irods / irods_client_globus_connector

The iRODS Globus Connector
2 stars 4 forks source link

globus_connector doesn't contain the client name/identifier - spOption #83

Closed mstfdkmn closed 5 months ago

mstfdkmn commented 6 months ago

Would it be possible to add spOption for identifying irods_client_globus_connector as the client that connects to the iRODS server?

Because in our rules we cannot capture the globus connector as client in the rei object of PEPs.

for example the snippet below writes out an empty string:

def pep_api_data_obj_close_post(rule_args, callback, rei):
    items = dict(session_vars.get_map(rei).items())
    callback.writeLine("serverLog", f"{items['connection']['option']}")
korydraughn commented 6 months ago

I believe what you're asking for is possible.

We'll investigate.

JustinKyleJames commented 6 months ago

Putting the following in /etc/gridftp.conf will handle that for you.

$spOption irods_client_globus_connector

I did that and then made a connection and did an ips and it reported the process as expected.

Let me know if that would be sufficient and if so I'll update the README.

JustinKyleJames commented 6 months ago

Question from @korydraughn is if this should be hardcoded to irods_client_globus_connector or if it should be modifiable (as it is now). I am not sure which is preferred.

mstfdkmn commented 5 months ago

Thanks @JustinKyleJames. After we made your above mentioned configuration change, I could capture "globus" as the client that connects to the iRODS server. So yes, this is sufficient for us.

korydraughn commented 5 months ago

Good.

@JustinKyleJames Let's go with updating the README. No hard-coded value necessary.

alanking commented 5 months ago

@JustinKyleJames - Please close if complete

korydraughn commented 5 months ago

Do we need a 4-3-stable branch for this repo?

alanking commented 5 months ago

Until and unless we start ramping up support for 5.0, I think we can hold on making a 4-3-stable. Thoughts?

korydraughn commented 5 months ago

If there's no reason to introduce a 4-3-stable branch at this time, that's perfectly ok.

JustinKyleJames commented 5 months ago

I don't see a reason to have it now. When we do create it we will create it from the current branch so it will have this README change.