Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

rfc: genpolicy on diverse platforms #761

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2024
Merged

rfc: genpolicy on diverse platforms #761

merged 1 commit into from
Aug 5, 2024

Conversation

burgerdev
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@burgerdev burgerdev added the no changelog PRs not listed in the release notes label Jul 26, 2024
@burgerdev burgerdev requested a review from katexochen as a code owner July 26, 2024 07:35
Copy link
Member

@katexochen katexochen left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks for writing this down!

rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
Copy link
Contributor

@msanft msanft left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks a lot for writing this!

rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
rfc/006-genpolicy-platforms.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

### Bundle both Microsoft's and Kata's tool

While this approach seems easiest on the surface, it's going to explode the size of the CLI binary, which is already significant.
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I see the second point, but I think there could be ways around a large CLI (e.g. by sourcing static builds of these tools at runtime, only for the required platform)

Just a note though, not advocating against your proposal

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

There's also other drawbacks, like increased TCB etc., but given the other arguments against it I don't think I need to add workarounds to the proposal text.

Co-authored-by: Moritz Sanft <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Paul Meyer <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Moritz Eckert <[email protected]>
Copy link
Member

@m1ghtym0 m1ghtym0 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thanks!

@Freax13 Freax13 removed their request for review August 1, 2024 09:44
@burgerdev burgerdev merged commit a4907cf into main Aug 5, 2024
6 checks passed
@burgerdev burgerdev deleted the rfc/006 branch August 5, 2024 12:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
no changelog PRs not listed in the release notes
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants