Re: [kubernetes-users] Pod that creates other Pods using the kubernetes API

2017-05-19 Thread Rodrigo Campos
On Friday, May 19, 2017, wrote: > On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:29:49 PM UTC+1, Rodrigo Campos wrote: > > On Friday, May 19, 2017, > wrote: > > > > > > > > I did look into init containers, and the reason why I feel init > containers cannot be used is because there will be good amount of business

[kubernetes-users] Re: SIG-Azure proposal

2017-05-19 Thread
I am -1 on this overall. I think sig-cloud would be better, with provider-specific sub-groups. On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Tim Hockin wrote: > you can label for area/platform/azure > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:43 PM, 'Eric Tune' via Kubernetes > developer/contributor discussion > wrote: >

[kubernetes-users] Re: SIG-Azure proposal

2017-05-19 Thread
you can label for area/platform/azure On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:43 PM, 'Eric Tune' via Kubernetes developer/contributor discussion wrote: > I was just triaging new issues today and I wanted to label one sig/azure, > but I can't (yet). > > On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:42 PM, jack quincy wrote: >> >>

[kubernetes-users] Re: SIG-Azure proposal

2017-05-19 Thread
I was just triaging new issues today and I wanted to label one sig/azure, but I can't (yet). On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:42 PM, jack quincy wrote: > +1 > > On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 6:14:18 AM UTC-7, Jason Singer DuMars wrote: > >> All, >> >> I'd like to revive the effort to create >>

[kubernetes-users] Re: SIG-Azure proposal

2017-05-19 Thread jack quincy
+1 On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 6:14:18 AM UTC-7, Jason Singer DuMars wrote: > > All, > > I'd like to revive the effort to create > > > SIG-Azure that was referenced in both this >

[kubernetes-users] Re: SIG-Azure proposal

2017-05-19 Thread Jack Francis
+1 On Monday, May 15, 2017 at 6:14:18 AM UTC-7, Jason Singer DuMars wrote: > > All, > > I'd like to revive the effort to create > > > SIG-Azure that was referenced in both this >

Re: [kubernetes-users] kubernetes headless service FQDN for pods

2017-05-19 Thread Brandon Philips
Hrm, the svc.namespace resolution _should_ work. Can you test the zk-2.zk-headless record? See the troubleshooting tips on this page for how: https://kubernetes.io/docs/concepts/services-networking/dns-pod-service/ If you can't get those instructions to work we there are some more DNS / networking

[kubernetes-users] kubernetes headless service FQDN for pods

2017-05-19 Thread george . pucea
Hello everybody, I was following the kubernetes tutorial from here https://kubernetes.io/docs/tutorials/stateful-application/zookeeper/. The tutorial is great and I was able to run it successfully. However, I tried to reproduce the steps of running zookeeper using a separate namespace. First,

Re: [kubernetes-users] Pod that creates other Pods using the kubernetes API

2017-05-19 Thread morpheyesh
On Friday, May 19, 2017 at 1:29:49 PM UTC+1, Rodrigo Campos wrote: > On Friday, May 19, 2017, wrote: > Hello all, > > > > > > I am super new to kubernetes and I have a usecase where I would need to > deploy a specific container(app) which does the following steps.. > > > > a) does some o

Re: [kubernetes-users] Pod that creates other Pods using the kubernetes API

2017-05-19 Thread Rodrigo Campos
On Friday, May 19, 2017, wrote: > Hello all, > > > I am super new to kubernetes and I have a usecase where I would need to > deploy a specific container(app) which does the following steps.. > > a) does some operations(business logic) > b) need to build an image from a Dockerfile and publish to >

[kubernetes-users] Pod that creates other Pods using the kubernetes API

2017-05-19 Thread morpheyesh
Hello all, I am super new to kubernetes and I have a usecase where I would need to deploy a specific container(app) which does the following steps.. a) does some operations(business logic) b) need to build an image from a Dockerfile and publish to registry(through API) c) deploy POD(s) with th

Re: [kubernetes-users] Flannel and master-to-slave node communication problems

2017-05-19 Thread Adieu
Hi Sonic, I think the FORWARD chain might drop your packets sent to flannel. > > Chain FORWARD (policy DROP) > target prot opt source destination > DOCKER-ISOLATION all -- anywhere anywhere > ACCEPT all -- anywhere anywhere ctstate >