1577
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:12:24 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (proxmox-new.maurer-it.com
[94.136.29.106])
(using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)
key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256)
(No client certificate requested)
by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTPS id BFA46156B
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:12:23 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1])
by proxmox-new.maurer-it.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 926E24097C
for <pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>; Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:12:23 +0200 (CEST)
Message-ID: <2ec9c9fd-ee83-754b-1206-56577f487dca@proxmox.com>
Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 10:12:22 +0200
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:100.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/100.0
Content-Language: en-US
To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
<pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>, Matthias Heiserer <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
References: <20220323130111.2552347-1-m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
<20220323130111.2552347-2-m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
From: Thomas Lamprecht <t.lamprecht@proxmox.com>
In-Reply-To: <20220323130111.2552347-2-m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0
AWL 1.591 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment
NICE_REPLY_A -3.086 Looks like a legit reply (A)
SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record
SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record
T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE -0.01 -
Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH proxmox-backup 2/3] fix #3939: set default
value in domains endpoint
X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion
<pbs-devel.lists.proxmox.com>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/options/pbs-devel>,
<mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.proxmox.com/pipermail/pbs-devel/>
List-Post: <mailto:pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com>
List-Help: <mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel>,
<mailto:pbs-devel-request@lists.proxmox.com?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 11 Apr 2022 08:12:54 -0000
On 23.03.22 14:01, Matthias Heiserer wrote:
> Because the default realm is stored in node.cfg, here we have to add
> it to the returned information.
>
> Signed-off-by: Matthias Heiserer <m.heiserer@proxmox.com>
> ---
> src/api2/access/domain.rs | 11 +++++++++--
> 1 file changed, 9 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> @@ -24,17 +24,19 @@ use pbs_api_types::BasicRealmInfo;
> /// Authentication domain/realm index.
> fn list_domains(mut rpcenv: &mut dyn RpcEnvironment) -> Result<Vec<BasicRealmInfo>, Error> {
> let mut list = Vec::new();
> + let default_realm = node::config()?.0.default_realm;
feels not ideal to pull in the node config here, if we really need to add a config
(see my bugzilla reply asking if the requester would be OK with just making the
realm box stateful), then I'd actually add it in the domain config as priority
flag (allow 0 to 100, default 50) which is then used for sorting the realms and
also for auto-selecting the highest priority + name sorted realm.
Same level of complexity in terms of what we need to safe (one new struct member),
but avoids the need to always load+parse an extra config and also more features we
can use it for.
Please note also that we'd like to have feature parity for the stuff that exists
in PVE or PMG too.