Hacker News Reader

Comment by smetj | Hacker News Reader

Certainly for SSH I find this a bad idea. If you need to ssh into a troubled machine then it might very well be it cannot be started.

View on HN

I don't necessarily think it's an outright bad idea, but it's certainly a departure from how sshd is traditionally run, and without awareness of this kind of change, this kind of "magic" runtime change could lead you to not expecting sshd to be unavailable in this kind of a scenario, and increase time to resolution during an incident.

If your systems are more pets than cattle, then I think I too would prefer an always-running ssh daemon. If your workflow is only to ssh into machines during bootstrap, however, then having sshd run only during initial bootstrap and then shut itself off does seem like a nice way to free up a small amount of resources without stopping or disabling the daemon post-bootstrap.

If it's so troubled that a process won't start, it's probably time to reach for the IPMI console. Even if ssh is still running, if the system is that broken, is bash going to start, or what tools you might need?

I've rescued pretty messed up systems before. In one case, a service went haywire and created tens of millions of <1kb files, eating up all the available inodes in the filesystem. The volume was only ~45% full, but you couldn't make any new files. If that happened here, it's unlikely the ssh process could start correctly since it creates locks, logs, and pid files. Those are mostly in /run, so it might be okay, but it does make me a bit antsy.

TBH - for any non-server class machine on my network, I'm fine with that.

SSH should probably be running 24/7 on any server(to keep those resources allocated for maintenance access), but if it's my workstation with a monitor - then it's a non-issue.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com