On Sat, Jan 7, 2017 at 12:43 AM, Merlijn Sebrechts < merlijn.sebrec...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Some questions, because this sounds like something perfect for us. > > Does this work on MAAS or only openstack? > > Does this mean that I can put the constraint "has to be connected to > network x" on an application and this will cause the container to be > connexted to that network? > > Any more info/docs on this feature? > > There is a little bit of documentation here: https://jujucharms.com/docs/2.0/charms-deploying#deploying-with-binding https://jujucharms.com/docs/2.0/charms-bundles#binding-endpoints-of-applications-within-a-bundle https://jujucharms.com/docs/2.0/network-spaces The feature is intended to be supported across all providers (MAAS, openstack, aws, etc). However, it does need a bit of implementation for each one, as we have to map our primitives into what that means on the given providers. The current work is focused on making the experience on MAAS very good, as Openstack charms deploying on MAAS is one of the first places where we're making heavy use of the feature. Our goal is to implement at least basic support for spaces across all providers for the 17.04 timeframe (so that you can request specific instances/applications to be only in a group of subnets that you've defined). Having containers supported on all providers is a bit of a stretch, as we have to worry more about how the provider has faked the network stack. We have support already for spaces and containers on MAAS in 2.0, however there has been some feedback that the particular implementation is non-ideal, which is why we're changing it a bit. (Specifically, in 2.0 we put containers into all spaces that the host is part of, the work we're doing is to only put them into the spaces that they need based on bindings and machine constraints.) John =:->
-- Juju-dev mailing list Juju-dev@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
