On 2018-12-29 18:55:43 +0100 (+0100), Thomas Goirand wrote: > On 12/29/18 3:06 PM, Paul Graydon wrote: [...] > > It's not all that much different from Google's instance agent > > that comes installed on their instances. > > Or the Microsoft's agent as well. I well know that popular cloud > provider tends to love adding an agent within the instance. That doesn't > make it a good practice. If it can be avoided, IMO that's best. That's > exactly the type of "feature" which, as a customer, would make me avoid > your public cloud (and GCE & Azure). But anyway, I'm digressing, > especially that I really don't need any public cloud access (I have > plenty of that kind of things running under OpenStack)... :) [...] To echo the sentiment, I too am not that keen on images which need provider-specific daemons installed to make them viable. As a sysadmin for applications which span multiple providers, it's more useful for me to be able to rely on building one image which can run consistently on all of them. But to clarify, I use plenty of (OpenStack-based) public service providers which work just fine without any proprietary agent daemon installed on my guest instances. OpenStack isn't *just* for "private cloud" and there are some 75+ different "public cloud" providers worldwide running OpenStack from which to choose if you're not a fan of closed/proprietary hosting platforms. Buy local, run free. -- Jeremy Stanley
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature