[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Infrastructure Secondary Offerings

On Mon, 9 Jun 2008, seth vidal wrote:

> On Mon, 2008-06-09 at 10:59 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> > people involved understand it.  This is a very high barrier but in our
> > case, it's completely worth it.
> >
> > However.... We do, regularly, have people request hosting from us for
> > various open source projects.  Some people just want a place to host
> > something.  I'd think these individuals would support these hosts
> > outside of Fedora's normal realm.  So question 1)
> >
> > Should Fedora get in the business of providing (probably xen guests) to
> > other projects?
> >
> > I'd love to say yes, but there are many concerns in terms of IP space,
> > security, security, liability, and security.
> >
> > Comment, please.
> We'll quickly run up against our limits I think after a few of these
> requests and we'll end up hosting things we may have to 'correct' later.

I'd think that unless they're officially "part of fedora" as in, everyone
involved is a member of the Infrastructure team, doing it the
infrastructure way with our puppet config.  We won't be correcting
anything.  I'd have to insist on that.  This secondary hosting would very
much be a second class citizen with the people requesting it basically
being on their own.

> I'd say we could provide managed xen guests but not just "here's your
> box, have fun" hosts.

Define "managed".  Would it have our account system?  If so would they
have access to the encrypted passwords of the sysadmin-main members?


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]