Add enterprise mode and refactor #51864

ywangd · 2020-02-04T14:11:52Z

Add enterprise operation mode to properly map enterprise license.

Aslo refactor XPackLicenstate class to consolidate license status and mode checks,
which turns out to be the majority changes of this PR.
This class has many sychronised methods to check basically three things:

minimum operation mode required
whether security is enabled
whether current license needs to be active

Depends on the actual feature, either 1, 2 or all of above checks are performed. These are now consolidated in to 3 helper methods (2 of them are new).

There are also some other methods that also checks the same things but they are static method without synchronisation. Therefore they are left unchanged, e.g. isMachineLearningAllowedForOperationMode, isTransformAllowedForOperationMode.

resolves: #51081

elasticmachine · 2020-02-04T14:11:54Z

Pinging @elastic/es-security (:Security/License)

ywangd · 2020-02-04T14:13:03Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

+    }
+
+    private synchronized boolean checkMinimumLicense(
+        OperationMode minimumMode, boolean needSecurity, boolean needActive, boolean allowTrial) {


The allowTrial argument is always true for all usages. It can be dropped unless anyone can foresee some future usage.

I think we should leave this be. While this is currently the case, there is no guarantee that all features will be available in trial*, and having this as a parameter would help future implementations take this into account in license checks.

* We do have differences in handling trial licenses already w.r.t. to functionality already, see #isTransportTlsRequired for instance

The semantic of isTransportRequired method is a bit different from the isXxxAllowed methods. So I can see trial could be handled differently. With that being said, I agree to keep the argument for 1) future proof; 2) consistent with pre-refactor logic

The semantic of isTransportRequired method is a bit different from the isXxxAllowed methods. So I can see trial could be handled differently.

agreed, I was just trying to make a point that it is not unheard of to have the need to treat trial differently.

ywangd · 2020-02-04T14:14:36Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

@@ -880,4 +809,24 @@ public static boolean isPlatinumOrTrialOperationMode(final OperationMode operati
    public synchronized XPackLicenseState copyCurrentLicenseState() {
        return new XPackLicenseState(this);
    }
+
+    private synchronized boolean checkSecurityEnabled() {


It is possible to replace this method with just a call of checkMinimumLicense(MISSING, true, false, true). But I feel a separate method clears the intention and is more readable.

It is possible to replace this method with just a call of checkMinimumLicense(MISSING, true, false, true)

is it ? That wouldn't handle the intricacies of isSecurityExplicitlyEnabled vs isSecurityEnabled

isSecurityEnabled is called inside checkMinimumLicense as well. So it can handle the subtlety. I do prefer to keep it separated for clarity.

ywangd · 2020-02-04T14:15:20Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

-    public synchronized boolean isStatsAndHealthAllowed() {
-        return status.active;
+    public boolean isStatsAndHealthAllowed() {
+        return isActive();


isActive is an existing synchronized method.

I'd prefer a method name like allowForAllLicenses()

Most of these isXYZAllowed() methods are added by people who deal with licensing questions very rarely. They just want to come in and implement a method in the most obvious way.
They don't know what "active" means (I forget what it means half the time), and their likely response here is "I'll just copy one of these other methods and hope that it's right". And it will be, but I'd rather we had something that was clearly correct to them, so that they don't need to hope. And that is a method that is named to be exactly in line with their requirement.
There's a good chance the PR reviewer isn't an expert on licensing either, so a method that copies this code isn't obviously correct to the reviewer - they need to look at how other methods are implemented to check. A method that has the equivalent of isMyFeatureAllowed() { return thisIsAllowedForAllLicenseTypes(); } is correct just from reading the diff.

I'm very open to discussion on a preferred name, but I'm pretty keen for these to be readable in a literal sense.

ywangd · 2020-02-05T00:24:54Z

I noticed some inconsistency in how the isXxxAllowed methods are implemented. Most of them have the signature of public synchronized boolean ... and they are refactored to use the new consolidated private sychronized boolean checkXxx(...) methods.

