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

Re: [Pulp-list] admin operations on consumers

Hash: SHA1

> My first thought is that any pulp-admin operations on consumers should
> be remotely instructing the client to take actions instead of operating
> on the server side.

Not sure I follow, are you saying that the pulp-admin is executing a
remote command on the client to tell it to do something to the pulp
server? What protocol would it use to tell the client what needs to be done?

If that's the intention than I'm -1 for this. It's either a security
concern of having one machine execute operations on another or it's an
over-complication to have the agent framework have to handle remote
commands to tell the clients to do something, especially given the
simplicity of doing things server side.

I do agree with the rest of this e-mail though. The client code is
really not set up to handle the client v. admin branches cleanly. It's
an effect of the fact that we didn't realize this requirement early on,
so trying to shoehorn it into the existing codebase ended up making it
pretty confusing to try to add something new.

>  If we conditionally take out the 'repolib.update()'
> call if we are executing from pulp-admin the client will still never get
> its package profile updated or the local yum.conf.d files updated.
> This same problem exists for create and update, and unbind.
> Mike
> _______________________________________________
> Pulp-list mailing list
> Pulp-list redhat com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/pulp-list

- -- 
Jason Dobies
RHCE# 805008743336126
Freenode: jdob
Version: GnuPG v2.0.14 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/


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