Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Don't use Nexus for T0/T1 #2382

Open
5 of 10 tasks
JimMadge opened this issue Jan 27, 2025 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2389
Open
5 of 10 tasks

Don't use Nexus for T0/T1 #2382

JimMadge opened this issue Jan 27, 2025 · 0 comments · May be fixed by #2389
Assignees
Labels
enhancement New functionality that should be added to the Safe Haven

Comments

@JimMadge
Copy link
Member

JimMadge commented Jan 27, 2025

✅ Checklist

  • I have searched open and closed issues for duplicates.
  • This is a request for a new feature in the Data Safe Haven or an upgrade to an existing feature.
  • The feature is still missing in the latest version.
  • I have read through the documentation.
  • This isn't an open-ended question (open a discussion if it is).

🍓 Suggested change

T0/T1 instance have unfiltered outbound internet access, so there is no need for the Nexus proxies for PyPI/CRAN. It could provide some caching, but it probably isn't worth it.

We could not deploy the Nexus container group and not template the /etc/pip.conf and /etc/RProfile files for these tiers.

  • Software repository deployment should be based on allow_workspace_internet - if it is allowed, there is no need for repositories
  • Catch incompatible config parameters - if allow_workspace_internet is true, then all software packages should be allowed
  • Desired state should either template the pip or R config files differently or don't template them at all
  • Modify allowlist functions to catch situations where there are no allowlists
  • Ensure software repository related outputs from user services are handled correctly when there are no software repositories.
@JimMadge JimMadge added the enhancement New functionality that should be added to the Safe Haven label Jan 27, 2025
@craddm craddm self-assigned this Jan 28, 2025
@craddm craddm moved this to In progress in Data Safe Haven Feb 3, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New functionality that should be added to the Safe Haven
Projects
Status: In progress
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

2 participants