|
Re: Cloud Foundry and Kubernetes Integration Efforts
Mike Youngstrom
This is great! I've been wondering about these very question since the Container Runtime was announced. Thanks for posting this here. Mike On Fri, Dec 15, 2017 at 2:00 AM, Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Cloud Foundry and Kubernetes Integration Efforts
Krannich, Bernd <bernd.krannich@...>
Hello all,
During the Cloud Foundry board meeting which happened right after the European Cloud Foundry summit in Basel there was a request to the Cloud Foundry Technical Advisory Board (TAB) to come up with ideas around a closer integration of Cloud Foundry and Kubernetes.
While there is the well-established Kubo effort to manage Kubernetes clusters using BOSH, a group of Cloud Foundry platinum member companies comprising of (in alphabetical order) IBM, SAP, and SUSE felt that we as a community could do more with respect to integrating Cloud Foundry and Kubernetes. In the last few weeks, colleagues from these three companies have started creating ideas and project proposals which are now in a shape so that we can share them with the broader Cloud Foundry community to solicit feedback:
People from the three companies can jointly say that it was great to see a collaborative effort resulting in what we think is a promising direction for Cloud Foundry overall.
We’d love to hear your thoughts so please make sure to leave comments and feedback in the respective documents or send us general feedback over cf-dev.
Thanks in advance, Simon Moser (IBM), Bernd Krannich (SAP), Vlad Iovanov (SUSE) in the name of the colleagues from these three companies who put effort into the topic
Bernd Krannich SAP Cloud Platform SAP SE Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16, 69190 Walldorf, Germany
Pflichtangaben/Mandatory Disclosure Statement: www.sap.com/impressum
Diese E-Mail kann Betriebs- oder Geschäftsgeheimnisse oder sonstige vertrauliche Informationen enthalten. Sollten Sie diese E-Mail irrtümlich erhalten haben, ist Ihnen eine Kenntnisnahme des Inhalts, eine Vervielfältigung oder Weitergabe der E-Mail ausdrücklich untersagt. Bitte benachrichtigen Sie uns und vernichten Sie die empfangene E-Mail. Vielen Dank.
This e-mail may contain trade secrets or privileged, undisclosed, or otherwise confidential information. If you have received this e-mail in error, you are hereby notified that any review, copying, or distribution of it is strictly prohibited. Please inform us immediately and destroy the original transmittal. Thank you for your cooperation. |
|
|
|
Re: Change filesystem type in V2 manifest schema
Marco Voelz
Hi,
a change in filesystem format requires formatting the disk. Currently, the only way to trigger creating a new persistent disk and copying over the data is when changing the disk's size. Hope that helps.
Warm regards Marco
From:
<cf-bosh@...> on behalf of Ponraj E <ponraj.e@...>
Hi,
Here in the bosh docs https://bosh.io/docs/persistent-disk-fs.html, it is mentioned that if we want to change the filesystem type, we have to change the persistent disk size. Why is the disk size change mandatory for the filesystem change?
We have a use case where we want to migrate the deployment from ext4 filesystem to xfs filesystem. But as per the docs, this happens only when the disk size is also
changed.
|
|
|
|
Re: [project-leads] Proposal to change GH org permission structure for committers
Amit Kumar Gupta
Hi all,
Do you have any data on how significant a problem this is? I assume 99% of a team's work happens in cf or cf-inc orgs, and forks are temporary in service of PR'ing to a repo in cf or cf-inc. For teams I've worked on in the past, someone has forked into their personal account and given the rest of the team members collab access to that repo, then tore it down after the PR is merged. Forking into a team account e.g. cf-routing also seems like it makes sense to solve this problem. But the main point IMO is that almost all the team's work happens in a discoverable place (cf or cf-inc), and the work that happens on these forks is ephemeral and not meant to receive further upstream PRs, they exist to PR into something else downstream.
