> What is your thinking about using the enum vs specific named API’s (e.g. setPoolProxyWithSNI).
I think the nice thing about the enum is over separate methods is that it's strongly typed, but it might still allow us to support additional proxy types in the future with less modifications for code that wraps the API (eg, cache.xml), or Spring Data Geode. It also makes it clear you can only set one type of proxy. +1 to what Bill said. I could be convinced to use setProxy(ProxyType, String host, int port) however. -Dan On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 10:54 AM Bill Burcham <bill.burc...@gmail.com> wrote: > By popular demand we are extending the RFC review period. I know Udo asked > for Friday (and Joris +1'd it), but since this is a small RFC, we'd like to > try to close it by Wednesday, March 11, ok? > > On Mon, Mar 9, 2020 at 10:39 AM Jacob Barrett <jbarr...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > I raised similar concerns as a comment in the RFC. > > > > > On Mar 9, 2020, at 10:29 AM, Anthony Baker <aba...@pivotal.io> wrote: > > > > > > Given this new API: > > > > > > setPoolProxy(ProxyType type, String proxyAddress) > > > > > > The ProxyType enum seems to be a look ahead at supporting other kinds > of > > proxies. What is your thinking about using the enum vs specific named > > API’s (e.g. setPoolProxyWithSNI). > > > > > > Currently the definition of the proxyAddress seems to be dependent of > > the proxy type. Did you consider stronger typing using an URI parameter > > type? > > > > > > Anthony > > > > > > > > > > > >> On Mar 6, 2020, at 11:04 AM, Bill Burcham <bill.burc...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> Please review the RFC for *Client side configuration for a SNI proxy*: > > >> > > >> > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/GEODE/Client+side+configuration+for+a+SNI+proxy > > >> > > >> Please comment by Monday, March 9, 2020. > > >> > > >> Regards, > > >> Bill and Ernie > > > > > >
