Swanil, I concur and want to keep both options for Mesos and Docker networking available, and putting the configuration for both in should be a priority. However, one has to be careful with this as the NM's register with the RM via heartbeats with their container port (Not the host port), this isn't an issue if NM and RM are in the same Docker Network, via Weave or Kubernetes but is with simple bridged networking. We also have to be careful as Myriad currently doesn't run HDFS itself so we'd lose data locality. My idea was the start with Host Networking so we could make Myriad easier to deploy but leave room to add additional networking options: basically exposing all the protobuf options for Docker Parameters (used to configure docker networking) and NetworkInfo (used to configure Mesos networking).
Darin On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 2:48 PM, Swapnil Daingade <sdaing...@maprtech.com> wrote: > Hi Darin, > > I feel docker networking is something we should spent time to think > through. > A user should be able to use multiple options provided by Mesos, Docker, > 3rd party etc > > It would be great if we can abstract the specific implementation to provide > container ip addresses behind interfaces. User should be able to switch > implementations by making simple changes in configuration files. > > Regards > Swapnil > > > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 8:20 AM, Darin Johnson <dbjohnson1...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Swapnil, > > > > Any help would be appreciated. I'll try to write up what I'm working on > > tomorrow. But essentially the ideas are: > > 1. Ability to launch the resource manager and node managers in docker > > containers > > 2. Use host networking for now (Ports configured to be pulled from mesos > - > > ability to use ports reserved by role), but leave hooks to easily add IP > > per container. > > 3. Ability to get configuration files for a URI > > 4. Ability to mount local volumes for local directories in the shuffle > > phase etc (though will require more config). > > > > Darin > > >
