Comment 11 for bug 1883242
Revision history for this message
| Billy Olsen (billy-olsen) wrote Re: consolidated etcd backend for Vault HA | #11 |
© 2004
Canonical Ltd.
•
Terms of use
•
Data privacy
•
Contact Launchpad Support
•
Blog
•
Careers
•
System status
•
9199653
demo site
(Get the code!)
I believe that the detailed scenario laid out by @freyes in comment #9 is the way to go. It has a nice default for moving forward, but allows for the legacy path and more complicated scenarios. Let's move in that direction.
As far as the options are concerned (comment 10), I think that would be okay - but it adds a bit of complexity as far as validating and verifying what the right type of configuration to have is. It does have the benefit of being able to block and indicate the user has not provided a valid configuration, but its almost nicer if it just works for basic installs and users can adopt the more complexity if their environment requires it.