> So, I sent an email a while back about this to get people thinking, but
> I didn't get too much feedback from my questions, so this time I am
> going to actually outline a proposal for people to look at. ;)
>
> Currently users expect pretty much any public service we have is fully
> supported. This means things like updating status when it's down,
> working anytime something is down to fix it as quickly as we can.
> New applications/services currently all pass through the (somewhat
> long) RFR process which we setup to make sure we could support the
> service moving forward.
>
> This is great and all, but some services just aren't as sustainable, or
> don't really fit into our RFR process very well. Also, our RFR process
> makes us pretty slow to bring a new service online properly.
>
> In order to have support levels, we need a way to communicate that to
> our users easily and the only/best way I can think of to do that easily
> is via domain name. If we try and have a table or something it could
> get pretty confusing for people. Tying it to domain names would make it
> much easier.
Just domain would be a good way for us internally, but maybe we can also
get the design people to provide us with banners or different versions of
the logo to put on stg/dev/cloud/... instances, so that we also make it
clear inside the applications in a consistent manner.
>
> So:
>
> fedoraproject.org - Anything with this domain is something that has
> passed though our RFR process and we support fully. This means we
> update status, we alert on them anytime they have issues, we work on
> them anytime they are down, etc.
Maybe clearly indicate cloud.fp.o (and some others probably) as exceptions
to this rule.
getfedora.org - Same level as fedoraproject.org.
>
> fedorainfracloud.org - This comes with a lesser level of support,
> simply because our cloud doesn't have any kind of HA setup, so
> it will be down when doing maint or when there's problems. Services in
> this domain may be down when there is scheduled cloud maint. We
> monitor, but don't page off hours, we may work on issues only during
> business hours, etc. Services here may not have passed through our RFR
> process (perhaps we should have a parallel cloud process)
cloud.fedoraproject.org - Same level as fedorainfracloud.org.
>
> stg.fedoraproject.org - These can be down anytime and we monitor on
> them, but may not work on them off hours, etc.
>
> someother domain that sounds fedora related (fedorarelated.org?
> fedoralinks.org? ?) - These are things that are fedora related, but not
> fully controlled by fedora infrastructure. Things like the fedora
> bootstrap site or the porting python3 in fedora site, or possibly cloud
> instances that aren't managed by us. These we don't monitor or have
> status on, and direct people to contact the managers directly.
>
> Any other types of sites / domains people can think of?
Where do hosted, people and planet fall in?
I would say these are production as well, and same as fp.o.
>
> Any general thoughts on the idea?
Outside of the indications to users, how about defining "SLA levels", or
however we want to call it, and display the above rules in a table, for
easy grokking by other people?
Something like:
Status | Monitored | Paged | Off-hours
Production | X X X -
Staging | - X - -
Or however we want to fill this in exactly, just a quick example, we might
for example give different names to the levels or the sort.
>
> kevin
>
With kind regards,
Patrick Uiterwijk
Fedora Infra
_______________________________________________
infrastructure mailing list
infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
