From owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Fri Jul 24 23:30:36 2020 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-questions@mailman.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mailman.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 256AF377025 for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:30:36 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) Received: from gromit.dlib.vt.edu (gromit.dlib.vt.edu [128.173.49.70]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "gromit.dlib.vt.edu", Issuer "Chumby Certificate Authority" (not verified)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4BD56M1DmXz4QPp for ; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:30:35 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu) Received: from gromit.gromit23.net (c-98-244-101-97.hsd1.va.comcast.net [98.244.101.97]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by gromit.dlib.vt.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5B47630C; Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:30:34 -0400 (EDT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 12.4 \(3445.104.15\)) Subject: Re: Technological advantages over Linux From: Paul Mather In-Reply-To: <20200724185605.598068c18440361a173b4e60@sohara.org> Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 19:30:33 -0400 Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: <3621691B-7397-4E96-BB2C-30DB13C4F59D@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> References: <20E68F58-D924-4EE5-8919-93E27FDF94C4@gromit.dlib.vt.edu> <20200724185605.598068c18440361a173b4e60@sohara.org> To: Steve O'Hara-Smith X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.104.15) X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4BD56M1DmXz4QPp X-Spamd-Bar: - Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="No valid SPF, No valid DKIM" header.from=vt.edu (policy=none); spf=none (mx1.freebsd.org: domain of paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu has no SPF policy when checking 128.173.49.70) smtp.mailfrom=paul@gromit.dlib.vt.edu X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-1.32 / 15.00]; RCVD_VIA_SMTP_AUTH(0.00)[]; ARC_NA(0.00)[]; MID_RHS_MATCH_FROM(0.00)[]; FROM_HAS_DN(0.00)[]; TO_DN_SOME(0.00)[]; MV_CASE(0.50)[]; NEURAL_HAM_LONG(-0.91)[-0.905]; MIME_GOOD(-0.10)[text/plain]; NEURAL_HAM_MEDIUM(-0.72)[-0.722]; RECEIVED_SPAMHAUS_PBL(0.00)[98.244.101.97:received]; TO_MATCH_ENVRCPT_SOME(0.00)[]; NEURAL_HAM_SHORT(-0.20)[-0.198]; RCPT_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; R_SPF_NA(0.00)[no SPF record]; FROM_EQ_ENVFROM(0.00)[]; R_DKIM_NA(0.00)[]; MIME_TRACE(0.00)[0:+]; ASN(0.00)[asn:1312, ipnet:128.173.0.0/16, country:US]; RCVD_COUNT_TWO(0.00)[2]; RCVD_TLS_ALL(0.00)[]; DMARC_POLICY_SOFTFAIL(0.10)[vt.edu : No valid SPF, No valid DKIM,none] X-BeenThere: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.33 Precedence: list List-Id: User questions List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 24 Jul 2020 23:30:36 -0000 On Jul 24, 2020, at 1:56 PM, Steve O'Hara-Smith = wrote: > On Fri, 24 Jul 2020 12:00:16 -0400 > Paul Mather wrote: >=20 >> Whenever Docker comes up, it seems to me that in the FreeBSD world = the >> cry that goes up is "they're just like jails." In my experience, = though, >> FreeBSD jails are more heavyweight than Docker containers. Jails in >> FreeBSD are more analogous to using LXD in Linux---lightweight OS >> virtualisation. >=20 > I think you mean LXC in Linux - Docker the engine is a built on = top > of LXC and filesystem layering. These days LXC is fronted by = containerd in > Docker which I believe allows for using other container technologies. No, I meant LXD (https://linuxcontainers.org/lxd/), but I admit my use = was confusing (as LXD !=3D Docker). I was using LXD as an example in = the Linux world of what iocage or ezjail or Bastile or pot or cbsd would = be in the FreeBSD world---as a framework for managing lightweight OS = servers. In other words, to me, LXD is closer in spirit (more so than = Docker) to the way jails are used and managed by tools like iocage et = al. in FreeBSD. I agree that LXC is the basis of containers in Linux. LXD itself is = just a management tool over LXC. >> (What you say sounds like LXD OS containers to me.) What people want >=20 > LXC =3D=3D jails. Docker is a layer built on top of LXC and = layered > VFS mounts. It is perfectly possible to build something like Docker on = top > of jails, it is probably even possible to make Docker use jails. Of = course > the library of LXC based images would be useless but the stack on up = to > swarm and Kubernetes would all work. It would be nice to make Docker use jails. I agree, the existing = LXC-based images would be unusable (though not all LXC images are built = and available for all architectures supported by LXC---most are for = x86), but like Docker Windows Containers, an ecosystem for = FreeBSD-compatible Docker containers could emerge. (And, with a bhyve = plugin for docker-machine, all the LXC images would be useful.) The = limitation is likely not technological but one of community and support. Cheers, Paul.