Re: [keycloak-user] Replace use of Infinispan with User Sessions SPI ?

Am 15.12.2015 um 15:47 schrieb Paul Blair <pblair(a)clearme.com&gt;: I've also been working on setting up clustered Keycloak on Docker containers in EC2 and would be interested in any potential solutions for this configuration. Alternatively I've set up on EC2 without Docker with S3_PING. I'd be interested in hearing about the issues with this configuration. From: Scott Rossillo <srossillo(a)smartling.com <mailto:srossillo@smartling.com>> Date: Mon, 14 Dec 2015 18:31:30 -0500 To: Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>>, <afield(a)redhat.com <mailto:afield@redhat.com>> Cc: keycloak-user <keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-user@lists.jboss.org>> Subject: Re: [keycloak-user] Replace use of Infinispan with User Sessions SPI ? There are two issues: 1. Infinispan relies on JGroups, which is difficult to configure correctly with the various ping techniques that aren’t UDP multicast. I can elaborate on each one that we tested but it’s just generally complex to get right. That’s not to say it’s impossible or the biggest reason this is complicated on ECS or _insert container service here_, see #2 for that. 2. It is difficult to do discovery correctly with JGroups and Docker. Non-privileged Docker instances - the default and recommend type - do not implicitly know their host’s IP. This causes IP mismatches between what JGroups thinks the machine’s IP is and what it actually is when connecting to hosts on different machines. This is the main issue and it’s not the fault of JGroups per se, but there’s no simple work around. Take for example a simple 2 node cluster: Node 1 comes up on the docker0 interface of host A with the IP address 172.16.0.4. The host A IP is 10.10.0.100. Node 2 comes up on the docker0 interface of host B with the IP address 172.16.0.8. The host B IP is 10.10.0.108. The 172.16 network is not routable between hosts (by design). Docker does port forwarding for ports we wish to expose to this works fine for HTTP/HTTPS but not the cluster traffic. So Node 1 will advertise itself as having IP 172.16.0.4 while Node 2 advertises 172.16.0.8. The two cannot talk to each other by default. However, using the hard coded IPs and TCP PING, we can set external_addr on Node 1 to 10.10.0.100 and external_addr on Node 2 to 10.10.0.108 and set initial_hosts to 10.10.0.100, 10.10.0.108. This will cause the nodes to discover each other. However, they will not form a cluster. The nodes will reject the handshake thinking they’re not actually 10.10.0.100 or 10.10.0.108 respectively. I’d like to discuss further and I can share where we’ve gotten so far with workarounds to this but it may be better to get into the weeds on another list. Let me know what you think. Best, Scott Scott Rossillo Smartling | Senior Software Engineer srossillo(a)smartling.com <mailto:srossillo@smartling.com> <http://www.sigstr.com/> > On Dec 14, 2015, at 5:32 PM, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>> wrote: > > CCing Alan Field from RH Infinispan team and forwarding his question: > I'd like to know which configuration files you are using and why is is > harder to use with Amazon’s Docker service (ECS) or Beanstalk. I'd also be > interested in how big a cluster you are using in AWS. > > > > On 14/12/15 22:24, Scott Rossillo wrote: >> AWS was why we didn’t use Infinispan to begin with. That and it’s even more complicated when you deploy using Amazon’s Docker service (ECS) or Beanstalk. >> >> It’s too bad Infinispan / JGroups are beasts when the out of the box configuration can’t be used. I’m planning to document this as we fix but I’d avoid S3_PING and use JDBC_PING. You already need JDBC for the Keycloak DB, unless you’re using Mongo and it’s easier to test locally. >> >> TCPPING will bite you on AWS if Amazon decides to replace one of your instances (which it does occasionally w/ECS or Beanstalk). >> >> Best, >> Scott >> >> Scott Rossillo >> Smartling | Senior Software Engineer >> srossillo(a)smartling.com <mailto:srossillo@smartling.com> >> >> <http://www.sigstr.com/> >>> On Dec 14, 2015, at 10:59 AM, Marek Posolda <mposolda(a)redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>> wrote: >>> >>> On 14/12/15 16:55, Marek Posolda wrote: >>>> On 14/12/15 15:58, Bill Burke wrote: >>>>> On 12/14/2015 5:01 AM, Niko Köbler wrote: >>>>>> Hi Marek, >>>>>> >>>>>>> Am 14.12.2015 um 08:50 schrieb Marek Posolda < <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>mposolda@redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com> >>>>>>> <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com <mailto:mposolda@redhat.com>>>: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Btv. what's your motivation to not use infinispan? If you afraid of >>>>>>> cluster communication, you don't need to worry much about it, because >>>>>>> if you run single keycloak through standalone.xml, the infinispan >>>>>>> automatically works in LOCAL mode and there is no any cluster >>>>>>> communication at all. >>>>>> My current customer is running his apps in AWS. As known, multicast is >>>>>> not available in cloud infrastructures. Wildfly/Infinispan Cluster works >>>>>> pretty well with multicast w/o having to know too much about JGroups >>>>>> config. S3_PING seams to be a viable way to get a cluster running in AWS. >>>>>> But additionally, my customer doesn’t have any (deep) knowledge about >>>>>> JBoss infrastructures and so I’m looking for a way to be able to run >>>>>> Keycloak in a cluster in AWS without the need to build up deeper >>>>>> knowlegde of JGroups config, for example in getting rid of Infinispan. >>>>>> But I do understand all the concerns in doing this. >>>>>> I still have to test S3_PING, if it works as easy as multicast. If yes, >>>>>> we can use it, if no… I don’t know yet. But this gets offtopic for >>>>>> Keycloak mailinglist, it’s more related to pure Wildfly/Infinispan. >>>>>> >>>>> seems to me it would be much easier to get Infinispan working on AWS >>>>> than to write and maintain an entire new caching mechanism and hope we >>>>> don't refactor the cache SPI. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> +1 >>>> >>>> I am sure infinispan/JGroups has possibility to run in non-multicast >>>> environment. You may just need to figure how exactly to configure it. So >>>> I agree that this issue is more related to Wildfly/Infinispan itself >>>> than to Keycloak. >>>> >>>> You may need to use jgroups protocols like TCP instead of default UDP >>>> and maybe TCPPING (this requires to manually list all your cluster >>>> nodes. But still, it's much better option IMO than rewriting UserSession >>>> SPI) >>> Btv. if TCPPING or S3_PING is an issue, there is also AWS_PING >>> http://www.jgroups.org/manual-3.x/html/protlist.html#d0e5100 <http://www.jgroups.org/manual-3.x/html/protlist.html#d0e5100> , but it's >>> not official part of jgroups. >>> >>> Marek >>>> >>>> Marek >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> keycloak-user mailing list >>>> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-user@lists.jboss.org> >>>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> keycloak-user mailing list >>> keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-user@lists.jboss.org> >>> https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user> >> > _______________________________________________ keycloak-user mailing list keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org <mailto:keycloak-user@lists.jboss.org>https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user <https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user>_______________... keycloak-user mailing list keycloak-user(a)lists.jboss.org https://lists.jboss.org/mailman/listinfo/keycloak-user