Supported LXD Providers

[Tom Barber]

Didn't know about AWS routing, interesting Rick! Although James is using
AWS afaik so maybe its regressed there.

Tom

--------------

Director Meteorite.bi - Saiku Analytics Founder
Tel: +44(0)5603641316

(Thanks to the Saiku community we reached our Kickstart
<http://kickstarter.com/projects/2117053714/saiku-reporting-interactive-report-designer/>
goal, but you can always help by sponsoring the project
<http://www.meteorite.bi/products/saiku/sponsorship>)

On 23 August 2016 at 14:45, Rick Harding <rick.harding at canonical.com> wrote:

> That looks like something interesting. :)
>
> Yes, the engineering team is working on adapting the Fan to public clouds
> as a first go at making sure containers can be routable ootb when using
> Juju. We'll just recently had a sprint scoping it out and see this as the
> solution to the problem your running into.
>
> As you note, in cases where the containers can get dhcp addresses on the
> same network as the hosts, it's not an issue. OpenStack (depending on
> config) and MAAS work this way and aren't an issue.
>
> At one point we had lxc container networking in AWS. I'm just
> bootstrapping to verify that this is still working properly in the latest
> 2.0 code and if not will file a bug that we've regressed in this.
>
> tl;dr
> containers should work with routing ootb on MAAS, OpenStack, and AWS. The
> team's working on leveraging the Fan for public clouds and other
> situations.
>
> On Tue, Aug 23, 2016 at 9:26 AM Tom Barber <tom at analytical-labs.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Possibly something like... https://wiki.ubuntu.com/FanNetworking ? :)
>>
>> --------------
>>
>> Director Meteorite.bi - Saiku Analytics Founder
>> Tel: +44(0)5603641316
>>
>> (Thanks to the Saiku community we reached our Kickstart
>> <http://kickstarter.com/projects/2117053714/saiku-reporting-interactive-report-designer/>
>> goal, but you can always help by sponsoring the project
>> <http://www.meteorite.bi/products/saiku/sponsorship>)
>>
>> On 23 August 2016 at 14:23, James Beedy <jamesbeedy at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mark,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the reply! Just to make sure I'm picking up what you are
>>> laying down, are you implying that Juju will soon support host <-> host
>>> container networking by supplying its own provider agnostic network fabric?
>>>
>>> ~James
>>>
>>> On Aug 23, 2016, at 4:29 AM, Mark Shuttleworth <mark at ubuntu.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> LXC/LXD should work everywhere, but *networking* to those containers is
>>> tricky. There is a dedicated team working on that problem, and we expect to
>>> ahve the ability to make and use LXC containers universally, soon.
>>>
>>> The remaining constraint will be that some charms try to modify their
>>> guest kernel, and that of course will be prevented in a container.
>>>
>>> Mark
>>>
>>> On 22/08/16 22:03, James Beedy wrote:
>>>
>>> Team,
>>>
>>> Question: What providers can Juju deploy LXD to?
>>>
>>> Answer: All of them.
>>>
>>> Question: What providers support Juju deployed LXD (juju deploy
>>> <application> --to lxd:0)?
>>>
>>> Answer: MAAS
>>>
>>>
>>> Problem: Juju can deploy LXD to all of the providers, but Juju can
>>> **REALLY** only provision LXD on MAAS. I get the impression that Juju is
>>> broken when I deploy applications to lxd on any provider other than MAAS.
>>>
>>> Proposed Solution: Disable `juju deploy <application> --to lxd:0` on
>>> providers which it is not supported.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Juju mailing list
>>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/
>>> mailman/listinfo/juju
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> Juju mailing list
>> Juju at lists.ubuntu.com
>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/
>> mailman/listinfo/juju
>>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/juju/attachments/20160823/7ccae51e/attachment.html>