On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Dmitriy Kalinin <dkalinin(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Hey all, As of version 9000.50.0 bosh-lite uses official garden-linux release. If everything was gone right, you will not notice any difference in how things work. One benefit of using newer garden server in bosh-lite is easier networking configuration in your bosh-lite manifests. For example before you would do something like this: networks: - name: cf1 subnets: - cloud_properties: {name: random} range: 10.244.0.0/30 reserved: - 10.244.0.1 static: - 10.244.0.2 - cloud_properties: {name: random} range: 10.244.0.4/30 reserved: - 10.244.0.5 static: - 10.244.0.6 ... and now you can just do something like this since garden server allows to place multiple containers on the same subnet: networks: - name: cf1 subnets: - range: 10.244.0.0/24 gateway: 10.244.0.1 static: [10.244.0.2, 10.244.0.3] ... Dmitriy
I know versioning is somewhat a lost cause for bosh-lite.
I guess my actual question is: will old manifests still work for new bosh-lite? I assume so as you said "you will not notice any difference"
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Dmitriy Kalinin <dkalinin(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Hey all, As of version 9000.50.0 bosh-lite uses official garden-linux release. If everything was gone right, you will not notice any difference in how things work. One benefit of using newer garden server in bosh-lite is easier networking configuration in your bosh-lite manifests. For example before you would do something like this: networks: - name: cf1 subnets: - cloud_properties: {name: random} range: 10.244.0.0/30 reserved: - 10.244.0.1 static: - 10.244.0.2 - cloud_properties: {name: random} range: 10.244.0.4/30 reserved: - 10.244.0.5 static: - 10.244.0.6 ... and now you can just do something like this since garden server allows to place multiple containers on the same subnet: networks: - name: cf1 subnets: - range: 10.244.0.0/24 gateway: 10.244.0.1 static: [10.244.0.2, 10.244.0.3] ... Dmitriy
I am glad for future simpler networking for bosh-lite manifests; I just know we have lots of infrastructure-warden.yml spiff templates in lots of bosh releases.
Also, will bosh-lite stemcells keep *warden* in their name? I assume there's no functional difference; they are just rootfs.
There's probably automation around that looks for if the current stemcell name has been uploaded already; else tries to upload it.
On Fri, Sep 11, 2015 at 4:53 PM, Dmitriy Kalinin <dkalinin(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Hey all, As of version 9000.50.0 bosh-lite uses official garden-linux release. If everything was gone right, you will not notice any difference in how things work. One benefit of using newer garden server in bosh-lite is easier networking configuration in your bosh-lite manifests. For example before you would do something like this: networks: - name: cf1 subnets: - cloud_properties: {name: random} range: 10.244.0.0/30 reserved: - 10.244.0.1 static: - 10.244.0.2 - cloud_properties: {name: random} range: 10.244.0.4/30 reserved: - 10.244.0.5 static: - 10.244.0.6 ... and now you can just do something like this since garden server allows to place multiple containers on the same subnet: networks: - name: cf1 subnets: - range: 10.244.0.0/24 gateway: 10.244.0.1 static: [10.244.0.2, 10.244.0.3] ... Dmitriy
