- From: Jeff Mendoza <
>
- To: Cary Penniman <
>
- Cc: Chef Dev <
>
- Subject: [chef-dev] RE: RE: REVIEW: Ohai Cloud Plugin Improvements (OHAI-542)
- Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2014 13:59:12 -0800
- Importance: Normal
Hi All,
I went ahead with node['azure']['public_ssh_port'] for the PR:
https://tickets.opscode.com/browse/CHEF-4962
This can be changed to node['cloud']['ssh_port'] if ssh_port is added to
cloud.
Thanks,
Jeff
----------------------------------------
>
From:
>
>
To:
>
>
CC:
>
>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:16:35 -0800
>
Subject: [chef-dev] RE: REVIEW: Ohai Cloud Plugin Improvements (OHAI-542)
>
>
As an answer to number 1. I'm fine with moving forward with
>
node['azure']['ssh_port']. I didn't think this would be acceptable by the
>
Chef community. I assume that node['cloud']['ssh_port'] would be
>
preferable, as this is generic, and does not lock out any other could
>
provider from filling that attribute.
>
>
Thanks,
>
Jeff
>
>
________________________________
>
> Date: Wed, 8 Jan 2014 16:25:08 -0800
>
> Subject: Re: [chef-dev] REVIEW: Ohai Cloud Plugin Improvements (OHAI-542)
>
> From:
>
>
>
> To:
>
>
>
> CC:
>
>
>
>
>
> Jeff,
>
>
>
> After doing more digging, I see what you mean about the single virtual
>
> IP....
>
>
>
> As you said, Azure has the concept of a "cloudservice"[1] which can
>
> contain multiple VMs within it. These VMs are all behind the
>
> cloudservice's load-balancer which has a single public IP address -- as
>
> you also mention. It appears that the ssh_port and winrm_port values
>
> are basically port forwards (known as "InputEndpoints"[2] in Azure
>
> parlance) set on the load-balancer. These port forwards allow access
>
> to the individual VMs within the cloudservice. On the VMs themselves
>
> the sshd service is still expected to be listening on port 22 [3].
>
>
>
> So ssh_port and winrm_port (and possibly
>
> other?) InputEndpoints are truly managed by the Azure cloud. While the
>
> naming might stand some improving (i.e.
>
> node['azure']['input_endpoints']['ssh']['port']) they
>
> most definitely are legit and (in most cases) necessary for the azure
>
> cloud plugin.
>
>
>
> Sorry for the long preamble, but I thought it might help give other
>
> chef-devs some context.
>
>
>
> Two questions:
>
>
>
> 1) Is it possible to patch "knife ssh" with some azure specific logic
>
> to check if a node['azure']['ssh_port] key is defined and use it's
>
> value over Chef::Config[:knife][:ssh_port] || ssh_config[:port]?
>
>
>
> 2) Are there any other clouds that currently managing port forwards in
>
> a similar way?
>
>
>
> If the answer to &2 is yes, then +1 for adding it to the cloud plugin
>
> interface in a cloud agnostic way. If not, IMHO, we should wait for a
>
> second cloud to help us achieve a better abstraction in node['cloud'].
>
> Until that time we should be able to simply use the node['azure']
>
> values directly.
>
>
>
> Your feedback is much appreciated!
>
>
>
> - Cary P
>
>
>
>
>
> [1] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg441304.aspx
>
> [2] http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windowsazure/jj157186.aspx
>
> [3]
>
> https://github.com/opscode/knife-azure/blob/master/lib/azure/role.rb&L269
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Dec 31, 2013 at 3:05 PM, Jeff Mendoza
>
> <
<mailto:
>>
>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Cary,
>
> I took a look at this again, and I think ssh_port should be left under
>
> cloud, and not specific to azure. I would like to patch 'knife ssh' to
>
> use ssh_port, much in the same way that it uses cloud.public_hostname
>
> now.
>
> (https://github.com/opscode/chef/blob/master/lib/chef/knife/ssh.rb&L157)
>
> This can't be azure specific for obvious reasons.
>
> Azure can have multiple nodes behind a single virtual IP or hostname,
>
> and use different ports for ssh. I can imagine having customized ssh
>
> ports per-node could be desirable in other situations.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jeff Mendoza
>
>
>
> Date: Mon, 23 Dec 2013 15:51:42 -0800
>
> From:
>
>
<mailto:
>
>
> To:
>
>
<mailto:
>
>
> Subject: [chef-dev] REVIEW: Ohai Cloud Plugin Improvements (OHAI-542)
>
> Ohai!
>
>
>
> Just submitted a PR to help make the ohai cloud plugin more consistent
>
> across clouds:
>
>
>
> https://tickets.opscode.com/browse/OHAI-542
>
>
>
> There are some breaking changes for GCE and Azure as documented.
>
>
>
> Thoughts? Questions? Concerns?
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Cary P
>
>
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.16.