From owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org Tue Jan 22 19:48:23 2019 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-virtualization@mailman.ysv.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.ysv.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A1F5914ACF91 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:48:23 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from msa1.earth.yoonka.com (yoonka.com [88.98.225.149]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client CN "msa1.earth.yoonka.com", Issuer "msa1.earth.yoonka.com" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69FA36C635 for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:48:22 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Received: from crayon2.yoonka.com (crayon2.yoonka.com [10.70.7.20]) (authenticated bits=0) by msa1.earth.yoonka.com (8.15.2/8.15.2) with ESMTPSA id x0MJmKZH045698 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128 verify=NO) for ; Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:48:20 GMT (envelope-from list1@gjunka.com) Subject: Re: The status of docker To: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org References: <089e330d-2761-2440-3b7f-dd22e9088af5@gjunka.com> <9A01020A-7CC6-4893-A425-11A7BF736F4E@ultra-secure.de> <42f59b63-fdc7-306f-d836-83533741a86c@FreeBSD.org> From: Grzegorz Junka Message-ID: <5c926314-adce-dba1-f5ce-2fda35e1aeba@gjunka.com> Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:48:20 +0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:60.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/60.3.2 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Language: en-GB-large X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 69FA36C635 X-Spamd-Bar: ------ Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; spf=pass (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of list1@gjunka.com designates 88.98.225.149 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=list1@gjunka.com X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-6.95 / 15.00]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; R_SPF_ALLOW(-0.20)[+ip4:88.98.225.149]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_ALL(0.00)[]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; PREVIOUSLY_DELIVERED(0.00)[freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org]; TO_DN_NONE(0.00)[]; RCPT_COUNT_ONE(0.00)[1]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-1.00)[-1.000,0]; DMARC_NA(0.00)[gjunka.com]; MX_GOOD(-0.01)[cached: gjunka.com]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-1.00)[-0.995,0]; IP_SCORE(-3.64)[ip: (-9.53), ipnet: 88.98.192.0/18(-4.77), asn: 56478(-3.81), country: GB(-0.09)]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:56478, ipnet:88.98.192.0/18, country:GB]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2] X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Discussion of various virtualization techniques FreeBSD supports." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2019 19:48:24 -0000 On 22/01/2019 08:28, Patrick M. Hausen wrote: > Good morning, > >> Am 22.01.2019 um 03:57 schrieb Craig Rodrigues : >> I hope I am wrong, but unfortunately I think getting Docker to work on >> natively on FreeBSD is ultimately a losing battle, >> unless you can get a team of several developers to work on it full time. > I have the same gut feeling, but unless somebody actually tries, we can’t > tell for sure, can we? ;-) > > Thanks for making the effort. > > Now what I wanted to throw in: possibly getting in touch with some of the > people at Joyent who implemented Docker support for Illumos/Solaris > zones might help: > > https://www.joyent.com/blog/triton-docker-and-the-best-of-all-worlds I think the question is how much should be implemented by a freebsd port and how much should come from the native linux/docker implementation. There are two extremes: 1. Linux in bhyve, docker is running completely in Linux environment 2. A docker container in a jail with no native linux kernel, docker is running completely in FreeBSD environment 1 is the least convenient because it requires all the hurdles related to setting up a bhyve host, including proper network configuration for containers and pre-allocating disk space. But it also requires no implementation in freebsd-related docker ports apart from maybe adding support to docker tools, like docker-machine for example 2 would be most convenient but also most difficult as all smallest docker features would need to be ported natively to FreeBSD I believe docker and freebsd-docker ports were trying different approaches somewhere in between these extremes. Maybe the correct approach would be to start with 1 and make running docker in bhyve as convenient as possible, then slowly move to 2 as much as interest/resources allow? GrzegorzJ