> On March 11, 2016, 7:28 p.m., Jie Yu wrote:
> > src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.cpp, lines 177-181
> > <https://reviews.apache.org/r/44555/diff/1/?file=1293049#file1293049line177>
> >
> >     Again, this check should be removed to support containers that do not 
> > specify NetworkInfo.
> 
> Qian Zhang wrote:
>     We do support containers that do not specify NetworkInfo, please take a 
> look at the diff of https://reviews.apache.org/r/44514/, in `prepare()`, if 
> the container does not specify NetworkInfo, then it will not do anything 
> (just a no-op) and subsequently `isolate()` will not do anything for this 
> kind of container too.
>     
>     So my idea is, if operator decides to use `network/cni` isolator, then 
> s/he must specify CNI network configuration and plugin which should be 
> acceptable since CNI isolator needs CNI network configuration and plugin 
> sounds a reasonable requirement to me. But for framework, they do not have to 
> launch container to join CNI network, if they do not want a container to join 
> any CNI networks, then just do not specify NetworkInfo or specify NetworkInfo 
> without `name` field, we should definitly support it.
> 
> Avinash sridharan wrote:
>     I agree with Qian on this.  If the `network/cni` isolator is being used 
> then we "must" have associated network configs. If frameworks don't want to 
> use the cni network they can opt-out by not setting anything in the `name` 
> field for `NetworkInfo`.

ok, what I am thinking is that we made network/cni isolator the default network 
isolator (like the default filesystem isolator). I think we need a network 
isolator anyway because imagine a situation where no network isolator is 
specified, but the framework specifies a name in the NetworkInfo, in that case, 
we don't have a way to reject this task. Therefore, we can either build a 
default network isolator which does nothing but reject containers that specify 
networkInfo.name, or we make network/cni isolator the default, and use it even 
if no cni plugins are specified by the operator (in that case, it'll also 
reject any containers the specify a networkinfo.name). Does that make sense?


- Jie


-----------------------------------------------------------
This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
https://reviews.apache.org/r/44555/#review123192
-----------------------------------------------------------


On March 15, 2016, 3:02 p.m., Qian Zhang wrote:
> 
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> This is an automatically generated e-mail. To reply, visit:
> https://reviews.apache.org/r/44555/
> -----------------------------------------------------------
> 
> (Updated March 15, 2016, 3:02 p.m.)
> 
> 
> Review request for mesos, Avinash sridharan, Gilbert Song, and Jie Yu.
> 
> 
> Bugs: MESOS-4759
>     https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-4759
> 
> 
> Repository: mesos
> 
> 
> Description
> -------
> 
> Implemented the framework and create() method of "network/cni" isolator.
> 
> 
> Diffs
> -----
> 
>   src/CMakeLists.txt 0517dd1ae7125ac1ae85cc83b6daaca66a10b8b4 
>   src/Makefile.am 7ee5a653fc96907021f14ab28f74c0b3ed0649d9 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.hpp PRE-CREATION 
>   src/slave/containerizer/mesos/isolators/network/cni.cpp PRE-CREATION 
> 
> Diff: https://reviews.apache.org/r/44555/diff/
> 
> 
> Testing
> -------
> 
> make check
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Qian Zhang
> 
>

Reply via email to