sungwy commented on code in PR #2244:
URL: https://github.com/apache/iceberg-python/pull/2244#discussion_r2276596881
##########
pyiceberg/catalog/rest/auth.py:
##########
@@ -109,6 +122,95 @@ def auth_header(self) -> str:
return f"Bearer {self._token}"
+class OAuth2TokenProvider:
+ """Thread-safe OAuth2 token provider with token refresh support."""
+
+ client_id: str
+ client_secret: str
+ token_url: str
+ scope: Optional[str]
+ refresh_margin: int
+ expires_in: Optional[int]
+
+ _token: Optional[str]
+ _expires_at: int
+ _lock: threading.Lock
+
+ def __init__(
+ self,
+ client_id: str,
+ client_secret: str,
+ token_url: str,
+ scope: Optional[str] = None,
+ refresh_margin: int = 60,
+ expires_in: Optional[int] = None,
+ ):
+ self.client_id = client_id
+ self.client_secret = client_secret
+ self.token_url = token_url
+ self.scope = scope
+ self.refresh_margin = refresh_margin
+ self.expires_in = expires_in
+
+ self._token = None
+ self._expires_at = 0
+ self._lock = threading.Lock()
+
+ def _refresh_token(self) -> None:
+ data = {
+ "grant_type": "client_credentials",
+ "client_id": self.client_id,
+ "client_secret": self.client_secret,
+ }
+ if self.scope:
+ data["scope"] = self.scope
+
+ response = requests.post(self.token_url, data=data)
+ response.raise_for_status()
+ result = response.json()
+
+ self._token = result["access_token"]
+ expires_in = result.get("expires_in", self.expires_in)
+ if expires_in is None:
+ raise ValueError(
+ "The expiration time of the Token must be provided by the
Server in the Access Token Response in `expired_in` field, or by the PyIceberg
Client."
+ )
+ self._expires_at = time.time() + expires_in - self.refresh_margin
+
+ def get_token(self) -> str:
+ with self._lock:
+ if not self._token or time.time() >= self._expires_at:
+ self._refresh_token()
+ if self._token is None:
+ raise ValueError("Authorization token is None after refresh")
+ return self._token
+
+
+class OAuth2AuthManager(AuthManager):
Review Comment:
I researched the IETF RFCs on OAuth closely, and my understanding is that
`resource` and `audience` parameters were introduced in subsequent RFCs as
supplemental parameters. What do you think about merging this version of the
`OAuth2AuthManager` that closely follows the initial
[RFC6749](https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/rfc6749) and introducing those
as followup PRs?
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
