Hi Martin,
On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 2:09 PM, Martin Lucina wrote:
> Hi Nikhil,
>
> On Tuesday, 12.06.2018 at 13:47, nikhil ap wrote:
> > > I'm not sure what you mean. What selection of modules gets complied
> > > in/enabled for a tender would be up to the operator of that tender to
> > >
Hi Nikhil,
On Tuesday, 12.06.2018 at 13:47, nikhil ap wrote:
> > I'm not sure what you mean. What selection of modules gets complied
> > in/enabled for a tender would be up to the operator of that tender to
> > determine as a policy decision. The tender would then, based on
> > interpreting the
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 5:56 PM, Martin Lucina wrote:
> Hi Nikhil,
>
> On Monday, 11.06.2018 at 16:10, nikhil ap wrote:
> > I'm not familiar with MirageOS. I need to look at how it works.
> > Although, this implies that we need to change the tooling for every
> > unikernel we
Hi Nikhil,
On Monday, 11.06.2018 at 16:10, nikhil ap wrote:
> I'm not familiar with MirageOS. I need to look at how it works.
> Although, this implies that we need to change the tooling for every
> unikernel we support.
That's correct.
> For ex, MirageOS, IncludeOS, Rumprun etc. Also, whenever
Hi Martin,
On Mon, Jun 11, 2018 at 2:48 PM, Martin Lucina wrote:
> Hi Nikhil,
>
> On Monday, 11.06.2018 at 10:15, nikhil ap wrote:
> > > The issue is not so much working out what the guest-side API (i.e.
> that in
> > > solo5.h) should be, but keeping the conceptual integrity of how Solo5
> > >
Hi Nikhil,
On Monday, 11.06.2018 at 10:15, nikhil ap wrote:
> > The issue is not so much working out what the guest-side API (i.e. that in
> > solo5.h) should be, but keeping the conceptual integrity of how Solo5
> > (kernel/bindings), ukvm (monitor/tender) and application (unikernel) fit
> >
Hi Martin,
Thanks for the detailed explanation. I have few questions & thoughts.
Please see inline.
On Wed, May 30, 2018 at 11:17 PM, Martin Lucina wrote:
> Hi Nikhil,
>
> On Tuesday, 22.05.2018 at 13:18, nikhil ap wrote:
> > Currently solo5/ukvm supports only one NIC. I wanted to know your
>
Hi Nikhil,
On Tuesday, 22.05.2018 at 13:18, nikhil ap wrote:
> Currently solo5/ukvm supports only one NIC. I wanted to know your thoughts
> on supporting multiple NICs. This is really important and essential
> requirement when trying to run on IncludeOS unikernels which is heavily
> focused on
Hi guys,
Currently solo5/ukvm supports only one NIC. I wanted to know your thoughts
on supporting multiple NICs. This is really important and essential
requirement when trying to run on IncludeOS unikernels which is heavily
focused on networking and NFV.
After talking to Ricardo, I understand
