Back to bug 1601041

Who When What Removed Added
Red Hat Bugzilla Rules Engine 2018-07-13 16:38:36 UTC Keywords FutureFeature
Target Release 3.0 3.*
Jason Dillaman 2018-07-13 16:56:30 UTC Target Release 3.* 4.0
Flags ceph-4.0?
Jason Dillaman 2018-07-13 16:56:48 UTC Status NEW ASSIGNED
Pasi Karkkainen 2019-01-03 07:48:39 UTC CC pasik
Red Hat Bugzilla Rules Engine 2019-01-03 07:48:42 UTC Target Release 4.0 3.*
Jason Dillaman 2019-01-17 23:29:11 UTC Target Release 3.* 4.0
Jason Dillaman 2019-02-05 21:57:53 UTC Status ASSIGNED POST
Drew Harris 2019-02-27 16:55:17 UTC Priority unspecified high
CC anharris
Drew Harris 2019-02-27 16:55:36 UTC Priority high medium
Drew Harris 2019-02-27 16:55:57 UTC Priority medium high
Giridhar Ramaraju 2019-08-05 13:06:22 UTC QA Contact ceph-qe-bugs hgurav
Hemant G 2019-08-06 08:57:08 UTC QA Contact hgurav mkasturi
Yaniv Kaul 2019-08-27 07:00:31 UTC CC mkasturi
Flags needinfo?(mkasturi)
Madhavi Kasturi 2019-08-27 12:54:18 UTC Flags needinfo?(mkasturi)
errata-xmlrpc 2019-08-27 14:45:18 UTC CC tserlin
Fixed In Version ceph-14.2.0
Status POST MODIFIED
Status MODIFIED ON_QA
Bara Ancincova 2019-12-10 09:38:52 UTC CC jdillama
Blocks 1730176
Docs Contact bancinco
Doc Type If docs needed, set a value Enhancement
Flags needinfo?(jdillama)
Jason Dillaman 2019-12-10 16:24:22 UTC Doc Text Feature:
RBD images can be segregated within isolated namespaces within the same pool.

Reason:
When using RBD directly without a higher-level system like OpenStack or OpenShift Container Storage, it was not possible to restrict user access to specific RBD images.

Result:
When combined with CephX caps, users can be restricted to specific pool namespaces to restrict access to RBD images.
Flags needinfo?(jdillama)
Bara Ancincova 2020-01-07 08:37:50 UTC Doc Text Feature:
RBD images can be segregated within isolated namespaces within the same pool.

Reason:
When using RBD directly without a higher-level system like OpenStack or OpenShift Container Storage, it was not possible to restrict user access to specific RBD images.

Result:
When combined with CephX caps, users can be restricted to specific pool namespaces to restrict access to RBD images.
.Segregating RBD images within isolated namespaces within the same pool

RBD images can now be segregated within isolated namespaces within the same pool. When using Ceph Block Devices directly without a higher-level system, such as OpenStack or OpenShift Container Storage, it was not possible to restrict user access to specific RBD images. When combined with CephX capabilities, users can be restricted to specific pool namespaces to restrict access to RBD images.Hi
Flags needinfo?(jdillama)
Jason Dillaman 2020-01-07 21:36:36 UTC Flags needinfo?(jdillama)
Bara Ancincova 2020-01-08 08:46:26 UTC Doc Text .Segregating RBD images within isolated namespaces within the same pool

RBD images can now be segregated within isolated namespaces within the same pool. When using Ceph Block Devices directly without a higher-level system, such as OpenStack or OpenShift Container Storage, it was not possible to restrict user access to specific RBD images. When combined with CephX capabilities, users can be restricted to specific pool namespaces to restrict access to RBD images.Hi
.Segregating RBD images within isolated namespaces within the same pool

RBD images can now be segregated within isolated namespaces within the same pool. When using Ceph Block Devices directly without a higher-level system, such as OpenStack or OpenShift Container Storage, it was not possible to restrict user access to specific RBD images. When combined with CephX capabilities, users can be restricted to specific pool namespaces to restrict access to RBD images.
Gopi 2020-01-13 05:46:58 UTC CC gpatta
QA Contact mkasturi gpatta
Gopi 2020-01-13 05:48:57 UTC Status ON_QA VERIFIED
errata-xmlrpc 2020-01-31 11:26:46 UTC Status VERIFIED RELEASE_PENDING
errata-xmlrpc 2020-01-31 12:44:52 UTC Status RELEASE_PENDING CLOSED
Resolution --- ERRATA
Last Closed 2020-01-31 12:44:52 UTC
errata-xmlrpc 2020-01-31 12:45:29 UTC Link ID Red Hat Product Errata RHBA-2020:0312

Back to bug 1601041