Expanding a bit, internal communication between services and units isn't along defined channels/ports by the charm, so in effect without vpc you'll need a separate network overlay (ala tinc or gre) which has some overhead. Its much more efficient to just use the provider (aws) network abstractions that directly map interface/addresses onto the containers. For some restricted set of use cases, ie http app containers, a name virtual host proxy (hipache, nginx/redis, etc) could do some of the work but again thats probably coordination and port forwarding (host port to container) that's outside of juju.
-k On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:46 AM, Kapil Thangavelu < [email protected]> wrote: > Theoretically yes, in juju probably not. > > > On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Mike Sam <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Sure, no worries, thank you for clarifying this. >> >> I am curious, in terms of lxc work on general ec2 and not vpc, is this >> going to be doable at all? >> >> >> On Oct 7, 2013, at 1:43 AM, William Reade <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> Hi Mike >> >> I'm sorry, it looks like we never hooked up the early validation that >> would have told you it wouldn't work right now. It's my fault -- it >> languished in review a bit, and I didn't think through the consequences of >> leaving it out. At the moment containerization only works against the MAAS >> provider. >> >> Cheers >> William >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 10:08 AM, Mike Sam <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> the command >>> >>> juju deploy --to lxc:1 >>> >>> on 1.15.1 worked for me and the lxc is running on the machine when I ssh >>> to it but did not check if the actual unit has been deployed on it or not. >>> Are you saying the accessibility is not supported yet? >>> >>> >>> On Oct 7, 2013, at 12:49 AM, John Arbash Meinel <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> > Hash: SHA1 >>> > >>> > On 2013-10-07 11:47, Mike Sam wrote: >>> >> Thanks. This is actually for when I have deployed a unit on ec2 >>> >> machine but within a new lxc on that machine so not for local. Does >>> >> this still apply? I am not quite sure how these network bridges >>> >> need to be configured so if anybody is familiar with their setup >>> >> and how to access the units within them through the machine public >>> >> ip, I would really appreciate that. >>> > >>> > We don't currently support using an LXC on EC2 because we don't have a >>> > way to route to the LXC machine. We are looking to add support with >>> > VPC to allow you to request an IP address for the LXC container. >>> > >>> > John >>> > =:-> >>> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- >>> > Version: GnuPG v1.4.13 (Cygwin) >>> > Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ >>> > >>> > iEYEARECAAYFAlJSZ3oACgkQJdeBCYSNAAOjTwCgqxLMn5YldsauJ4WpfrtODTZ5 >>> > 3HwAnjtUhtQ9zUKvJLgtDNYw9Io0Ev+r >>> > =g0jC >>> > -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- >>> >>> -- >>> Juju-dev mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >>> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >>> >> >> >> -- >> Juju-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> Modify settings or unsubscribe at: >> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev >> >> >
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