However a few of the isXxxAllowed methods do not have the synchronized modifier, e.g. isEnrichAllowed and isIndexLifecycleAllowed. It looks to me that they can all be refactored the same way. But since this means adding synchronization to a few more methods, I'd like to get more opinions.

…-operation-mode

ywangd · 2020-02-05T02:32:36Z

Platinum operation mode is used as default model in following places:

While I don't think they need to be changed (to the new Enterprise mode), some confirmation would be helpful. The platinum mode is also used as default in some tests, but I think they are less important.

…-operation-mode

jkakavas

Looks good Yang, I added some comments

jkakavas · 2020-02-05T05:52:29Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

+        return isSecurityEnabled(status.mode, isSecurityExplicitlyEnabled, isSecurityEnabled);
+    }
+
+    private synchronized boolean checkMinimumLicense(


The name of the method threw me off while initially reading the code. I don't have a good suggestion that isn't too long for a method name, but can we add a line of javadoc explaining that this checks if the current license is at least minimumMode and the rest of the requirements are satisfied ?

I agree that the name is not good. I am not happy with the usage of check since this name usually feels like a void method. How about isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity? I'll also add javadoc. Thanks

jkakavas · 2020-02-05T05:57:18Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

+    }
+
+    private synchronized boolean checkMinimumLicense(
+        OperationMode minimumMode, boolean needSecurity, boolean needActive, boolean allowTrial) {


I think we should leave this be. While this is currently the case, there is no guarantee that all features will be available in trial*, and having this as a parameter would help future implementations take this into account in license checks.

* We do have differences in handling trial licenses already w.r.t. to functionality already, see #isTransportTlsRequired for instance

jkakavas · 2020-02-05T07:45:27Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
 public class XPackLicenseState {

    public static final Set<OperationMode> FIPS_ALLOWED_LICENSE_OPERATION_MODES =


We can probably remove this and expose an isFipsModeAllowed() method here. Happy with a followup but I think it makes sense for the current refactoring

Sounds like a reasonable change to me. There are a few other public static boolean isXxxAllowedForOperationMode methods. This can be another addition.

jkakavas · 2020-02-05T08:13:09Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

@@ -880,4 +809,24 @@ public static boolean isPlatinumOrTrialOperationMode(final OperationMode operati
    public synchronized XPackLicenseState copyCurrentLicenseState() {
        return new XPackLicenseState(this);
    }
+
+    private synchronized boolean checkSecurityEnabled() {


It is possible to replace this method with just a call of checkMinimumLicense(MISSING, true, false, true)

is it ? That wouldn't handle the intricacies of isSecurityExplicitlyEnabled vs isSecurityEnabled

jkakavas · 2020-02-05T08:18:44Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

    }

-    public static boolean isPlatinumOrTrialOperationMode(final OperationMode operationMode) {
-        return operationMode == OperationMode.PLATINUM || operationMode == OperationMode.TRIAL;
+    public static boolean isPlatinumPlusOrTrialOperationMode(final OperationMode operationMode) {


Could we make this generic too ? Something like isMinimumLicense(final OperationMode minimumMode, final OperationMode currentMode) ? The callers of this should know what the minimum allowed op mode is

I thought about consolidate this with checkMinimumLicense method as well. I didn't do it because this method is static and not synchronised. Also it is used as a predicate for RemoteClusterLicenseChecker. So it has some ripple effect.

It will be more feasible if it does not need to be consolidated with checkMinimumLicense. I'll give it a go.

PS: I am confused by the inconsistent synchronisation involved for license check. These static methods can possibly run into racing issues. Is this not a concern? If so why other methods require synchronize?
There are pair of methods for some checks, e.g. isMachineLearningAllowedForOperationMode and isMachineLearningAllowed, where the former is static and the latter is non-static and synchronized. How so?

This methoid is now refactored to be isAllowedByOperationMode. It is also used by the isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity (previously checkMinimumLicense) method. So that's an extra generification.

jkakavas · 2020-02-05T08:23:25Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/license/TestUtils.java

                .issuedTo("customer")
                .issuer("elasticsearch")
                .maxNodes(5);
        if (version == License.VERSION_START) {
            builder.subscriptionType((type != null) ? type : randomFrom("dev", "gold", "platinum", "silver"));
            builder.feature(randomAlphaOfLength(10));
        }
+        if ("enterprise".equals(licenseType)) {
+            builder.version(License.VERSION_ENTERPRISE).maxResourceUnits(5).maxNodes(-1);


nit: I think we generally prefer separate calls for builder as it is clearer to read, or at least split them in different lines. Also maxResourceUnits can be called with a randomIntegerInRange

Splitted them in different lines. Also updated for random integer.

jkakavas

Just minor nits ( more suggestions, than requests for changes ) and a +1 to continue the refactoring as your analysis has indicated that we can (removing local status variable, make isXXXAllowed call isActive() .

Platinum operation mode is used as default model in following places:

* [OperationModeFileWatcher](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.6/x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/OperationModeFileWatcher.java#L35).

* [TrainedModelConfig#build](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.6/x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/ml/inference/TrainedModelConfig.java#L583)

* [TransportPutDataFrameAnalyticsAction](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.6/x-pack/plugin/ml/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/ml/action/TransportPutDataFrameAnalyticsAction.java#L96)

* [TransportPutTrainedModelAction#masterOperation](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.6/x-pack/plugin/ml/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/ml/action/TransportPutTrainedModelAction.java#L101)

* [TransportStartDataFrameAnalyticsAction](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.6/x-pack/plugin/ml/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/ml/action/TransportStartDataFrameAnalyticsAction.java#L128)

* [AnalyticsResultProcessor#createTrainedModelConfig](https://github.com/elastic/elasticsearch/blob/7.6/x-pack/plugin/ml/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/ml/dataframe/process/AnalyticsResultProcessor.java#L188)

While I don't think they need to be changed (to the new Enterprise mode), some confirmation would be helpful. The platinum mode is also used as default in some tests, but I think they are less important.

All of these usages are explicit, reflect the desired level of features and are not affected by the introduction of a new tier so I agree with your analysis that these shouldn't be changed.

Also +1 to changing all isIndexLifeCycleAllowed, isEnrichAllowed and isSpatialAllowed implementations to return isActive()

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:19:47Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/RemoteClusterLicenseChecker.java

@@ -138,9 +138,9 @@ public RemoteClusterLicenseChecker(final Client client, final Predicate<License.
        this.predicate = predicate;
    }

-    public static boolean isLicensePlatinumOrTrial(final XPackInfoResponse.LicenseInfo licenseInfo) {
+    public static boolean isAllowedByLicenseInfo(final XPackInfoResponse.LicenseInfo licenseInfo) {


nit:

Suggested change

public static boolean isAllowedByLicenseInfo(final XPackInfoResponse.LicenseInfo licenseInfo) {

public static boolean isAllowedByLicense(final XPackInfoResponse.LicenseInfo licenseInfo) {

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:21:17Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/license/TestUtils.java

@@ -274,14 +274,20 @@ public static License generateSignedLicense(String type, int version, long issue
                .version(version)
                .expiryDate(System.currentTimeMillis() + expiryDuration.getMillis())
                .issueDate(issue)
-                .type(licenseType)
+                .type(licenseType )


nit: extra space

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:21:57Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/license/TestUtils.java

                .issuedTo("customer")
                .issuer("elasticsearch")
                .maxNodes(5);
        if (version == License.VERSION_START) {
            builder.subscriptionType((type != null) ? type : randomFrom("dev", "gold", "platinum", "silver"));
            builder.feature(randomAlphaOfLength(10));
        }
+        if ("enterprise".equals(licenseType)) {
+            builder


nit:

Suggested change

builder

builder.version(License.VERSION_ENTERPRISE)

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:22:16Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/test/java/org/elasticsearch/license/TestUtils.java

                .issuedTo("customer")
                .issuer("elasticsearch")
                .maxNodes(5);
        if (version == License.VERSION_START) {
            builder.subscriptionType((type != null) ? type : randomFrom("dev", "gold", "platinum", "silver"));
            builder.feature(randomAlphaOfLength(10));
        }
+        if ("enterprise".equals(licenseType)) {
+            builder
+                .version(License.VERSION_ENTERPRISE)


nit:

Suggested change

.version(License.VERSION_ENTERPRISE)

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:25:42Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

+    }
+
+    private synchronized boolean checkMinimumLicense(
+        OperationMode minimumMode, boolean needSecurity, boolean needActive, boolean allowTrial) {


The semantic of isTransportRequired method is a bit different from the isXxxAllowed methods. So I can see trial could be handled differently.

agreed, I was just trying to make a point that it is not unheard of to have the need to treat trial differently.

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:35:45Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

+    }
+
+    /**
+     * Test whether a feature is allowed by the status of current license and security config.


nit:

Suggested change

* Test whether a feature is allowed by the status of current license and security config.

* Test whether a feature is allowed by the status of current license and security configuration.

jkakavas · 2020-02-07T05:45:23Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

+    private synchronized boolean isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity(
+        OperationMode minimumMode, boolean needSecurity, boolean needActive, boolean allowTrial) {
+
+        final Status localStatus = status;


I agree with your reasoning that since status is not volatile, we can remove the local variables from here and other places ( I don't think there was an explicit reason this was not done in #33396 )

Removed. Also see my comments below

ywangd · 2020-02-07T12:04:13Z

Repost slack message here for reference:

By reading through the threads of #45819, I understand why synchronized is necessary for the license checking methods. I now also understand that those static methods are ok as well because they don’t rely on the status instance variable.
There are however 3 other license checking methods which are instance scoped and not synchronised, isIndexLifeCycleAllowed, isEnrichAllowed and isSpatialAllowed. If I understand it correctly, they should all be synchronized.
Another minor thing is we could remove all the local copying of status . This is needed before synchronised was introduced and status was volatile. But now readers and writers are all synchronised, there is no strong reason to keep doing it.

Both of above suggestions (add synchronized, remove local copy) are now implemented.

…-operation-mode

jkakavas

LGTM Yang, thanks for the iterations

Add enterprise operation mode to properly map enterprise license. Aslo refactor XPackLicenstate class to consolidate license status and mode checks. This class has many sychronised methods to check basically three things: * Minimum operation mode required * Whether security is enabled * Whether current license needs to be active Depends on the actual feature, either 1, 2 or all of above checks are performed. These are now consolidated in to 3 helper methods (2 of them are new). The synchronization is pushed down to the helper methods so actual checking methods no longer need to worry about it. resolves: elastic#51081

tvernum

If I'm listed as a reviewer, & haven't reviewed yet, can you give me a ping before you merge?
I often choose to wait for the other reviewer to finish so that I'm not duplicating their work, and I need a window after they approve to run through and look at it.

tvernum · 2020-02-09T23:49:13Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/LicenseService.java

@@ -256,6 +256,7 @@ public void registerLicense(final PutLicenseRequest request, final ActionListene
                        "] license unless TLS is configured or security is disabled");
                } else if (XPackSettings.FIPS_MODE_ENABLED.get(settings)
                    && newLicense.operationMode() != License.OperationMode.PLATINUM
+                    && newLicense.operationMode() != License.OperationMode.ENTERPRISE


I'd prefer that we change this to either be < PLATINUM, or use methods on XPackLicenseState so that we don't have a bunch of code that assumes the set of licenses and their ordering.

tvernum · 2020-02-10T00:01:21Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

-    public synchronized boolean isStatsAndHealthAllowed() {
-        return status.active;
+    public boolean isStatsAndHealthAllowed() {
+        return isActive();


I'd prefer a method name like allowForAllLicenses()

Most of these isXYZAllowed() methods are added by people who deal with licensing questions very rarely. They just want to come in and implement a method in the most obvious way.
They don't know what "active" means (I forget what it means half the time), and their likely response here is "I'll just copy one of these other methods and hope that it's right". And it will be, but I'd rather we had something that was clearly correct to them, so that they don't need to hope. And that is a method that is named to be exactly in line with their requirement.
There's a good chance the PR reviewer isn't an expert on licensing either, so a method that copies this code isn't obviously correct to the reviewer - they need to look at how other methods are implemented to check. A method that has the equivalent of isMyFeatureAllowed() { return thisIsAllowedForAllLicenseTypes(); } is correct just from reading the diff.

I'm very open to discussion on a preferred name, but I'm pretty keen for these to be readable in a literal sense.

tvernum · 2020-02-10T00:07:24Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

-        final boolean isSecurityCurrentlyEnabled = isSecurityEnabled(mode, isSecurityExplicitlyEnabled, isSecurityEnabled);
-        return isSecurityCurrentlyEnabled;
+    public boolean isApiKeyServiceAllowed() {
+        return isAllowedBySecurity();


This reads strangely to me.
I realise that, in terms of readability, it's logically equivalent to the isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity method, but here with no parameters, it just looks like a mistake.

Given this is the only place it's called, I would just replace it with isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity(OperationMode.BASIC, true, false, true);

tvernum · 2020-02-10T00:10:49Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

-                return false;
-        }
+    public boolean isWatcherAllowed() {
+        return isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity(OperationMode.STANDARD, false, true, true);


I don't like the version of this method that passes false for security.
It's calling a method named isAllowedBy___Security` and then says "oh, but not really security".

Reading this method, on its own, if you aren't intimately familiar with what isAllowedByLicenseAndSecurity does, and what those parameters mean, a reader is left:

Wondering why watcher cares about security (because it's in that method name).

What all those parameters mean, and whether they're correct.

People adding a new license check for paid functionality shouldn't be expected to make decisions about so many parameters. There should be one obvious method with the smallest set of parameters that they can use.

tvernum · 2020-02-10T00:13:18Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

    }

    public static boolean isTransformAllowedForOperationMode(final OperationMode operationMode) {
        // any license (basic and upwards)
        return operationMode != License.OperationMode.MISSING;
    }

+    public static boolean isFipsAllowedForOperationMode(final OperationMode operationMode) {
+        return isAllowedByOperationMode(operationMode, OperationMode.PLATINUM, true);
+    }


It bothers me that we have this method, and them re-implement the same OperationMode check for FIPS in LicenseService

tvernum · 2020-02-10T00:15:33Z

x-pack/plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/license/XPackLicenseState.java

@@ -796,7 +708,7 @@ public synchronized boolean isTrialLicense() {
    public synchronized boolean isSecurityAvailable() {
        OperationMode mode = status.mode;
        return mode == OperationMode.GOLD || mode == OperationMode.PLATINUM || mode == OperationMode.STANDARD ||
-                mode == OperationMode.TRIAL || mode == OperationMode.BASIC;
+                mode == OperationMode.TRIAL || mode == OperationMode.BASIC || mode == OperationMode.ENTERPRISE;


I think we can just replace with with mode != MISSING.

tvernum · 2020-02-10T00:19:17Z

.../plugin/core/src/main/java/org/elasticsearch/xpack/core/ml/inference/TrainedModelConfig.java

@@ -243,7 +243,8 @@ public boolean isAvailableWithLicense(XPackLicenseState licenseState) {
        }

        // The model license does not matter, this is the highest licensed level
-        if (licenseState.isActive() && XPackLicenseState.isPlatinumOrTrialOperationMode(licenseState.getOperationMode())) {
+        if (licenseState.isActive() && XPackLicenseState.isAllowedByOperationMode(
+            licenseState.getOperationMode(), License.OperationMode.PLATINUM, true)) {


Strictly speaking, this check is incorrect because there is a race condition between the 2 calls. I don't think we should be perpetuating this style of call, and should actually push it to a single call that passes in the licenseState object and checks both active and operation mode.

ywangd · 2020-02-10T00:27:57Z

If I'm listed as a reviewer, & haven't reviewed yet, can you give me a ping before you merge?

