shykes

53 ms·

511.
by shykes 11y ago
Docker volumes are persistent. Docker never removes anything unless you ask it to, specifically to allow you to decide what is persistent and what isn't. It certainly has never removed volumes when containers stop using them. However D
512.
by shykes 11y ago
In case you're interested, the next version of Docker (1.7) supports multi-host networking and dynamic service discovery out of the box. The whole thing is pluggable and can use various distributed state backends (etcd, zookeeper etc)
513.
by shykes 12y ago
I think that the goal was to show that Microsoft already supports the Docker orchestration stack with its current products - and in doing so is laying the groundwork for integrating future Windows containers into that same stack.
514.
by shykes 12y ago
Yes, via the Docker-native orchestration tools: Swarm [1] and Compose [2]. [1] https://docs.docker.com/swarm/ [2] https://docs.docker.com/compose/
515.
by shykes 12y ago
The same guy (Darren aka "ibuildthecloud") is behind both projects. He is very prolific.
516.
Security at Docker(blog.docker.com)
4 points by shykes 12y ago|0 comments
517.
by shykes 12y ago
Basically it means 1) it's stable enough to be useful, 2) but not stable enough that we feel comfortable telling you to rely on it in production, and 3) the UI and integration into the rest of the Docker platform are susceptible to cha
518.
by shykes 12y ago
This could be an artifact of how these valuations are communicated, rather than the actual valuations. It's common for companies to not disclose their valuation when announcing funding, but for journalists to make assumptions based on
519.
by shykes 12y ago
Brandon, let me respectfully ask you 3 questions: 1) As you very well know, Docker is already working on cryptographic signature, federated DNS based namespace and simple hosting on object stores. If you "would like to see convergence&
520.
by shykes 12y ago
People visit HM for technical news, not drama. Taking this private is the polite thing to do.
521.
by shykes 12y ago
I'm happy to address any specific concerns you have about security. It's an important topic for me. In this particular comment I could only spot one specific criticism: the lack of built-in user segmentation, so I will talk about
522.
by shykes 12y ago
I think the problem is that we are talking about 2 different things. You want to access a particular piece of content without being forced to connect to a particular server. I want to avoid the same name designating completely different pie
523.
by shykes 12y ago
I totally agree that mirroring of official images should be easier, and right now it's an obstacle to easier production deployment. This is why it's important to have cryptographically signed, self-describing images. Then it becom
524.
by shykes 12y ago
> this is a the biggest usability problem with Docker to me the way it stands now > You can make this hard, and have it continue to annoy users I have to respectfully disagree. From my experience talking to many many Docker users,
525.
by shykes 12y ago
Can you explain why you disagree and why you think this is "doublespeak"?
526.
by shykes 12y ago
I totally agree that users should be given the freedom to choose their own path. For example that's why we added pluggable backends for storage and sandboxing very early, before even shipping 1.0 :) At the same time, I care a lot about
527.
by shykes 12y ago
User namespaces recently got merged into libcontainer (which is used as the default backend for sandboxing in Docker). There is 1 technical question left to resolve to enable it by default: how to abstract away the concept of UID mapping, a
528.
by shykes 12y ago
The split into smaller binaries is something I'm very open to. We just want to make sure the user experience doesn't get sacrificed. Here's a recent discussion thread on the subject: https://groups.google.com/
529.
by shykes 12y ago
I think the best way is to allow a "whitelist mode" where only an explicitly specified list of URLs are allowed to be reached. Everything else would be blocked by default. This should give ops the peace of mind they need. Note tha
530.
by shykes 12y ago
You are right that devicemapper (basically lvm snapshots for storage, used as an alternative to aufs/btrfs on many distros including Red Hat) has been a source of headaches for us. It is relatively obscure (we knew we were in trouble w
531.
by shykes 12y ago
I agree it's still an issue. Enterprise sysadmins should be allowed to block access to external registries, including Docker Hub. There is nothing contentious about it, and it has nothing to do with profit. If you send a properly imple
532.
by shykes 12y ago
We really wanted to, but there was a specific reason not to. I will ask our resident ipv6 expert to provide more details.
533.
by shykes 12y ago
Congratulations Luke and team! The ClusterHQ crew is great to work with, they really get what we're trying to do with Docker, and they're providing great feedback on the best way to help the Docker ecosystem be successful, instead
534.
by shykes 12y ago
Hi Tameir, thanks for taking the time for a thoughtful response. I disagree with many of your points and would like to offer a different perspective, could I interest you in a civil email conversation? You can reach me anytime at solomon@do
535.
Official IRSSI Docker image(registry.hub.docker.com)
4 points by shykes 12y ago|0 comments
536.
by shykes 12y ago
I'm not sure what to reply in the face of so much bile. Hacker News used to be the home of people who built cool stuff and wanted to show it to each other. Now it's the home of people like you. Docker and CoreOS might be competito
537.
by shykes 12y ago
My understanding is that Docker's lack of an open specification was advertised as a primary motivation for rocket. So it seemed relevant to point out efforts by Docker to provide such a specification. The reason the specification docum
538.
by shykes 12y ago
Here's the open specification for Docker's standard format: https://github.com/docker/docker/blob/master/image/spec/v1.m...
539.
by shykes 12y ago
veth pairs are a reasonable default for simple single-host connectivity (it's the default for Docker, for example). But for high-throughput production deployments where latency matters, you may need to look at other options. This is wh
540.
by shykes 12y ago
Don't worry, we believe in small composable tools, for example we are planning to break up Docker into more discrete binaries. So we're not about to bundle systemd into every Docker installation ;)

More ›