Open Stack

As operators, we have a need for both cases and actually a 3rd one as well which should be domain scoped.
I think the definition of reader should also include a scope (cloud-wide, domain specific or project specific) so that we don’t need different roles.
This might be a more fundamental change though as the scoping is static today, I mean defined in the policy files/code.

Cristian Calin

From: Adam Young [mailto:ayoung at redhat.com] 
Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2018 3:09 AM
To: List, OpenStack
Subject: Meaning of role name: auditor versus reader

We've recently come to accept reader as one of the default roles.  However, one thing that is not clear to me is the intention:  is this designed to be the readonly set of operations that an admin can do, or the read only set of operations that a member can do?

Should we really have two read-only roles, one for each case?  Perhaps the admin-read-only should be called auditor, and then reader is for member only operations?

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Ce message et ses pieces jointes peuvent contenir des informations confidentielles ou privilegiees et ne doivent donc
pas etre diffuses, exploites ou copies sans autorisation. Si vous avez recu ce message par erreur, veuillez le signaler
a l'expediteur et le detruire ainsi que les pieces jointes. Les messages electroniques etant susceptibles d'alteration,
Orange decline toute responsabilite si ce message a ete altere, deforme ou falsifie. Merci.

This message and its attachments may contain confidential or privileged information that may be protected by law;
they should not be distributed, used or copied without authorisation.
If you have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this message and its attachments.
As emails may be altered, Orange is not liable for messages that have been modified, changed or falsified.
Thank you.