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.hard...@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 <t...@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 <jamesbe...@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 <m...@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@lists.ubuntu.com >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ >>> mailman/listinfo/juju >>> >>> >> -- >> Juju mailing list >> Juju@lists.ubuntu.com >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/ >> mailman/listinfo/juju >> >
-- Juju mailing list Juju@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju