[WIP]HIVE-29615: Fix Hive Metastore and NameNode connection failure due to SASL no common protection layer between client and server#6492
Open
VenuReddy2103 wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
… SASL no common protection layer between client and server
|
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What changes were proposed in this pull request?
Accept the user defined configuration for
hadoop.rpc.protectionWhy are the changes needed?
On a SSL + KERBEROS authentication enabled cluster, if
hadoop.rpc.protectionproperty on server side do not containauthentication, Hive Metastore and NameNode connection fails withjavax.security.sasl.SaslException: No common protection layer between client and server.Currently, HMS overrides the
hadoop.rpc.protectionvalue toauthenticationif SSL is enabled. Thus, failing to establish connection.Does this PR introduce any user-facing change?
No
How was this patch tested?
Manual Testing