Am 28.10.19 um 15:48 schrieb Casey Bodley: > > On 10/24/19 8:38 PM, Oliver Freyermuth wrote: >> Dear Cephers, >> >> I have a question concerning static websites with RGW. >> To my understanding, it is best to run >=1 RGW client for "classic" S3 and >> in addition operate >=1 RGW client for website serving >> (potentially with HAProxy or its friends in front) to prevent messup of >> requests via the different protocols. >> >> I'd prefer to avoid "*.example.com" entries in DNS if possible. >> So my current setup has these settings for the "web" RGW client: >> rgw_enable_static_website = true >> rgw_enable_apis = s3website >> rgw_dns_s3website_name = >> some_value_unused_when_A_records_are_used_pointing_to_the_IP_but_it_needs_to_be_set >> and I create simple A records for each website pointing to the IP of this >> "web" RGW node. >> >> I can easily upload content for those websites to the other RGW instances >> which are serving S3, >> so S3 and s3website APIs are cleanly separated in separate instances. >> >> However, one issue remains: How do I run >> s3cmd ws-create >> on each website-bucket once? >> I can't do that against the "classic" S3-serving RGW nodes. This will give >> me a 405 (not allowed), >> since they do not have rgw_enable_static_website enabled. >> I also can not run it against the "web S3" nodes, since they do not have the >> S3 API enabled. >> Of course I could enable that, but then the RGW node can't cleanly >> disentangle S3 and website requests since I use A records. >> >> Does somebody have a good idea on how to solve this issue? >> Setting "rgw_enable_static_website = true" on the S3-serving RGW nodes would >> solve it, but does that have any bad side-effects on their S3 operation? > > Enabling static website on the gateway serving the S3 api does look like the > right solution. As far as I can tell, it's only used to control whether the > S3 ops for PutBucketWebsite, GetBucketWebsite, and DeleteBucketWebsite are > exposed.
Thanks, that's also how I would read the code at first glance - good to see it
confirmed. Then this is what we'll use :-).
Cheers,
Oliver
>
>>
>> Also, if there's an expert on this: Exposing a bucket under a tenant as
>> static website is not possible since the colon (:) can't be encoded in DNS,
>> right?
>>
>>
>> In case somebody also wants to set something like this up, here are the best
>> docs I could find:
>> https://gist.github.com/robbat2/ec0a66eed28e5f0e1ef7018e9c77910c
>> and of course:
>> https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en-us/red_hat_ceph_storage/2/html-single/object_gateway_guide_for_red_hat_enterprise_linux/index#configuring_gateways_for_static_web_hosting
>>
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Oliver
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
>> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
> _______________________________________________
> ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io
> To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
_______________________________________________ ceph-users mailing list -- ceph-users@ceph.io To unsubscribe send an email to ceph-users-le...@ceph.io
