On Dec 10, 2013 7:00 PM, "Clint Byrum" <cl...@fewbar.com> wrote: > > Excerpts from Dmitry Mescheryakov's message of 2013-12-10 08:15:15 -0800: > > Guys, > > > > I see two major trends in the thread: > > > > * use Salt > > * write our own solution with architecture similar to Salt or MCollective > > > > There were points raised pro and contra both solutions. But I have a > > concern which I believe was not covered yet. Both solutions use either > > ZeroMQ or message queues (AMQP/STOMP) as a transport. The thing is there is > > going to be a shared facility between all the tenants. And unlike all other > > OpenStack services, this facility will be directly accessible from VMs, > > which leaves tenants very vulnerable to each other. Harm the facility from > > your VM, and the whole Region/Cell/Availability Zone will be left out of > > service. > > > > Do you think that is solvable, or maybe I overestimate the threat? > > > > I think Salt would be thrilled if we tested and improved its resiliency > to abuse. We're going to have to do that with whatever we expose to VMs.
+1 to not reinventing the wheel, and using a friendly ecosystem tool that we can improve as needed. > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
