Open Stack

2014-08-19 4:11 GMT+08:00 Eric Windisch <ewindisch at docker.com>:

>
>
>
> On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Jyoti Ranjan <jranjan at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I believe that everything can not go as a dock container. For e.g.
>>
>> 1. compute nodes
>> 2. baremetal provisioning
>> 3. L3 router etc
>>
>
> Containers are a good solution for all of the above, for some value of
> container. There is some terminology overloading here, however.
>

Hi Eric, one more question, not quite understand what you mean for
"Containers are a good solution for all of the above", you mean docker
container can manage all of three above? How? Can you please show more
details? Thanks!

>
> There are Linux namespaces, capability sets, and cgroups which may not be
> appropriate for using around some workloads. These, however, are granular.
> For instance, one may run a container without networking namespaces,
> allowing the container to directly manipulate host networking. Such a
> container would still see nothing outside its own chrooted filesystem, PID
> namespace, etc.
>
> Docker in particular offers a number of useful features around filesystem
> management, images, etc. These features make it easier to deploy and manage
> systems, even if many of the "Linux containers" features are disabled for
> one reason or another.
>
> --
> Regards,
> Eric Windisch
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-dev mailing list
> OpenStack-dev at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
>


-- 
Thanks,

Jay
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20140819/28ef4207/attachment.html>