Hi,
> our design of template proxying is not good
I don't think, it's that bad. Your suggestion does have it's advantages,
though. From a security perspective it would be great if the smart-proxy
wouldn't need any calls to Foreman.
> The downside is that Smart Proxy would be required in order to do
templating
If we pre-render all templates in Foreman and just deploy text files to
the proxy, why do we need templating on the proxy?
> There should not be any technical limitation, unless I miss something.
How do you want to handle the "built"-Url? I think, you still need a
callback to Foreman when a Host has finished provisioning. That
basically voids most of the advantages (like improving reliability -
btw: a Foreman ha is easy vs. a smart-proxy ha setup is hard).
We currently setup puppetca orchestration when a Host requests the
provisioning template. That would need to be changed first. Please see [1].
I do think, it's a good idea that Foreman knows the current state of an
installation. We could even show valueable information on the
provisioning progress or potential errors like with [2]. That would be a
huge benefit for users, at least from my experience.
Timo
[1] https://github.com/theforeman/rfcs/pull/7/files
[2] https://github.com/ShimShtein/foreman_build_history
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"foreman-dev" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
