I put some more thought on the possibility of SRUing this to Bionic and
Focal, and my conclusion is that it's probably not a good idea to
attempt a SRU. The rationale is:

1. This doesn't clearly fit into the SRU requirements [1], as we're not
fixing a bug, but enabling a new feature. I agree it's a fairly
important security features, and it may fit under the "we sometimes want
to introduce new features" case, however I'm not *really* sure [2] is a
totally safe change, as it touches the currently used code path.

2. Now we SRU support for IMDSv2. Then, for example, how long before
before we also want support for the "new" ec2metadata fields [3]?

I understand the clouds are a moving target, and maybe cloud-utils
should be granted a SRU exception, like cloud-init has.

Another solution consists in publishing the newer versions of cloud-
utils to the -backports pockets (bionic-backports and focal-backports in
this case). This is easy to do and will enable users to use the new
features when needed, even if without the guarantees given by the SRU
process [1].

Any opinion for or against proceeding with backports is welcome!

[1] https://wiki.ubuntu.com/StableReleaseUpdates
[2] 
https://github.com/canonical/cloud-utils/commit/2dabc1a177a18525da07983c1365673e7f91efbb
[3] 
https://github.com/canonical/cloud-utils/commit/558b5d005c801b9b3c8b8603f0144de82997ed17

-- 
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1870244

Title:
  ec2metadata does not speak EC2 IMDSv2

To manage notifications about this bug go to:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/cloud-utils/+bug/1870244/+subscriptions


-- 
ubuntu-bugs mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs

Reply via email to