From nobody Fri Feb 02 12:30:03 2024 X-Original-To: freebsd-virtualization@mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2610:1c1:1:606c::19:1]) by mlmmj.nyi.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4TRFV15c5Kz58fmf for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 12:30:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aimass@yabarana.com) Received: from mail-il1-x12b.google.com (mail-il1-x12b.google.com [IPv6:2607:f8b0:4864:20::12b]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256 client-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) client-digest SHA256) (Client CN "smtp.gmail.com", Issuer "GTS CA 1D4" (verified OK)) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4TRFV139XDz429t for ; Fri, 2 Feb 2024 12:30:17 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from aimass@yabarana.com) Authentication-Results: mx1.freebsd.org; none Received: by mail-il1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id e9e14a558f8ab-363793e88abso7849115ab.1 for ; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 04:30:17 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yabarana-com.20230601.gappssmtp.com; s=20230601; t=1706877015; x=1707481815; darn=freebsd.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=fY9Q4W35/VPDxtF4GzyLovwt9AT9C/Sn5Riav9ppJHI=; b=WMjj36nM+tT7Vc5BWWCXP+UCFD4We9cSK1S7GrZZlhoh5nVuDAxFNitvBecwTbpqD4 q1xD8nlDz4jElqkkQT5HesW38hrc/XKvMmOODSTp/1SDEpyKRU9/Gq7EO2l5ZssYwwu+ bnw2tKwdL1EKRn61gmR1VXZMX7ID2qujx9XOs26j5Fd9hHUoNFQgGrrfQIap/IVEJpA8 W/qNFSn14pLFj/8vojOdFclbMQOWQyrqozPWHMQLyNg873TXaOVcBQoFjGjdLahpA3J+ ASNczhB5e6wiBsLMqJH+yLpj0pGXMcPBfSVIULtXL+gK3gmgbufH4NcbZg643sMcidXT P6XA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1706877015; x=1707481815; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from:in-reply-to:references :mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id :reply-to; bh=fY9Q4W35/VPDxtF4GzyLovwt9AT9C/Sn5Riav9ppJHI=; b=IYzcee9lEMuS2gG6A1Rmup8GC7Lcn8zvwelXAXdZw3BRFpI5fMD+c45/ggdvOP2dlz Wqt5RN1u86w97YDmtUVXV2e+9tCLubdGgnXVUo/i4ir2FPHBoDrDpdfWKWlh/FivKfrF dEtIzXhCjHAiWMyFjodeG7QIBUxfs/xdI5CGGnkpfZxy4yQJM4mYb1cEfqePNMEmKIur tf/IfbZZhiI6sgkm1qt1H1uHdDcC6YTkKpCT7MNPN8VGIU5dvz/NJQ+7Sxs4uucovs8h MP9aHDTh+Fv5aRp/lr+7XsV4Il6r3exk2MBSKztvh0LRLezAap6Wi9GAVzh46V9JQu57 a4RQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yww7XH/WkC09iXKCHLzuAS9czBiqQluCmbH6sQr1RuYbet9aH4P cYzSWMrFSmKSyh1+3KMiwwSmkCS0fVf0dK75vrN+YDj/lvJfM3f1pXrJzyJk/+TFSxHK/WyBN3o fYWBg8DsxV/QBB7ncoX0XtbnYutsJrk3y8Xvmkw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFSNfiy+iCXHDdcFwSphAJdAEetGe0UNhrKylMl+TFObgFxntXFFd4QiWb6iuw8WJyJAhU0kU0exW734VH81nw= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6e02:1aaa:b0:363:8ce0:c8c0 with SMTP id l10-20020a056e021aaa00b003638ce0c8c0mr7790742ilv.15.1706877014927; Fri, 02 Feb 2024 04:30:14 -0800 (PST) List-Id: Discussion List-Archive: https://lists.freebsd.org/archives/freebsd-virtualization List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: Sender: owner-freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-virtualization@freebsd.org MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Alejandro Imass Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2024 13:30:03 +0100 Message-ID: Subject: Re: If we are so opposed to Docker and Kubernetes, what is the real alternative on BSD? To: Mario Marietto Cc: Paul Vixie , FreeBSD virtualization Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000026833806106546e8" X-Rspamd-Queue-Id: 4TRFV139XDz429t X-Spamd-Bar: ---- X-Rspamd-Pre-Result: action=no action; module=replies; Message is reply to one we originated X-Spamd-Result: default: False [-4.00 / 15.00]; REPLY(-4.00)[]; ASN(0.00)[asn:15169, ipnet:2607:f8b0::/32, country:US] --00000000000026833806106546e8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 12:40=E2=80=AFAM Mario Marietto wrote: > Excuse me. I'm not very experienced,but isn't the L4 or any other > microkernel a valid alternative to containers ? If I have understood > correctly how it works,it allows multiple instances of the various servic= es > implemented within the microkernel OS. How many instances can we have ? F= or > example in the L4 Linux kernel webpage it is explained that it can boot > FreeBSD in cooperation with Linux. It works like xen. WIth xen we can hav= e > multiple virtual machines. But xen today has been preferred to kvm. And > anyway,we always talk about monolithic kernels. So,I want to ask : is a > microkernel OS a valid alternative to the containers ? If it allows to ru= n > only some services of the "virtualized" os,why not use it ? Why not inves= t > effort and time to implement this solution as an alternative to the > containers that FreeBSD already has ? Personally I like the idea of seein= g > Linux and FreeBSD work together. > > IMHO, way beyond the scope of this thread. AFAIK neither Linux nor FreeBSD are microkernels. The original question is more like what would it take to run k8s natively using different jail managers like CBSD and BastilleBSD as drivers? Does it already exist? maybe: https://github.com/tnorlin/kubernetes What is the state? What are the limitations? etc. etc. --00000000000026833806106546e8 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Fri, Feb 2, 2024 at 12:40=E2=80=AF= AM Mario Marietto <marietto200= 8@gmail.com> wrote:
Excus= e me. I'm not very experienced,but isn't the L4 or any other microk= ernel a valid alternative to containers ? If I have understood correctly ho= w it works,it allows multiple instances of the various services implemented= within the microkernel OS. How many instances can we have ? For example in= the L4 Linux kernel webpage it is explained that it can=C2=A0boot FreeBSD = in cooperation with Linux. It works like xen. WIth xen we can have multiple= virtual machines. But xen today has been preferred to kvm. And anyway,we a= lways talk about monolithic kernels. So,I want to ask : is a microkernel OS= a valid alternative to the containers ? If it allows to run only some serv= ices of the "virtualized" os,why not use it ? Why not invest effo= rt and time to implement this solution as an alternative to the containers = that FreeBSD already has ? Personally I like the idea of seeing Linux and F= reeBSD work together.
=

IMHO, way beyond the scope of th= is thread. AFAIK neither Linux nor FreeBSD are microkernels.=C2=A0

The original question is more like what would it take to r= un k8s natively using different jail managers like CBSD and BastilleBSD as = drivers?
Does it already exist? maybe:=C2=A0https://github.com/tnorlin/kubernetes
What is the state? What are the limitations?
etc. etc.


=C2=A0
--00000000000026833806106546e8--