Repository navigation
docs(design-proposals): add Proxmox LXC containers for tenants - #117
Open
Marian Koreniuk (themoriarti) wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Marian Koreniuk (themoriarti) wants to merge 1 commit into
Marian Koreniuk (themoriarti) wants to merge 1 commit into
Conversation
Proposes an lxc-instance application that renders one kubemox Container per release: a catalog image, a size, networks of the tenant's namespace from the Proxmox tenant networks zone, a static address from the network's pool and SSH keys. The platform owns the node, storage, bridge, VLAN and image file. A live test of kubemox Container on a Proxmox VE 9.2 lab is recorded in the proposal: two objects can bind one container by hostname, an out-of-band stop or delete is not repaired, a delete of a missing container leaks a mutex shared with the VM code, and a container cannot be put on a VLAN with an address or keys. The kubemox changes that close these gaps come before the application in the rollout. Assisted-by: LLM Signed-off-by: Marian Koreniuk <moriarti@cp.if.ua>
|
Important
This repository does not receive automatic reviews because it has fewer than 10 stars.
 |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What
A design proposal for an
lxc-instancetenant application on Proxmox-backed installations: one kubemoxContainerper release, rendered from a platform catalog image, a size, networks of the tenant's namespace (the zone and pools of #104) and SSH keys. Tenants never choose a node, storage, bridge, VLAN, address, image file or OCI reference.Why now
#98 lists LXC containers as a non-goal of the support tier. This proposal is where they are handled, and it records why kubemox
Containercannot be given to tenants as it is today.What was tested
kubemox
Containerwas run on a single-node Proxmox VE 9.2 lab: two containers from OCI images, one more from another image, and a full and a linked clone of an unprivileged template. The table in the proposal has the results. The ones that shape the design:spec.namebind the same container, and deleting one destroys the other's container.Containercontroller stops. This happened twice in one run, after a finalizer update conflict.template.diskandtemplate.network. The OCI path always rendersip=dhcpon the first NIC. There is no way to set a VLAN, an address or SSH keys.oci-registry-pullneedsSys.AccessNetworkon the node, so an operator token without it cannot pull. The proposal keeps it that way: the admin places images, and tenants pick catalog entries.The kubemox changes (K1–K7 in the proposal) are listed with what each one fixes. They come first in the rollout, as upstream PRs to alperencelik/kubemox.
Related