Open Stack

> I also don't like that the discussions suggested that because it would be
hard
> to get Barbican incubated/integrated it should not be used. That is just
crazy
> talk. TripleO merged with Tuskar because Tuskar is part of deployment.

We are completing our incubation request for Barbican right now. I am
waiting to send it until tomorrow as I figured it woudn't get a lot of
traction right before the break.

As I've said before, I think the KDS should be part of Barbican, but if
Keystone wants to merge it sooner, I won't complain. Barbican has a pretty
full roadmap through the Icehouse release, so I doubt my team would get to
this. We'd be happy to help anyone interested in implementing it and I would
merge it, but that's up to the authors.

The public / private service argument I don't really get. The KDS will be an
internal server regardless of whether it is in Barbican or Keystone so I
don't think that is a differentiator.

> Seems to me that pulling Barbican into the identity _program_, but still
as its
> own project/repo/etc. would solve that problem.

Not sure I agree here. Key management solves many problems, some of which
are identity problems, but key management is not fundamentally an identity
service.  For example, SSL certificates for services, symmetric key
generation for at rest encryption, etc.

What do we think are the reasons for combining the two efforts?



Jarret

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 6087 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20131201/2a358f7d/attachment.bin>