From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (gate001.proxmox.com [45.144.208.40]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4C0F21FF0B2 for ; Tue, 08 Sep 2026 20:42:10 +0200 (CEST) Received: from gate001.proxmox.com (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by gate001.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E9ECD21538; Tue, 08 Sep 2026 20:42:07 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: <91b23a08-e52e-4f21-979c-d44a1cfa6e6b@proxmox.com> Date: Tue, 8 Sep 2026 20:42:02 +0200 MIME-Version: 1.0 User-Agent: Thunderbird Daily Subject: Re: [PATCH docs v2 1/5] cephx-migration: Replace consumer with client To: Maximiliano Sandoval , pve-devel@lists.proxmox.com References: <20260908153932.577051-1-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> <20260908153932.577051-2-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> Content-Language: en-US From: Thomas Lamprecht In-Reply-To: <20260908153932.577051-2-m.sandoval@proxmox.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bm-Milter-Handled: 55990f41-d878-4baa-be0a-ee34c49e34d2 X-Bm-Transport-Timestamp: 1788892914923 X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL -0.283 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy KAM_DMARC_STATUS 0.01 Test Rule for DKIM or SPF Failure with Strict Alignment (newer systems) RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED -2.3 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, medium trust SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record Message-ID-Hash: TIEWQWLNVWPZCESCESWPNB3CV6D7AUM5 X-Message-ID-Hash: TIEWQWLNVWPZCESCESWPNB3CV6D7AUM5 X-MailFrom: t.lamprecht@proxmox.com X-Mailman-Rule-Misses: dmarc-mitigation; no-senders; approved; loop; banned-address; emergency; member-moderation; nonmember-moderation; administrivia; implicit-dest; max-recipients; max-size; news-moderation; no-subject; digests; suspicious-header X-Mailman-Version: 3.3.10 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox VE development discussion List-Help: List-Owner: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Am 08.09.26 um 17:39 schrieb Maximiliano Sandoval: > The later term is used more often in the Proxmox VE documentation and upstream > [1]. The Consumer row is removed from the table to avoid being redundant after > replacing it with Client. I'm fine with that. "consumer" was meant to name all the individual users of the credential without confusing them with the Ceph identity named client.admin, and it tried to avoid suggesting that one Ceph identity corresponds to one VM or connection. Anyway, that is to subtle in any case (and I jumped terms here a few time, so everything sounded odd in the end), with a fresher brain the client terms sounds OK here. > > [1] https://docs.ceph.com/en/latest/dev/cephx/ > > Signed-off-by: Maximiliano Sandoval > --- > pveceph.adoc | 41 ++++++++++++++++++++--------------------- > 1 file changed, 20 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/pveceph.adoc b/pveceph.adoc > index c9832ec..9664289 100644 > --- a/pveceph.adoc > +++ b/pveceph.adoc > @@ -1407,30 +1407,29 @@ automatically. > [[pveceph_cipher_support]] > .Check compatibility > Several workloads can share one Ceph user. Migrate its key only when every > -consumer supports `aes256k`, including disconnected and external clients. > +client supports `aes256k`, including disconnected and external clients. > Ceph programs from the updated {pve} packages support it; kernel clients > require a *running* kernel version 7.0 or newer. > > [cols="2,3",options="header"] > |=== > -|Consumer |Client implementation removing the table header without removing the options="header", which tells asciidoc that the first row will be a table header, makes this render odd. > |Virtual machine with RBD disks |Userspace, unless `krbd` is enabled. > |Container on RBD |Always the kernel client. > |CephFS mount |Kernel, unless `fuse` is enabled. > |=== >