Bug 1173386

Since this issue was entered in Red Hat Bugzilla, the release flag has been
set to ? to ensure that it is properly evaluated for this release.

Since this issue was entered in Red Hat Bugzilla, the release flag has been
set to ? to ensure that it is properly evaluated for this release.

Clearing out my queue...

Hi Lukas,

Thank you for the information, and for the diagrams!

At current, we have a section in our new Provisioning Guide where I think it might be a good place to call out these differences -

https://access.redhat.com/documentation/en/red-hat-satellite/6.2/single/provisioning-guide#Introduction-Defining_Provisioning_Types

We have the diagram for bare metal provisioning, and I am assuming the diagram for virtualization will be more or less the same for both cloud and virtualization, but is there much difference for the one on containers?

My apologies for the delay on this, but I'm hoping we can make some progress now as part of our z-stream work, and I can certainly see how diagrams might be helpful here.

Thank you once again for your help!

Kind regards,

Andrew

Sure.

Moving back to the default assignee to be re-triaged as the schedule allows.

Removed outdated target milestone

Assigning to Zac for review.

Zac - would you be able to follow up with Lukas and see if we can confirm any differences between the processes, and then work with Jess to create diagrams we can add to the Provisioning Guide?

Bare metal can only do PXE/Bootdisk/Discovery.
Virtual can do both PXE/Bootdisk/Discovery or image-based provisioning.
Cloud can do only image-based provisioning.

These are the two main workflows. Now image-based provisioning has two paths determined by "user data" checkbox on image associated with the operating system. If user data is set, it's using user-data template to inject initial seed into the instance. If its unset, it is using ssh to deploy finish template and performs it once appliance is booted up.

Setting to NEW as there is no one assigned to these bugs.

Hi David, 

This is not a Bugzilla ticket that can be given to a writer without consideration for the content plan for the release and the overall content strategy of the team at large. It also requires prioritization on a program level and a careful assessment of child tasks that would lead to the completion of this overall task. I assume it has not been assigned in the past as there was quite a lot of work to it. Given that this was assigned to me in a blind manner and without any clues to the priority of this ticket when compared to items that were prioritised for beta and the release, the constant stream of bug fixes to live content, as well as other initiatives, it was not possible for me to dedicate any time to this. 

Provisioning functionality is quite versatile and also quite a challenge to describe accurately in words. While the provisioning guide has been enhanced greatly since 2014, the complexity customers might experience when trying to grasp this information is a very valid and current concern. 

When I met Dana Singleterry last summer, I recall that he mentioned that our customer base were using Satellite's provisioning features quite a lot, perhaps more than originally thought previous to some customer visits. What would work for this request would be for the docs program team to coordinate with the Satellite program team to determine which diagrams are a priority, then create child Bugzilla tickets from this main ticket, then work with engineers like Lzap to get solid descriptions of the workflows to illustrate, then schedule time with the technical illustrators to get these diagrams made. 

Lukas's comment in #Comment25 provides a helpful overview of where to focus. Once these are ranked in accordance with customer priority, I think that the team can proceed to resolve this ticket. 

I am unassigning this from myself for the content strategy team to analyse and weigh against the current workload and expected workload for 6.8. 

Thanks, 

Melanie