[Bro-Dev] Broker port status
Azoff, Justin S
jazoff at illinois.edu
Thu Mar 8 12:18:08 PST 2018
> On Mar 8, 2018, at 1:28 PM, Jon Siwek <jsiwek at corelight.com> wrote:
> Hi all, this is just a status update on porting Bro to use the new
> Broker communication system. I'd say the topic/actor-system branch is
> now functionally complete with still a few weeks left of internal
Awesome, I'll get it deployed here on a test cluster.
> Open questions:
> * Rename "proxy" nodes?
> The previous idea was to call them "data nodes", though I don't see
> the benefit. It's awkward to talk about because there's no shorthand
> for that node type: you can say "logger", "manager", or "worker",
> though you'd have to say the whole "data node" phrase to make any
> sense. That also shows that maybe it's helpful to name nodes based
> upon a personifiable role that they play: "data" isn't a role/action
> performed by a node/person. IMO, "proxy" is still accurate to the
> role that these nodes perform: they are intermediaries for offloading
> analysis and/or storage. Are there other ideas or is everyone wanting
> to go ahead with "data node" ?
I think I was the one calling them data nodes, but I only did that because that's what
they were called in the original broker integration branch that Mathias Fischer started.
I don't care about the name, as long as it's documented as a proxy node is for "offloading
analysis and storage" that works for me.
> * How much of the old comm. system to deprecate vs. remove?
> (1) &synchronized, &mergeable, &persistent. Seems fine to deprecate these now.
I'm fine with it going away, but there needs to be some sort of replacement for &synchronized,
minimally a how-to for porting existing scripts to something else.
I don't think anyone currently uses mergeable or persistent.
More information about the bro-dev