On Aug 29, 2012, at 10:49 AM, Arnau Bria wrote:
> On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 09:48:17 +0200
> Jan Just Keijser wrote:
>
>> Hi *,
> Hi Jan,
>
For info some months ago I 'Orphaned' the fedora branches of torque.
I will never build an EPEL7 branch of torque.
Any one who wants to take ownership of torque in Fedora and/or FedoraEPEL please get in touch.
>> Arnau Bria wrote:
>>> On Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:52:18 +0200
>>> Erekle Magradze wrote:
>>>
>>>
>> sorry to butt in so late , but it seems this thread is heading in the
>> direction of 'how can I run torque without munge' ; when EMI/EGI
>> switched to torque 2.5+ this was done to mitigate some security risks:
>>
>> https://rt.egi.eu/rt/Ticket/Display.html?id=2296
>> http://www.clusterresources.com/pipermail/torqueusers/2011-August/013184.html
>>
>> basically, any torque cluster is as secure as its worker nodes are -
>> compromise one worker node and you've got the whole torque cluster.
>> One way to mitigate this is to use munge. That's why the default EPEL
>> torque 2.5+ package has munge enabled. By disabling this you're
>> potentially making your site vulnerable to attacks from within - are
>> you sure this is a good idea?
>>
>> Security is a pain in the behind, but unfortunately necessary.
>
> From our side, we know it and will add it in the (near) future.
>
> We did few test with munge (at the beginning) and had some troubles, so
> we left it for some time (... till today). We have the munge integration
> in our agenda, but need some time.
>
>
>> regards,
> Cheers,
> Arnau
|