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
|
### 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
|
#### 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 infra | root | root |
|
||||||
| nixops local | root | root |
|
| nixops local | root | root |
|
||||||
| protected? nixops panel local | root | root |
|
| protected? nixops panel local | root | root |
|
||||||
| nixops panel deployed | root | root |
|
| nixops panel deployed | root | root |
|
||||||
<!-- | tf infra | root | root | -->
|
| tf local | personal (hard-coded) | root |
|
||||||
| tf local | personal[^hardcoded] | root |
|
| protected? tf panel local | personal (hard-coded) | root |
|
||||||
| protected? tf panel local | personal[^hardcoded] | root |
|
| tf panel deployed | personal (hard-coded) | root |
|
||||||
| tf panel deployed | personal[^hardcoded] | root |
|
| tf infra | root | root |
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
#### key
|
#### key
|
||||||
|
|
||||||
|-|-|-|
|
|
||||||
| context | current | desired |
|
| context | current | desired |
|
||||||
| nixops infra | personal[^agent] | (protected) personal key |
|
|-|-|-|
|
||||||
| nixops local | personal[^agent] | personal |
|
| nixops infra | personal (thru ssh agent) | (protected) personal key |
|
||||||
| nixops panel local | personal[^agent] [^inaccessible] | (unprotected) personal key |
|
| nixops local | personal (thru ssh agent) | personal |
|
||||||
| nixops panel deployed | machine key[^agent] | machine key |
|
| nixops panel local | personal (thru ssh agent, failed to handle password protection) | (unprotected) personal key |
|
||||||
<!-- | tf infra | n/a | (protected) personal key [^propagate] | -->
|
| nixops panel deployed | machine key (thru ssh agent) | machine key |
|
||||||
| tf local | personal[^agent] [^explicit] | personal[^either] |
|
| tf local | personal (thru ssh agent, password can be passed explicitly) | personal (unprotected, or if protected by passing it explicitly) |
|
||||||
| tf panel local | personal[^agent] [^explicit] | personal[^either] |
|
| 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[^agent] | machine key |
|
| 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
|
added sub-tasks to:
|
||||||
- [ ] fix ssh access on test03
|
|
||||||
- [?] mimic strategy used with nixops for TF for ssh access from panel (deployed)
|
- #272
|
||||||
- [ ] allow access by machine key? or.. how did nixops have access?
|
- #76
|
||||||
- [ ] use/allow separate unprotected SSH key for test0x VMs (#272)
|
- #274
|
||||||
- [ ] 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
|
|
||||||
|
|
|
@ -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
|
- 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
|
- 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
|
- 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
|
- 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?
|
- thijs: thanks - what else should we change for tomorrow?
|
||||||
- koen: maybe add graphs over time on disk space and number of applications deployed
|
- koen: maybe add graphs over time on disk space and number of applications deployed
|
||||||
|
|
Loading…
Add table
Reference in a new issue