Did you look at Project Calico? 2016-05-07 3:45 GMT+02:00 Bharath Ravi Kumar <reachb...@gmail.com>:
> Hi Zameer, > > Thanks for responding. I had reached out to user@ at the same time, but > haven't heard back. As for the specific feature in Aurora, since we're > still testing our internal system against various frameworks, I'd be > willing to try a patch to better evaluate the capability in question. > Looking forward to a response on user@aurora. > > On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Zameer Manji <zma...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Bharath, >> >> Aurora is currently adding support for arbitrary resources with this >> exact usecase in mind. The code isn't complete yet and it hasn't been tried >> out in production. I suggest reaching out to the user@ >> <http://aurora.apache.org/community/> for Aurora to get the latest >> update. >> >> On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 6:36 AM, Bharath Ravi Kumar <reachb...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I'm aware of mesos' IP-per-container capability and the authors' reasons >>> for not modeling an IP address as a resource on a host. However, for >>> operational simplicity, I prefer an implementation that does not interact >>> with multiple other services (e.g. an IPAM). I'm hence considering the >>> following approach: >>> >>> a) Model the IP addresses available on a host as resources. >>> b) Using the IP address (from the set) accepted by a framework, launch a >>> task using the docker containerizer, with the IP address selected by the >>> framework. >>> c) For tasks that are not resource intensive, fall back on port range >>> reservation and docker host mode networking. >>> >>> It appears that Marathon doesn't support arbitrary resources, but Apache >>> Aurora might(?) . I'd like to know if anyone else has attempted this >>> approach with either framework, any potential downsides to this approach, >>> and any alternatives that are similar to this. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Bharath >>> >>> -- >>> Zameer Manji >>> >>> >
