Skip to content

docs: add parent-child deployments and access levels section#22065

Draft
nedi-app[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
docs/add-parent-child-access-levels-section
Draft

docs: add parent-child deployments and access levels section#22065
nedi-app[bot] wants to merge 1 commit intomasterfrom
docs/add-parent-child-access-levels-section

Conversation

@nedi-app
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@nedi-app nedi-app bot commented Mar 27, 2026

Summary

This PR adds a new section to netdata-oss-limitations.md explaining how access levels work in parent-child streaming deployments:

  • Clarifies that parent-child streaming without Netdata Cloud uses Anonymous access level (sensitive functions blocked)
  • Explains that parent-child with Cloud claiming follows the authenticated user's access level (Community or Business)
  • Adds a comparison table showing the three scenarios and their capabilities
  • Includes a note distinguishing streaming API key authentication (for data transfer) vs Cloud authentication (for UI access)
  • Provides cross-reference to the parent-child deployment guide

Changes

  • Added "Parent-Child Deployments and Access Levels" section to docs/netdata-oss-limitations.md
  • Included comparison table for Anonymous, Community, and Business access in parent-child scenarios
  • Added explanatory note about streaming API keys vs Cloud authentication
  • Cross-referenced deployment-with-centralization-points.md

Audit Context

Session Query: "how does community differs from a parent-child set up with anonymous log in"

Decision Verdict: surgical_edit - Add documentation explaining the relationship between parent-child streaming architectures and Netdata access control levels, clarifying that streaming API keys don't unlock sensitive functions.


Summary by cubic

Adds a new “Parent-Child Deployments and Access Levels” section to docs/netdata-oss-limitations.md clarifying how access works in parent-child streaming setups. It covers Anonymous access without Cloud, Community/Business access when Cloud-claimed, includes a brief capabilities comparison, notes that streaming API keys don’t grant UI privileges, and links to the parent-child deployment guide.

Written for commit f402936. Summary will update on new commits.

- Explain access levels in parent-child streaming architectures
- Clarify distinction between streaming API keys and Cloud authentication
- Add comparison table showing Anonymous, Community, and Business access
- Include cross-reference to deployment-with-centralization-points.md
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@cubic-dev-ai cubic-dev-ai bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

No issues found across 1 file

Confidence score: 5/5

  • Automated review surfaced no issues in the provided summaries.
  • No files require special attention.
Architecture diagram
sequenceDiagram
    participant User as User / Browser
    participant Cloud as Netdata Cloud
    participant Parent as Parent Node
    participant Child as Child Node

    Note over Child, Parent: Data Streaming Flow
    Child->>Parent: NEW: Stream metrics (Auth via API Key)
    Note over Parent: Data stored but sensitive<br/>functions remain locked

    Note over User, Parent: Dashboard Access Flow
    alt Scenario: WITHOUT Netdata Cloud
        User->>Parent: Request local dashboard
        Parent->>Parent: CHANGED: Set access to "Anonymous"
        Parent-->>User: Metrics view (Sensitive functions BLOCKED)
    else Scenario: WITH Netdata Cloud (Claimed)
        User->>Cloud: Authenticate (Community/Business)
        Cloud->>Parent: NEW: Verify authenticated session
        Parent->>Parent: CHANGED: Unlock features based on Plan
        Parent-->>User: Full Dashboard (Sensitive functions UNLOCKED)
        opt Business Plan
            Parent->>Parent: NEW: Enable Dynamic Configuration
        end
    end
Loading

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant