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

Allow local (LAN) access to a device as a config option #216

Open
robmarcer opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 4 comments
Open

Allow local (LAN) access to a device as a config option #216

robmarcer opened this issue Dec 19, 2023 · 4 comments
Labels
customer request requested by customer feature-request New feature or request that needs to be turned into Epic/Story details needs-triage Needs looking at to decide what to do

Comments

@robmarcer
Copy link
Contributor

Description

As a backup to being able to access a device's editor from FlowFuse, it would be helpful to be able to access the editor directly.

This has been requested by this existing customer - https://app-eu1.hubspot.com/contacts/26586079/record/0-1/503903

This will allow a user to make changes to their flow in an emergency situation where their network connection to FlowFuse is unstable or offline.

We would need to consider how the local connection to these devices is secured.

I would suggest that local access is disabled by default but can be switched on by editing the device's device.yml

@robmarcer robmarcer added needs-triage Needs looking at to decide what to do feature-request New feature or request that needs to be turned into Epic/Story details customer request requested by customer labels Dec 19, 2023
@MarianRaphael
Copy link
Contributor

See FlowFuse/flowfuse#2855

@robmarcer
Copy link
Contributor Author

@joepavitt
Copy link
Contributor

Security is managed by FF OAuth, but a strong use case here is the ability to access the editor if the device has lost network connection. Open point of discussion here is how we handle the security of the offline access use case.

@ZJvandeWeg
Copy link
Member

My worries are around having multiple ways of achieving the same thing (editing flows) which do have different features available to them.

One of these customers linked wanted a stable URL to the editor. This issue doesn't service that request. Also, all edge cases point to the problem that we cannot both provide the service level users are used to AND be partition tolerant. cap theorem is pretty clear on that, and FlowFuse shouldn't jump through hoops to reinvent the wheel.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
customer request requested by customer feature-request New feature or request that needs to be turned into Epic/Story details needs-triage Needs looking at to decide what to do
Projects
Status: Next
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants