> On Jan. 15, 2016, 6 a.m., Cong Wang wrote:
> > Why do we need netcls to regulate framework traffic on a per-container 
> > basis? Given the fact that a) the port range based filters already work and 
> > the code (see egress fq_codel) already exists b) we only have port range 
> > based network isolation so far.
> > 
> > I see no point of this. Please describe your use case with details, just 
> > pointing to netcls kernel doc doesn't help at all.
> 
> Cong Wang wrote:
>     Since no one answers this, I assume no one in Mesosphere actually 
> understands it... So looks like you are pushing something no one is actually 
> going to use.
> 
> Avinash sridharan wrote:
>     The egress_fq_codel that you are pointing too (I am assuming this is the 
> jira you are refferring to https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-2422) 
> needs port mapping isolator to enforce QoS on any egress traffic 
> shaping/policing, and for that matter any network policy enforcement.  
>     
>     The net_cls cgroup is a linux kernel construct that allows operators to 
> support traffic shapping/policing and any network policy enforcement using 
> existing networking tools like tc and iptables. By enabling net_cls cgroup it 
> gives mesos a more generalized way of allowing operators to enforce network 
> policy irrespective of whether the task is running in the global namespace or 
> in a specific network namespace. In other words it will allow network policy 
> enforcement to take place irrespective of the type of network isolator you 
> are using. For e.g., if someone wants to use ip-per-container (MESOS-2044) vs 
> the port mapping isolator, operators would still be able to perform policy 
> enforcement without relying on the network isolator to provide those 
> constructs.
> 
> Cong Wang wrote:
>     True, I know what netcls is more than you do, but you just ignore the 
> fact that we _only_ have port mapping isolator in our _current_ code, that is 
> my whole point. We can always add this _after_ ip-per-container work is 
> merged in upstream, it is never too late.
>     
>     No need to mention this is hard to work together with the fq_codel 
> filters on egress. This is why I ask for more details, but you still don't 
> give any detail so far.

Cong, we already have other network isolators (e.g., Calico has one for ip per 
container) through modules. I don't think the operator will allow two network 
isolators to co-exists in production so I am not so worried about the egress 
filter conflicts.


- Jie


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/42047/#review114665
-----------------------------------------------------------


On Jan. 20, 2016, 5:05 a.m., Avinash sridharan wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/42047/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated Jan. 20, 2016, 5:05 a.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4262
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4262
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Specified the CgroupsNetClsIsolatorProcess class. This adds the ability to 
> isolate a mesos container using the net_cls cgroup subsystem.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/CMakeLists.txt a52203ab9aa47315e6e5c58cc283a7b5df597c76 
>   src/Makefile.am 4fabe600d4ba38c95a777d622b0b675dd5811a53 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/cgroups/net_cls.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/cgroups/net_cls.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/42047/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Avinash sridharan
> 
>

Reply via email to