forked from fediversity/meta
		
	update meeting notes as per ssh meeting, feedback on design minutes
This commit is contained in:
		
							parent
							
								
									1c617dce0c
								
							
						
					
					
						commit
						a5670bb674
					
				
					 2 changed files with 23 additions and 34 deletions
				
			
		|  | @ -39,49 +39,38 @@ some notes on our current status, challenges and ways to address these | |||
| 
 | ||||
| ### how to use SSH on deployment | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| [^temp]: for now, as per the scope of #274 | ||||
| [^sensitive]: must be password-protected | ||||
| [^agent]: thru ssh agent | ||||
| [^inaccessible]: fails to handle password protection | ||||
| [^propagate]: with password propagated, somehow | ||||
| [^hardcoded]: hard-coded | ||||
| [^explicit]: password can be passed explicitly | ||||
| [^either]: unprotected, or if protected by passing it explicitly | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| #### user | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| (note that `desired` columns are focused on the scope of #76, so keeping e.g. security considerations out of scope.) | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| | context | current | desired | | ||||
| |-|-|-| | ||||
| | context | current | desired[^temp] | | ||||
| | nixops infra | root | root | | ||||
| | nixops local | root | root | | ||||
| | protected? nixops panel local | root | root | | ||||
| | nixops panel deployed | root | root | | ||||
| <!-- | tf infra | root | root | --> | ||||
| | tf local | personal[^hardcoded] | root | | ||||
| | protected? tf panel local | personal[^hardcoded] | root | | ||||
| | tf panel deployed | personal[^hardcoded] | root | | ||||
| | tf local | personal (hard-coded) | root | | ||||
| | protected? tf panel local | personal (hard-coded) | root | | ||||
| | tf panel deployed | personal (hard-coded) | root | | ||||
| | tf infra | root | root | | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| #### key | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| |-|-|-| | ||||
| | context | current | desired | | ||||
| | nixops infra | personal[^agent] | (protected) personal key | | ||||
| | nixops local | personal[^agent] | personal | | ||||
| | nixops panel local | personal[^agent] [^inaccessible] | (unprotected) personal key | | ||||
| | nixops panel deployed | machine key[^agent] | machine key | | ||||
| <!-- | tf infra | n/a | (protected) personal key [^propagate] | --> | ||||
| | tf local | personal[^agent] [^explicit] | personal[^either] | | ||||
| | tf panel local | personal[^agent] [^explicit] | personal[^either] | | ||||
| | tf panel deployed | machine key[^agent] | machine key | | ||||
| |-|-|-| | ||||
| | nixops infra | personal (thru ssh agent) | (protected) personal key | | ||||
| | nixops local | personal (thru ssh agent) | personal | | ||||
| | nixops panel local | personal (thru ssh agent, failed to handle password protection) | (unprotected) personal key | | ||||
| | nixops panel deployed | machine key (thru ssh agent) | machine key | | ||||
| | tf local | personal (thru ssh agent, password can be passed explicitly) | personal (unprotected, or if protected by passing it explicitly) | | ||||
| | tf panel local | personal (thru ssh agent, password can be passed explicitly) | personal (unprotected, or if protected by passing it explicitly) | | ||||
| | tf panel deployed | machine key (thru ssh agent) | machine key | | ||||
| | tf infra | n/a | (protected) personal key (with password propagated, somehow) | | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| ## solutions | ||||
| ## outcomes | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| - [x] fix ssh user in #274 | ||||
| - [ ] fix ssh access on test03 | ||||
| - [?] mimic strategy used with nixops for TF for ssh access from panel (deployed) | ||||
|   - [ ] allow access by machine key? or.. how did nixops have access? | ||||
| - [ ] use/allow separate unprotected SSH key for test0x VMs (#272) | ||||
| - [ ] ensure whitelisted keys for infra are protected | ||||
| - [ ] work out way to use password-protected ssh keys in TF for infra? e.g.: | ||||
|   - delegate to ssh agent | ||||
|   - pass explicitly | ||||
| added sub-tasks to: | ||||
| 
 | ||||
| - #272 | ||||
| - #76 | ||||
|  - #274 | ||||
|  |  | |||
|  | @ -35,7 +35,7 @@ Present: {thijs,timon}@slik, {koen,kevin,kiara}@procolix | |||
| - koen: we should show those from the panel, but there are different ways to approach this as per an operator's business model | ||||
| - thijs: maybe hosts should get to choose how to approach this | ||||
| - koen: agree, companies will have limited resources and may prefer to not make things too granular, tho in larger set-ups one may need to be able to better justify how pricing scales | ||||
| - thijs: do we always want granular pricing? | ||||
| - thijs: do we always want to add a link to the price/value breakdown for every plan? | ||||
| - koen: by default yes, if you don't want that, it's open-source so you can fork if you like | ||||
| - thijs: thanks - what else should we change for tomorrow? | ||||
| - koen: maybe add graphs over time on disk space and number of applications deployed | ||||
|  |  | |||
		Loading…
	
	Add table
		
		Reference in a new issue
	
	 Kiara Grouwstra
						Kiara Grouwstra