See prev comment about how these team-specific orgs are generally not used for long-lived work that should be receiving PRs. 3) Use of the cloudfoundry-incubator for these forks is confusing to observers, and completely different from what the incubator is supposed to be. Agree that cf-inc shouldn't be used to house forks. It's confusing, not the point of cf-inc, and doesn't scale (what happens when two teams want to fork nats into cf-inc?). If there were a simple working agreement to do core work in cf or cf-inc, and use personal/team accounts/orgs for temporary forks for the purpose of PRs, would this solve the problems? I would definitely be hesitant about wide-open push access across teams, I'd recommend allowing teams and people to organically choose the best cross-team collaboration workflow (cross-team pairing, PRs, direct commit) on a case-by-case basis. Cheers, Amit On Wed, Dec 6, 2017 at 4:50 PM, Chip Childers <cchilders@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Change filesystem type in V2 manifest schema
Ponraj E <ponraj.e@...>
Hi,
Here in the bosh docs https://bosh.io/docs/persistent-disk-fs.html, it is mentioned that if we want to change the filesystem type, we have to change the persistent disk size.
Why is the disk size change mandatory for the filesystem change?
We have a use case where we want to migrate the deployment from ext4 filesystem to xfs filesystem. But as per the docs, this happens only when the disk size is also changed. Appreciate the help. |
|
|
|
Proposal to change GH org permission structure for committers
Chip Childers
All (especially committers and project leads), Some of the CFF project teams have been working in team specific GH orgs as a way to fork other project team repos that aren't core to their own efforts. Others have been using the cloudfoundry-incubator org for this same purpose. Largely, this seems to be happening inside of the Runtime PMC projects, but may be happening in other projects. Neither is optimal, for several reasons: 1) People that aren't on the project teams have a hard time finding where work of that project team is actually happening. 2) The team specific orgs are not typically setup to ensure CLA's for any inbound pull requests. 3) Use of the cloudfoundry-incubator for these forks is confusing to observers, and completely different from what the incubator is supposed to be. Today, permissions are established for specific teams to access specific repos. In most cases they are limited to the repos owned by their project. In some cases, teams are already sharing commit rights to repos from other projects. The theory of locked down permissions is tied to the assumption of code ownership by one specific team. I propose we change both the technical aspects of how permissions are handled, and the social / community aspect of how committers work with other project teams. Specifically, I propose that we change our permission model to a much simpler one: 1) A single team for all committers in each PMC. That team would be given write permission across all repos that are part of projects in that PMC in both the cloudfoundry-incubator and cloudfoundry GH organizations. 2) All repos would also have a default branch selected and set as "protected" (disabling deletion and things like forced push). This would both simplify some of the administrative work (much of which is handled by the awesome admin team at Pivotal today), and allow us to change our community's approach to cross project collaboration. Specifically, teams that want to make changes to another project's repo would create a branch in that repo to do their work in (and from which to do a PR). Project teams would still "own" their repos (and default branches), but this would be convention not enforced via permissions. I welcome your thoughts and feedback on the proposal! -chip -- Chip Childers CTO, Cloud Foundry Foundation 1.267.250.0815 |
|
|
|
Re: Default user and password for bosh-lite vm
Thanks Tyler...
|
|
|
|
Re: Server error, status code: 500, error code: 170011, message: Stager error: Failed to open TCP connection to stager.service.cf.internal:8888
Danny Berger
Hi Arpit - this message is fairly specific to the Cloud Foundry releases, so you might have better luck emailing the cf-dev@... where there's more experience deploying CF and seeing these particular error messages. A cursory suggestion to investigate might be that cells are not correctly running or reporting in. I think cf-dev will be able to help out more, or feel free to join the channels at http://slack.cloudfoundry.org. Danny On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 10:53 PM, Arpit Sharma <arpitvipulsharma@...> wrote:
--
Danny Berger |
|
|
|
Server error, status code: 500, error code: 170011, message: Stager error: Failed to open TCP connection to stager.service.cf.internal:8888
Dear Team,
I have deployed CF as per official doc from cloudfoundry site on vsphere. When I am pushing an app, I am getting below mentioned error
Server error, status code: 500, error code: 170011, message: Stager error: Failed to open TCP connection to stager.service.cf.internal:8888
Can anyone help me with this? |
|
|
|
Re: Is there a way to specify the filesystem format in BOSH v1 manifest schema
Dr Nic Williams
The version of the manifest isn’t the main issue - you will need to upgrade your bosh director. But it is highly encouraged for you to be regularly upgrading your bosh environments.
See bosh-deployment repo for a wonderful way to deploy your bosh environments.
From: Dr Nic Williams <drnicwilliams@...>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 8:32:22 PM To: cf-bosh@...; cf-bosh@... Subject: Re: [cf-bosh] Is there a way to specify the filesystem format in BOSH v1 manifest schema One option is to use the multiple persistent disk feature of bosh - this creates disks and does not format them.
http://www.starkandwayne.com/blog/bosh-multiple-disks/
From: cf-bosh@... <cf-bosh@...> on behalf of Ponraj E <ponraj.e@...>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 7:07:55 PM To: cf-bosh@... Subject: [cf-bosh] Is there a way to specify the filesystem format in BOSH v1 manifest schema Hi Colleagues,
Currently bosh uses ext4 filesystem format by default for the attached persistent disks. Is there a way to specify some other filesystem format (like XFS) in BOSH V1 manifest schema? I am aware of this https://bosh.io/docs/persistent-disk-fs.html but looks like this is for V2 manifest schema. Regards, Ponraj |
|
|
|
Re: Is there a way to specify the filesystem format in BOSH v1 manifest schema
Dr Nic Williams
One option is to use the multiple persistent disk feature of bosh - this creates disks and does not format them.
http://www.starkandwayne.com/blog/bosh-multiple-disks/
From: cf-bosh@... <cf-bosh@...> on behalf of Ponraj E <ponraj.e@...>
Sent: Friday, November 10, 2017 7:07:55 PM To: cf-bosh@... Subject: [cf-bosh] Is there a way to specify the filesystem format in BOSH v1 manifest schema Hi Colleagues,
Currently bosh uses ext4 filesystem format by default for the attached persistent disks. Is there a way to specify some other filesystem format (like XFS) in BOSH V1 manifest schema? I am aware of this https://bosh.io/docs/persistent-disk-fs.html but looks like this is for V2 manifest schema. Regards, Ponraj |
|
|
|
Is there a way to specify the filesystem format in BOSH v1 manifest schema
Ponraj E <ponraj.e@...>
Hi Colleagues,
Currently bosh uses ext4 filesystem format by default for the attached persistent disks. Is there a way to specify some other filesystem format (like XFS) in BOSH V1 manifest schema? I am aware of this https://bosh.io/docs/persistent-disk-fs.html but looks like this is for V2 manifest schema. Regards, Ponraj |
|
|
|
Re: Default user and password for bosh-lite vm
Jain, Ashish <ashish.jain09@...>
Tips section has details https://bosh.io/docs/bosh-lite.html
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On 01/11/17, 10:02 PM, "Arpit Sharma" <arpitvipulsharma@...> wrote:
Hi Team, I have deployed bosh lite with followed link https://bosh.io/docs/bosh-lite.html Can any one update me how i can login in this vm? What will be default user and password for the vm which is deployed in virtualbox? Regards: Arpit Sharma |
|
|
|
1 of 3 pre-start scripts failed. Failed Jobs: cloud_controller_ng. Successful Jobs: route_registrar, consul_agent
Dear Team,
We are deploying cloud foundry on vsphere using bosh. We are getting following error on deployment of cf. Can anyone help me with this? Task 56 | 16:37:14 | Updating instance api_z1: api_z1/da2b9778-64dd-444d-9b90-d22397ba83de (0) (canary) (00:00:33) L Error: Action Failed get_task: Task 535ba5ee-07f6-4750-4ad2-f527d0e4126c result: 1 of 3 pre-start scripts failed. Failed Jobs: cloud_controller_ng. Successful Jobs: route_registrar, consul_agent. Task 56 | 16:37:47 | Error: Action Failed get_task: Task 535ba5ee-07f6-4750-4ad2-f527d0e4126c result: 1 of 3 pre-start scripts failed. Failed Jobs: cloud_controller_ng. Successful Jobs: route_registrar, consul_agent.
Task 56 Started Thu Nov 9 16:26:01 UTC 2017 Task 56 Finished Thu Nov 9 16:37:47 UTC 2017 Task 56 Duration 00:11:46 Task 56 error
Updating deployment: Expected task '56' to succeed but state is 'error'
Exit code 1 |
|
|
|
Nominations Open: CF Summit NA CFP Co-Chair
spodila@...
Hello!
For those of you that I haven't interacted with yet, I am Swarna Podila, and have been dubbed the Community Manager for CF community. I will make sure we will have plenty of opportunities to meet virtually and face-to-face. As you can imagine, we (at the Foundation) have begun planning for CF Summit, Boston in April 2018. I would like to share with you that we are accepting nominations for CFP Co-Chairs to help curate content for Cloud Foundry Summit North America 2018. Please nominate yourself or a fellow community member that would represent the greater Cloud Foundry community's interest and are leaders in the community. And feel free to unicast or post your questions here. I am super psyched to be here and look forward to meeting y'all over the coming months. Cheers, Swarna. |
|
|
|
Re: CF mailing lists migration Tuesday at 9am PST
Chris Clark
Migration is now complete and things seem fully functional (including search function). Please let me know if you have any issues or concerns. You can take a look at the new interface here, or just continue to use email. Links to the old lists have been redirected and should be working fine. However, if there are links out there (in documentation, stack overflow, wherever) pointing to specific posts on the lists, those links have broken. Hopefully the search function will allow people to easily find old posts, so this shouldn't be a big inconvenience. If it is, please let me know. - Chris Clark On Fri, Nov 3, 2017 at 10:03 AM, Chris Clark <cclark@...> wrote:
|
|
|
|
Access of cf from bosh lite
Dear Team,
I have deployed cf on bosh lite. But cf is only able to accessable from that server because its based on boshlite. we installed bosh lite from the link https://bosh.io/docs/bosh-lite.html and cloud foundry from official http://docs.cloudfoundry.org/deploying/boshlite/index.html.Is there any way I can get access of this cf to on our lan? |
|
|
|
CF mailing lists migration Tuesday at 9am PST
Chris Clark
Hello all,
CF-bosh, and all other Cloud Foundry Foundation mailing lists, will be migrating from Mailman to Groups.io on Nov 7th, Tuesday morning, at 9am PST. Migration should take an hour or two, and during this time there will be a delay in any new posts. The archives will be still be available. Groups.io should provide significant improvements in functionality and UI over Mailman. For those of you interacting with this list solely through email, you likely won't even notice the change. If you use the interface at lists.cloudfoundry.org, you will soon see a nice new GUI to use... the domain, and associated URLs, will remain the same. If you'd like to learn more about Groups.io, please reference their documentation <https://groups.io/static/help>. I'll let you know Tuesday once migration is complete. Please reach out if you have any questions, concerns, exultations. Chris Clark |
|
|
|
Bosh compatible vSphere version
nitin padalia
Hi,
Is there any compatibility list of BOSH with vSphere version. Say I am upgrading my vSphere environment then how can I safely say that it won't impact my CF deployment or other deployments managed by BOSH. |
|
|
|
Re: Default user and password for bosh-lite vm
Tyler Schultz
The Tips section of the page you linked to has instructions on how to ssh
into the director vm. --Tyler On Wed, Nov 1, 2017 at 9:24 AM, Arpit Sharma <arpitvipulsharma(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hi Team, |
|
|