On 12/19/06, Sharpe, Sam J <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tue, 2006-12-19 at 10:45 -0600, Stanley, Jon wrote:
> Towards the bottom of this page is a comparison between Satellite and
> hosted RHN (sorry for the marketing content, but it's good):
>
> https://www.redhat.com/rhn/compare/
Comparing that list with what I know I get from our RHN Proxy (all our
systems have Management entitlement by default) the features you get
extra with Satellite are:
1) Instant Update (I'm not convinced we don't have this on Proxy -
there's a 4 hour checkin time on rhnsd so if you define "Instant" as
"within 4 hours" rather than waiting for the client to run "up2date -u",
then we have that already.
2) Complete Off Network Capability
3) Local Database Repository
For everything else extra you need Provisioning Entitlement (and I think
some of those features can be used on Proxy with Provisioning - we can
certainly put our RHN Proxies under Configuration Profiles and they are
the only machines we have that are Provisioning entitled)
After more than 2 years as a proxy user we just evaluated a satellite.
One of the main motivations was the poor performance and response time
we get from using the RHN web interface as a hosted customer. Waiting
minutes, I'm not exaggerating, for pages to be returned from RHN is
very frustrating to users and getting the web interface local is a big
plus for us. I'm not really sold on the value of the satellite in our
environment though. One of its biggest shortcomings for me is its
inability to compartmentalize access. Just because two admins have
provisioning entitlements and configuration management privileges
doesn't make them peers who should be able to get into each other's
business, but I digress.
John
_______________________________________________
rhelv5-beta-list mailing list
[email protected]
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/rhelv5-beta-list
