Have a couple of questions on the proposed multi-tenancy feature (pardon me if they are obvious, as I am slowly getting up to speed):
a) First, good initiative. I think this will make ZK more pervasive. I plan to participate and contribute b) Is there any assumption on the trust and security ? i.e. could we assume that the servers would be in a secure environment and so no need for SSL et al., could we trust the MAC Address/IP Address (this also raises the question of NAT et al, if they are relevant) and could we make an assumption that there is no need for a secure identity ? c) I remember seeing one of Ben's ToDo, an entry for distributed ZK. I couldn't find a resolution or write-up. Possible, I am missing something obvious. Anyway, Is it already in place or do we need to consider that feature in the multi-tenancy capability ? Cheers & thanks <k/> |-----Original Message----- |From: Benjamin Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |Sent: Mon, 27 Oct 2008 20:35:37 -0700 |To: [email protected] |Subject: ZooKeeper Roadmap - 3.1.0 and beyond. | <..snip/> 5) (begin) multi-tenancy support. A number of users have expressed interest in being able to deploy ZK as a service in a cloud. Multi-tenancy support would be a huge benefit (quota, qos, namespace partitioning of nodes, billing, etc...) <..snip>
