Update Satellite server topology diagram #3905
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
Needs tech review
|
Hi @ehelms, can you please take a look at the updated diagram? I did my best to implement the suggestions from https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-21492. I was unclear about these two:
I don't know where exactly to add Apache. Can you help?
For now, I added Redis only to Foreman. Should I add it to both Foreman Proxies too? Note that this is a WIP version so the elements are not aligned properly etc. This is because I want to first make sure to collect feedback and acks on technical accuracy. Only then will I start finalizing the design itself. |
aneta-petrova
changed the title
This sits in front of everything but the foreman-proxy. I'll send along a diagram that may help.
Yes. Redis is used by Foreman, Dynflow and Pulp. |
|
Thanks @ehelms! I added the missing components reported in the Jira. Can you please re-review? Are all the components in the appropriate places now? In d3e3766, I also dropped the port numbers from the diagram and replaced them with a textual link to the section on port requirements in the Installation guide. This helps us maintain this information in one place only and in text form, which is easier. Additionally, I believe it makes the diagram itself look cleaner and less intimidating at first glance. Let me know if you have any concerns about this particular change. |
|
A few notes on what we should try to show:
One thing our port/firewall documentation doesn't appear to do is talk about it in terms of the components in this diagram. That makes it hard to connect the diagram with the port table. |
Is this something we tell users to do or expect them to do? To open or close ports to enable or prevent communication between the individual components? I think users are only expected to open ports as described in https://docs.theforeman.org/nightly/Installing_Server/index-katello.html#Enabling_Connections_from_a_Client_to_Server_foreman, aren't they? If so, then including details on internal communications (ports between individual components) doesn't represent any actionable items for users, which would support dropping the port numbers + reducing the number of arrows. The current diagram seems more like a jungle of arrows and numbers than a clear and useful diagram :) |
|
If there really is a need to have a reference of the ports for communication among the internal components, perhaps we could document it in a table too, just like https://docs.theforeman.org/nightly/Installing_Server/index-katello.html#Enabling_Connections_from_a_Client_to_Server_foreman That would make the diagram simpler and easier to process visually, with the added benefit of making the list of ports themselves easier to maintain. |
Users ask these kind of questions as they like to understand what is talking to what. And I think through docs we can capture that information and prevent users raising issues or forum questions. A table works. |
What changes are you introducing?
Why are you introducing these changes? (Explanation, links to references, issues, etc.)
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/SAT-21492
Anything else to add? (Considerations, potential downsides, alternative solutions you have explored, etc.)
Checklists
Please cherry-pick my commits into: