From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (firstgate.proxmox.com [212.224.123.68]) by lore.proxmox.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A5B701FF168 for ; Sun, 27 Jul 2025 00:36:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: from firstgate.proxmox.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by firstgate.proxmox.com (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B2982B12A; Sun, 27 Jul 2025 00:37:56 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: garm.ovh; auth=pass (GARM-112S0069414652a-362e-412b-85b8-646a4fcea413, 2F8ECA6A9B5BDE9F0F5C9828A41A535C1962F384) smtp.auth=laurent@guerby.net X-OVh-ClientIp: 91.224.148.165 Message-ID: From: Laurent GUERBY To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion , Thomas Lamprecht Date: Sat, 26 Jul 2025 23:19:17 +0200 In-Reply-To: References: <20250723143152.3829064-1-d.csapak@proxmox.com> <931c8fa8-694e-43fe-9354-7ba752063b2c@proxmox.com> User-Agent: Evolution 3.46.4-2 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Originating-IP: [37.59.142.112] X-ClientProxiedBy: DAG7EX2.mxp7.local (172.16.2.62) To DAG3EX1.mxp7.local (172.16.2.21) X-Ovh-Tracer-GUID: 4f60b6f9-301c-458e-8666-9a0d47b73a27 X-Ovh-Tracer-Id: 5068519907555024538 X-VR-SPAMSTATE: OK X-VR-SPAMSCORE: -100 X-VR-SPAMCAUSE: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeffedrtdefgdekjeegjecutefuodetggdotefrodftvfcurfhrohhfihhlvgemucfqggfjpdevjffgvefmvefgnecuuegrihhlohhuthemucehtddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenucfjughrpefkuffhvfffjghftgfgfgggihesthhqredttderjeenucfhrhhomhepnfgruhhrvghnthcuifgfgfftuegjuceolhgruhhrvghnthesghhuvghrsgihrdhnvghtqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeettdduueegveehfeeujeeigefhfffgledtfeetveffteegtdekfeeuieelffetvdenucfkphepuddvjedrtddrtddruddpfeejrdehledrudegvddrudduvddpledurddvvdegrddugeekrdduieehnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivgeptdenucfrrghrrghmpehinhgvthepuddvjedrtddrtddruddpmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehlrghurhgvnhhtsehguhgvrhgshidrnhgvthdpnhgspghrtghpthhtohepvddprhgtphhtthhopehpsghsqdguvghvvghlsehlihhsthhsrdhprhhogihmohigrdgtohhmpdhrtghpthhtohepthdrlhgrmhhprhgvtghhthesphhrohigmhhogidrtghomhdpoffvtefjohhsthepmhhoheehvdgmpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuth DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; bh=gIwbclOjvmtTRd5KA1brJRQeYzMV1IqI1gLv3B6MLxI=; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=guerby.net; h=From; s=ovhmo40022-selector1; t=1753564760; v=1; b=bQ8Kibr8FsurWGIg+aMu/lMbmR4T536pdydJJp2GfR5pPc0q4IYJuabEpYxZbjD5d52oxUe9 e+3UBcfGJtraHYI5z6Smw0tnxRC+p1cFnC4Y0DbKFkJfn03UOEc1hgyx0cxsQnIt+mM6GdTFwwS LF5UuU1nU+13HZVE86vRk1/dLcNvb0t7fPzHZ/Z3u4OYRMLTJqXePyUxfH/UOLeHOj5xahVHwa8 ksH2ebfKXLYHVO2nWgzAb59U6+gvGFyO6j1Lr6hZi/treUZXPJ9K0IXYay8LCJzFCtEvB0k7Qaj rCW9RFChBOwvzYtl8mrJ8PVGZIoTnwrxWp50e9dY6Q2Tw== X-SPAM-LEVEL: Spam detection results: 0 AWL 0.203 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain DMARC_MISSING 0.1 Missing DMARC policy RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE -0.0001 Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2 0.001 Average reputation (+2) RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to Validity was blocked. See https://knowledge.validity.com/hc/en-us/articles/20961730681243 for more information. SPF_HELO_NONE 0.001 SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record SPF_PASS -0.001 SPF: sender matches SPF record URIBL_BLOCKED 0.001 ADMINISTRATOR NOTICE: The query to URIBL was blocked. See http://wiki.apache.org/spamassassin/DnsBlocklists#dnsbl-block for more information. [guerby.net] Subject: Re: [pbs-devel] [PATCH] tape: forbid operations on a s3 datastore X-BeenThere: pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Proxmox Backup Server development discussion Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Errors-To: pbs-devel-bounces@lists.proxmox.com Sender: "pbs-devel" On Thu, 2025-07-24 at 08:50 +0200, Dominik Csapak wrote: > Hi > > On 7/23/25 21:51, Thomas Lamprecht wrote: > > This was fine and I applied it but still have some comments on one > > of the arguments that would indicate that this never makes sense to > > have, as IMO it can. > > > > Am 23.07.25 um 16:31 schrieb Dominik Csapak: > > > namely: > > > * backup to tape from s3 (including a configuring such a job) > > > * restore to s3 from tape > > > > > > It does not work currently, but it probably does not make sense to allow > > > that at all for several reasons: > > > * both are designed to be 'off-site', so copying data from one off-site > > > location to another directly does not make sense most of the time Hi, With my CISO hat on I see tapes physically removed from the tape library as an essential security tool providing the "offline" property to one copy of the backups, this is orthogonal to "off-site" being discussed here. S3 is typically online, even if some providers offer S3 to tape/offline. Bandwith/delay constraints especially for full restore after a successful deep cyberattack might favor an "on-site "offline" tape backup for many organization. Backup solutions like Veeam already provide "object to tape". I think it would be nice to have this feature in the PBS roadmap if there's no technical roadblock to having the same feature set for S3 and directory datastore, including tape. Sincerely, Laurent GUERBY _______________________________________________ pbs-devel mailing list pbs-devel@lists.proxmox.com https://lists.proxmox.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pbs-devel