|
Re: Buildpacks Checksum Site for Release Validation
Great,
I hope cloudfoundry/cli will provide the same thing.
cf.
https://lists.cloudfoundry.org/archives/list/cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org/thread/K3BEBY4A2WSUKS7YS5IF2UDQHHSU35A7/
Taichi
Great,
I hope cloudfoundry/cli will provide the same thing.
cf.
https://lists.cloudfoundry.org/archives/list/cf-dev(a)lists.cloudfoundry.org/thread/K3BEBY4A2WSUKS7YS5IF2UDQHHSU35A7/
Taichi
|
By
taichi nakashima
·
#4919
·
|
|
Re: Team
Hi Amulya,
"believe me after running multiple bosh services managing marketplace"
Are you using bosh releases for deploying service brokers or service
deployments??
Thanks
Ronak
Hi Amulya,
"believe me after running multiple bosh services managing marketplace"
Are you using bosh releases for deploying service brokers or service
deployments??
Thanks
Ronak
|
By
Ronak Banka
·
#4918
·
|
|
Re: Team
Thank You all .. for responding ..
my whole idea is to simplify
Large Market place
Service/Plan visibility
Billing and offering
self hosted or SaaS providers
by taking market place as separate
Thank You all .. for responding ..
my whole idea is to simplify
Large Market place
Service/Plan visibility
Billing and offering
self hosted or SaaS providers
by taking market place as separate
|
By
Amulya Sharma <amulya.sharma@...>
·
#4917
·
|
|
Re: How are you using HAProxy in cf-release?
I've seen more than a few references over time to poor performance of TLS
termination at GoRouter vs. HAProxy - is this no longer the case? It's
probably the only reason I'd be concerned about taking
I've seen more than a few references over time to poor performance of TLS
termination at GoRouter vs. HAProxy - is this no longer the case? It's
probably the only reason I'd be concerned about taking
|
By
Aaron Huber
·
#4916
·
|
|
How are you using HAProxy in cf-release?
Hello,
To support the project wide goal of deploying CF as a collection of
composable releases, rather than one, the CF Routing team has extracted
Gorouter from cf-release into cf-routing-release. Of
Hello,
To support the project wide goal of deploying CF as a collection of
composable releases, rather than one, the CF Routing team has extracted
Gorouter from cf-release into cf-routing-release. Of
|
By
Shannon Coen
·
#4915
·
|
|
Buildpacks Checksum Site for Release Validation
Dear Cloud Foundry Users,
To help operators and users of Cloud Foundry establish a "chain of custody" for buildpacks, we have launched the following checksum
Dear Cloud Foundry Users,
To help operators and users of Cloud Foundry establish a "chain of custody" for buildpacks, we have launched the following checksum
|
By
David Jahn
·
#4914
·
|
|
Re: Proposal: Reducing State in Service Brokers - Service Broker API Enhancement
I think it's a great idea to help make SBs stateless if possible. I've even toyed with modifying service instance tags as the only place in CF API where arbitrary data can be stored (base64 encode the
I think it's a great idea to help make SBs stateless if possible. I've even toyed with modifying service instance tags as the only place in CF API where arbitrary data can be stored (base64 encode the
|
By
Dr Nic Williams <drnicwilliams@...>
·
#4913
·
|
|
Re: UX proposal App manifests improvements for Routes, open for review
Follow on - a discussion/reference of this thread/proposal turned up in
https://github.com/cloudfoundry/cli/issues/418 (New issue In manifest,
'no-hostname' clobbers 'host' or 'hosts')
Nic
--
Dr
Follow on - a discussion/reference of this thread/proposal turned up in
https://github.com/cloudfoundry/cli/issues/418 (New issue In manifest,
'no-hostname' clobbers 'host' or 'hosts')
Nic
--
Dr
|
By
Dr Nic Williams <drnicwilliams@...>
·
#4912
·
|
|
CVE-2016-3091 Diego log encoding vulnerability
CVE-2016-3091 Diego log encoding vulnerability
Severity
High
Vendor
Cloud Foundry Foundation
Versions Affected
-
Diego-release versions 0.1468.0 through 0.1470.0
Description
Due to how
CVE-2016-3091 Diego log encoding vulnerability
Severity
High
Vendor
Cloud Foundry Foundation
Versions Affected
-
Diego-release versions 0.1468.0 through 0.1470.0
Description
Due to how
|
By
Chip Childers <cchilders@...>
·
#4911
·
|
|
Removing nginx 1.8 from PHP Buildpack
The Buildpack team is planning to remove nginx 1.8 from the PHP Buildpack. 1.9 is currently the default version so this change will not affect default behavior.
The pull request for this change can
The Buildpack team is planning to remove nginx 1.8 from the PHP Buildpack. 1.9 is currently the default version so this change will not affect default behavior.
The pull request for this change can
|
By
David Jahn
·
#4910
·
|
|
Proposal: Reducing State in Service Brokers - Service Broker API Enhancement
Hello cf-dev,
I work on a team at Pivotal that builds lots of service brokers. We are currently working on broker that backs onto BOSH and want to move towards making it stateless. We have written a
Hello cf-dev,
I work on a team at Pivotal that builds lots of service brokers. We are currently working on broker that backs onto BOSH and want to move towards making it stateless. We have written a
|
By
Alex Ley
·
#4909
·
|
|
Re: Team
Sorry for the name misunderstanding... We use the word "marketplace", but not the term in CF.
The background is, firstly it is a public cloud, people use CF and the services provided by the CF; We
Sorry for the name misunderstanding... We use the word "marketplace", but not the term in CF.
The background is, firstly it is a public cloud, people use CF and the services provided by the CF; We
|
By
Layne Peng
·
#4908
·
|
|
Re: Team
Hi,
Marketplace is a CF things for CF so what is exaclty the problem you try to
solve ?
Hi,
Marketplace is a CF things for CF so what is exaclty the problem you try to
solve ?
|
By
Gwenn Etourneau
·
#4907
·
|
|
Re: Team
marketplace is CF ....
By
Gwenn Etourneau
·
#4906
·
|
|
Re: Team
Actually, we are creating the a service marketplace, and meet the same problem, too: when we add a new service from the service marketplace, it need to be registered in the CF side.
But with the
Actually, we are creating the a service marketplace, and meet the same problem, too: when we add a new service from the service marketplace, it need to be registered in the CF side.
But with the
|
By
Layne Peng
·
#4905
·
|
|
Re: How can we customized "404 Not Found"
How to reconcile these use cases:
Given one shared domain mycorp.com
And a wildcard route from that domain, *.mycorp.com
And an app mapped to the wildcard route that returns a 503
I expect that a
How to reconcile these use cases:
Given one shared domain mycorp.com
And a wildcard route from that domain, *.mycorp.com
And an app mapped to the wildcard route that returns a 503
I expect that a
|
By
Shannon Coen
·
#4904
·
|
|
Re: Brokered route services only receiving traffic for routes mapped to started apps
Inline
Shannon Coen
Product Manager, Cloud Foundry
Pivotal, Inc.
CC would not be involved with route registration. CC would send the route
and the app process ID (received from Diego) to the Routing
Inline
Shannon Coen
Product Manager, Cloud Foundry
Pivotal, Inc.
CC would not be involved with route registration. CC would send the route
and the app process ID (received from Diego) to the Routing
|
By
Shannon Coen
·
#4903
·
|
|
Re: Team
Hi Amulya,
Using cups for service binding has no down side because that is how
services are consumed if we ignore service broker.
Whole point of using service broker with cf is to consume service
Hi Amulya,
Using cups for service binding has no down side because that is how
services are consumed if we ignore service broker.
Whole point of using service broker with cf is to consume service
|
By
Ronak Banka
·
#4902
·
|
|
runtime-ci docker image EOL
Hey all,
*TL;DR: we have deprecated the runtime-ci Docker image, and will soon
delete it from Docker Hub.*
Thanks to Concourse, it's a cinch to build, maintain, and use Docker images
in your CI
Hey all,
*TL;DR: we have deprecated the runtime-ci Docker image, and will soon
delete it from Docker Hub.*
Thanks to Concourse, it's a cinch to build, maintain, and use Docker images
in your CI
|
By
CF Runtime
·
#4901
·
|
|
Re: Brokered route services only receiving traffic for routes mapped to started apps
Thanks a lot Shannon for your detailed response and sharing the routing
architecture plans. I realize the priorization of such effort remains a
challenge.
Out of curiosity, in step #6, how would CC
Thanks a lot Shannon for your detailed response and sharing the routing
architecture plans. I realize the priorization of such effort remains a
challenge.
Out of curiosity, in step #6, how would CC
|
By
Guillaume Berche
·
#4900
·
|