NC-1936 discovery wiring for --node-whitelist #365
Conversation
…scoveryController
| @@ -106,6 +107,7 @@ | |||
|
|
|||
| private final PeerDiscoveryAgent agent; | |||
| private final PeerBlacklist peerBlacklist; | |||
| private final NodeWhitelistController nodeWhitelistController; | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: s/nodeWhiteListController/nodeWhitelist
Reason being, the term Controller is unnecessary, brings no additional contextual meaning.
| } | ||
|
|
||
| public static boolean isNodeWhitelistSet() { | ||
| return nodeWhitelistSet; | ||
| public boolean isNodeWhitelisted(final Peer node) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Suggestion: s/isNodeWhiteListed/contains
Reason: as a public scoped method, it would reduce repetition in context when calling the method i.e. nodeWhiteList.contains() vs nodeWhitelist.isNodeWhiteListed()
There was a problem hiding this comment.
this method also returns true if the whitelist is not set - in which case it doesn't 'contain' anything. contains() doesn't really cover both cases
There was a problem hiding this comment.
If there is no white list, then everything is whitelisted. The whitelist contains the node, as it is the set of all nodes.
PR description
If --node-whitelist is set, discard any messages from non-whitelisted peers.
Fixed Issue(s)
NC-1936