4 ms·
Perhaps the article was not explaining in detail what this daemon does. No, it's not just an SSH endpoint on instance X. For large deployments it is an SSH gate
by old-gregg 8y ago
Perhaps the article was not explaining in detail what this daemon does. No, it's not just an SSH endpoint on instance X. For large deployments it is an SSH gateway (better implementation of jumphost) to your entire data center and it's running on multiple hosts behind an LB. Yet, every instance of it may be supporting hundreds of long-lived SSH connections originating from multiple teams, some of them can be deploying something critically important.
So, yes, this socket acrobatics is absolutely table stakes and is required (and has been requested by corporate customers of T) for robust infrastructure upgrades. Old-timers like to refer to this as "carrier-grade" way of doing things.
You may dislike SSH itself, but hey - that's what our current UNIX tooling depends on, so we have to make it work, and work well. Besides, even stateless HTTP sometimes needs reliable long-lived connections! Full disclaimer: I'm one of early Teleport contributors.
- otterley 8y agoI don't dislike ssh. It's sometimes necessary and useful. But the modern way of performing deployments is not via ssh -- it's via container and load balancer orchestration and virtual machine management infrastructure. Making your customers happy is good for business, and I salute you for the work you've done in this area. But I still take issue with your "table stakes" characterization and maintain that it is best omitted from an otherwise good discussion. Being "table stakes" for your business is different from being "table stakes" for service architectures generally.