Whats the right way to budget & access control - users vs teams vs virtual key of master user?

[Chan9390]

LiteLLM has Teams and Internal Users and virtual keys can be associated with both.

Talking about budget, you can add budget at global proxy, team, team users, internal users and virtual keys.

While there's a lot of flexibility, there's confusion on what to do when.

If my goal is to budget for every customer I have, what should I do?

• Create virtual key for master user and associate budgets to them?
• Create teams and add individual team member and set budgets to the team members?
• Create teams, add team members, add virtual keys to each team member and set budgets to them?

What are the pros and cons of each?

Will virtual keys of master user have permissions to access some resources that team members don't have?

Will virtual keys belonging to a team be able to access something in the team (like chat history or similar), etc?

[ejblom]

He Chan9390, did you ever figure this out? I am experiencing the same issue where a budget for an user is not respected when the user is inside a team.

[edit]
btw, i've tested somewhat further. The team budget that can be set for a user is also not used. At least you can track the budget used by a user using the LiteLLM_EndUserTable in postgres.

[ishaan-jaff]

Well when a user is inside a team their Team budget is respected. What is the behavior you want here ?

[theptrk]

I sometimes have users as part of multiple teams.
In that case, is the budget of the user or the team respected (and which team?)

[ishaan-jaff]

If my goal is to budget for every customer I have, what should I do?

Then you should use the concept of customers and set budgets on customers/end users https://docs.litellm.ai/docs/proxy/customers

The concept of Teams, Users is mostly for Enterprise Deployments where each Team is a team at a company