Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MediaType validation too aggressive #2259

Closed
stevvooe opened this issue Apr 27, 2017 · 7 comments
Closed

MediaType validation too aggressive #2259

stevvooe opened this issue Apr 27, 2017 · 7 comments
Labels
bug priority/P2 Nice to have.

Comments

@stevvooe
Copy link
Collaborator

stevvooe commented Apr 27, 2017

The mediaType validation for the manifest getter is too aggressive: https://github.com/docker/distribution/blob/master/registry/storage/manifeststore.go#L98.

This prevents the fetching of content by digest which would fail validation on the client. This validation will make it hard to upgrade in the future.

cc @caervs

@dmcgowan dmcgowan added this to the Registry/2.7 milestone Apr 27, 2017
@jonjohnsonjr
Copy link
Contributor

Could you expand on this a little bit? Is this related to #2076?

@stevvooe
Copy link
Collaborator Author

@jonjohnsonjr The registry should be fairly agnostic about the format it is returning. Also, the current code relies on the existence of an embedded mediaType field, which is problematic, as the types are supposed to be external.

In general, the current approach will make #2076 harder.

@davidspek
Copy link
Collaborator

@milosgajdos Is this still relevant since #2076 has since been merged? Also, should the v3 release be blocked on this?

@milosgajdos
Copy link
Member

@stevvooe do you wanna close this issue?

@davidspek
Copy link
Collaborator

@milosgajdos Can this be closed given that #2076 was merged?

@milosgajdos
Copy link
Member

This issue seems outdated and I'm not sure it's addressed by #2076. Equally, it's 6 years old and may already be forgotten. Not quite sure what the step forward here should be without clarification from the reporter.

@davidspek
Copy link
Collaborator

Lets close it. If the issue is still relevant it can be re-opened or a new issue can be created.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
bug priority/P2 Nice to have.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

6 participants