On 05/27/2011 12:45 PM, Hugh Brock wrote:
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 05:07:14PM +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
> On Fri, 2011-05-27 at 12:07 -0400, Bryan Kearney wrote:
>> On 05/27/2011 11:48 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
>>> On Thu, 2011-05-26 at 14:02 -0400, Carl Trieloff wrote:
>>>> Based on an environment, I may have a different set of permissions. In
>>>> addition there may be additional images I can see in that environment.
>>> Well ...
>>> The only time I see environment coming into this from a user's
>>> perspective is when they are launching a deployable - i.e. they are
>>> launching a deployable in an environment
>>> And the only permission that seems relevant when launching a deployable
>>> is whether a given image is available to that user for that environment
>>> So, I'd prefer the less generic version .... or multiple less generic
>>> statements that make it more obvious what policy is being enforced.
>> need to consider org/environment. Each tenant (org) could have unique
>> set of environments.
> Hmm, you're going to need to elaborate that for me.
> I guess I'm asking whether there is some time other the deployable
> launch that Conductor would need environment/org policy enforced?
I sure hope there is not.
I know that in Katello there are orgs, which have users and
environments, and environments, which have content. (At least I think
this is true, Bryan correct me if I'm wrong.) We will, one way or
another, have a way of determining which Katello environment the
content the user wants to launch comes from, and we will have a way of
determining the Conductor environment that the user wants to launch
in. No matter how we link Conductor environments to Katello
environments, as long as there is a link, I think we're fine.
One thing that does occur to me is that we will need a spoof-proof
mechanism for determining that yes, this image some user built *really
was* built from content that is authorized for environment E. This
might mean doing something fancy like matching checksums or I don't
know what all. But I don't believe we can just trust that the user that
builds the template will voluntarily mark it for the environment
Katello believes it belongs in.
As long as there is a multi-tenancy plan.. we are ok. If you and I are
from unique orgs. Our respective admins should be able to provide
different quotas et al for us. Many tenants, one installation.