I will make sure you get notified in the future.
I can create a new PR to address your comments. Please let me know whether this works for you. Thanks

Add enterprise operation mode to properly map enterprise license. Aslo refactor XPackLicenstate class to consolidate license status and mode checks. This class has many sychronised methods to check basically three things: * Minimum operation mode required * Whether security is enabled * Whether current license needs to be active Depends on the actual feature, either 1, 2 or all of above checks are performed. These are now consolidated in to 3 helper methods (2 of them are new). The synchronization is pushed down to the helper methods so actual checking methods no longer need to worry about it. resolves: #51081

Add enterprise mode and refactor

588acf8

ywangd added >enhancement :Security/License License functionality for commercial features v8.0.0 labels Feb 4, 2020

ywangd requested review from tvernum and jkakavas February 4, 2020 14:11

ywangd commented Feb 4, 2020

View reviewed changes

ywangd added 2 commits February 5, 2020 01:30

Fix test failure

e2622da

Fix broken IT tests

ff12f91

ywangd added 2 commits February 5, 2020 11:48

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into es-51081-enterprise…

f311e7a

…-operation-mode

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into es-51081-enterprise…

5805cde

…-operation-mode

ywangd added 3 commits February 5, 2020 16:25

Fix more test failure due to missing enterprise handling

23e265e

Remove unnecessary javadocs

25411e3

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into es-51081-enterprise…

b599f82

…-operation-mode

jkakavas reviewed Feb 5, 2020

View reviewed changes

ywangd added 2 commits February 6, 2020 01:09

Address feedbacks

0fe8af1

Address feedback to consolidate OperationMode logic

e6a1ac2

ywangd requested a review from jkakavas February 6, 2020 03:24

jkakavas reviewed Feb 7, 2020

View reviewed changes

Address feedbacks

d413b0c

ywangd requested a review from jkakavas February 7, 2020 12:06

Merge remote-tracking branch 'origin/master' into es-51081-enterprise…

540538e

…-operation-mode

jkakavas approved these changes Feb 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

ywangd merged commit 4ab16c6 into elastic:master Feb 9, 2020

tvernum added the v7.7.0 label Feb 9, 2020

tvernum reviewed Feb 10, 2020

View reviewed changes

ywangd mentioned this pull request Feb 10, 2020

Refactor license checking #52118

Merged

jkakavas mentioned this pull request Mar 26, 2020

Remove allowTrial flag in license checking #54293

Merged

codebrain mentioned this pull request Apr 1, 2020

7.7.0 meta ticket (Part 2) elastic/elasticsearch-net#4533

Closed

jakelandis added v8.0.0-alpha1 and removed v8.0.0 labels Jul 26, 2021

		@@ -31,7 +31,7 @@
		public class XPackLicenseState {

		public static final Set<OperationMode> FIPS_ALLOWED_LICENSE_OPERATION_MODES =

	public static boolean isAllowedByLicenseInfo(final XPackInfoResponse.LicenseInfo licenseInfo) {
	public static boolean isAllowedByLicense(final XPackInfoResponse.LicenseInfo licenseInfo) {

	* Test whether a feature is allowed by the status of current license and security config.
	* Test whether a feature is allowed by the status of current license and security configuration.

Add enterprise mode and refactor #51864

Add enterprise mode and refactor #51864

Conversation

ywangd commented Feb 4, 2020 • edited Loading

elasticmachine commented Feb 4, 2020

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ywangd commented Feb 5, 2020 • edited Loading

ywangd commented Feb 5, 2020 • edited Loading

jkakavas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ywangd Feb 6, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ywangd Feb 5, 2020 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jkakavas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ywangd commented Feb 7, 2020 • edited Loading

jkakavas left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

tvernum left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

ywangd commented Feb 10, 2020 • edited Loading

ywangd commented Feb 4, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ywangd commented Feb 5, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ywangd commented Feb 5, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ywangd Feb 6, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ywangd Feb 5, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ywangd commented Feb 7, 2020 •

edited

Loading

ywangd commented Feb 10, 2020 •

edited

Loading