New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We鈥檒l occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

rkt container engine support #58

Closed
euank opened this Issue Jul 23, 2016 · 13 comments

Comments

Projects
None yet
8 participants
@euank
Copy link
Member

euank commented Jul 23, 2016

Description

There is ongoing work for Kubernetes' support of rkt as a production-ready, generally usable container runtime option. This project is sometimes called rktnetes. 馃殌

There has already been significant work to implement this feature, and as of v1.3 it's already a supported option. However, it does not yet have full feature parity with the default Docker runtime, and I would be wary of calling it "production ready".

In order to have a sane scope for this feature, I'd like for it to track the rkt container runtime having full support for all Kubernetes features, support in Kubernetes deployment, well documented, and a great production choice.

Progress Tracker

  • Pre-release
  • Initial release
  • Released as fully supported/stable
    • All Kubernetes features are supported when using rkt as the container runtime
    • Well Tested
      • K8s master is tested with rkt as the runtime
      • Failures against k8s master blocks merges
      • PRs are tested with rkt as the runtime
      • Failures on PRs block merges
    • Known to be used actively in at least one production environment
    • docs/design/rkt-container-runtime.md exists.
    • Soak, load testing, performance testing with awesome results
    • detailed user docs and examples

FEATURE_STATUS: IN_DEVELOPMENT (I'm not sure the right status; this has had an initial release suitable for use; development is being done to improve the integration and address known issues / caveats).

cc @kubernetes/sig-node

Short meta-note: This feature might or might not actually fit here since it's something that is and has been in progress for quite a while. Many of the bullet points don't work well for it because of its circumstances, and I'm hopeful that it can help refine this process a bit; I've taken some liberties with formatting.

@yifan-gu

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

yifan-gu commented Jul 23, 2016

Can someone help adding 1.4 milestone for this? Thank you!

@yujuhong

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

yujuhong commented Jul 23, 2016

/cc @kubernetes/features-maintainers

@yujuhong

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

yujuhong commented Aug 25, 2016

My understanding is that we have switched to focusing on integrating rkt with kubelet using CRI, and the 1.4 milestone doesn't really apply anymore.
@euank @philips, should we remove the milestone and 1.4 labels?

@matchstick matchstick removed this from the v1.4 milestone Aug 25, 2016

@matchstick

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link

matchstick commented Aug 25, 2016

I will remove the 1.4 milestone for now. Let me know if that is not the right thing to do.
@euank @philips

@euank

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

euank commented Aug 31, 2016

xref kubernetes/kubernetes#8262

I also updated the checkpoints a little, specifically I broke out features a bit more and testing a bit more.

I'll also make a little set of "work done for v1.4" at some point (right now it's subPath, improved privilege, and a couple other bits). The mile-stoning thing makes sense because we're dependent on #54, which is not 1.4.

@philips philips changed the title rkt container runtime support rkt container engine support Sep 6, 2016

@idvoretskyi idvoretskyi added this to the next-candidate milestone Sep 21, 2016

@idvoretskyi

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

idvoretskyi commented Sep 21, 2016

@philips @euank I'd like to insist on Milestone to be present for easier feature tracking. I've set a "next-candidate" Milestone for now.

@philips

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

philips commented Sep 21, 2016

The rkt integration works mostly today (for example it works under minikube). I will put it under the v1.5 milestone as we hope the CRI refactor will get it to 100% parity with the Docker engine integration and CRI in this time frame.

@philips philips modified the milestones: v1.5, next-candidate Sep 21, 2016

@idvoretskyi

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

idvoretskyi commented Sep 22, 2016

@philips thank you for clarifying.

@euank

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

euank commented Nov 28, 2016

This feature is straddling two different implementations. I don't think either of them should be marked stable in 1.5 and this feature should be focused on the new integration (dependent on the CRI feature) going forwards to end up stable.
For that integration we're now targeting alpha in 1.6.

I think updating to reflect that makes sense.

@idvoretskyi

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

idvoretskyi commented Nov 28, 2016

@euank I would suggest you update and close this feature as rkt support itself is already implemented in Kubernetes.
To solve the questions, that you've described in your post above, please, open a new feature request, targeting 1.6 /cc @philips @calebamiles

@calebamiles calebamiles modified the milestones: v1.6, v1.5 Nov 28, 2016

@calebamiles

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

calebamiles commented Nov 28, 2016

@idvoretskyi, I will update this issue. This feature covers the work to make rkt a first class container runtime for Kubernetes there is an existing implementation currently in tree that is mostly but not entirely feature complete with respect to the docker runtime, however, this is an implementation detail of the feature. Currently there are CoreOS developers working on a CRI conformant rkt integration, tracked here, which is related to #54. Our CRI work is targeting the 1.6 release of Kubernetes and I will move this issue into the 1.6 milestone for tracking. Finally, regarding the existing rkt integration as only small changes have been made during this release cycle we do not believe it makes sense to change the status of that implementation to stable; the CRI work can be considered an iteration on the existing implementation which is currently in tree.

cc: @philips, @euank, @kubernetes/sig-node

@idvoretskyi

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

idvoretskyi commented Nov 28, 2016

@calebamiles thank you!

@idvoretskyi

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

idvoretskyi commented Feb 28, 2017

Implemented.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment