2014-08-19 4:11 GMT+08:00 Eric Windisch <ewindi...@docker.com>: > > > > On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 8:49 AM, Jyoti Ranjan <jran...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I believe that everything can not go as a dock container. For e.g. >> >> 1. compute nodes >> 2. baremetal provisioning >> 3. L3 router etc >> > > Containers are a good solution for all of the above, for some value of > container. There is some terminology overloading here, however. >
Hi Eric, one more question, not quite understand what you mean for "Containers are a good solution for all of the above", you mean docker container can manage all of three above? How? Can you please show more details? Thanks! > > There are Linux namespaces, capability sets, and cgroups which may not be > appropriate for using around some workloads. These, however, are granular. > For instance, one may run a container without networking namespaces, > allowing the container to directly manipulate host networking. Such a > container would still see nothing outside its own chrooted filesystem, PID > namespace, etc. > > Docker in particular offers a number of useful features around filesystem > management, images, etc. These features make it easier to deploy and manage > systems, even if many of the "Linux containers" features are disabled for > one reason or another. > > -- > Regards, > Eric Windisch > > _______________________________________________ > OpenStack-dev mailing list > OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org > http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev > > -- Thanks, Jay
_______________________________________________ OpenStack-dev mailing list OpenStack-dev@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
