You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Currently we are using a single bird container which depending on the env variables is running one or 2 daemons, then checking their liveness and if one of them died - the whole container is dying.
IMO we should instead use 2 separate containers (second one created "if needed", if ipv6 is enabled in the configuration) while the entry point for each of them should be directly bird (or bird6 in the second case), running in the foreground mode (possibly with some additional logs).
This would provide imo more k8s native way of whole thing handling (restarts) also having separately logs on consoles for both processes (e.g. right now we don't have any info why previous instance of daemon died and with which status code).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Currently we are using a single bird container which depending on the env variables is running one or 2 daemons, then checking their liveness and if one of them died - the whole container is dying.
IMO we should instead use 2 separate containers (second one created "if needed", if ipv6 is enabled in the configuration) while the entry point for each of them should be directly bird (or bird6 in the second case), running in the foreground mode (possibly with some additional logs).
This would provide imo more k8s native way of whole thing handling (restarts) also having separately logs on consoles for both processes (e.g. right now we don't have any info why previous instance of daemon died and with which status code).
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: