Unless we get more justified request (performance in safe environment like yours), I'd rather we don't make it easy for people to configure a completely unsafe LXD.
I'm a bit worried of people jumping on such an option as an alternative from writing code that talks to our unix socket (for local use case) because most languages make you jump through a few hoops to get http over unix socket working. The last thing I want to see is publicly exposed LXDs with an unauthenticated API! Based on recent support requests on IRC, I've seen about 50% of our users running with LXD exposed to the network on a machine with public IPs. I don't know if they had a firewall in front of it or not, but if not, then I sure am glad that we've been pretty paranoid with our TLS requirements :) -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1538174 Title: ways to speed up overhead of "lxc exec" on remote containers To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/lxd/+bug/1538174/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs
