You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
{{ message }}
This repository has been archived by the owner on Mar 4, 2024. It is now read-only.
As a result of using unit_name in the responses to key conversations to the units, the tls-certificates interface does not successfully handle Cross Model Relations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
With cross-model relations (CMR), the "unit name" visible on the
offering side of the relation is a UUID which doesn't match with the
unit's own view of its unit name. Thus, the unit cannot find the
responses to its cert requests, as they are keyed by the UUID rather
than the unit name. By explicitly publishing the unit name over the
relation, it ensures that the provider and requirer will use the same
key.
We use the unit name rather than a UUID or nonce to ensure that non-CMR
deployments are not broken upon upgrade.
Fixes#14
With cross-model relations (CMR), the "unit name" visible on the
offering side of the relation is a UUID which doesn't match with the
unit's own view of its unit name. Thus, the unit cannot find the
responses to its cert requests, as they are keyed by the UUID rather
than the unit name. By explicitly publishing the unit name over the
relation, it ensures that the provider and requirer will use the same
key.
We use the unit name rather than a UUID or nonce to ensure that non-CMR
deployments are not broken upon upgrade.
Fixes#14
Sign up for freeto subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/vault-charm/+bug/1813605
As a result of using unit_name in the responses to key conversations to the units, the tls-certificates interface does not successfully handle Cross Model Relations.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: