Date
1 - 6 of 6
Diego Docker private repository not working
|
Anuj Jain <anuj17280@...>
Hi,
I could not able to run docker containers using docker's v2 private repository - I am using CF V226, Diego V0.1443.0 and Diego docker cache V0.1021.0 (with stemcell V3146 - across all components). I also found on your site that private is not supported with V2 yet ( https://docs.pivotal.io/pivotalcf/concepts/docker.html and/or https://github.com/cloudfoundry-incubator/docker_app_lifecycle/issues/5) - please confirm is that still the case or is there any workaround. I can launch the docker app/container from Docker Hub public v2 registory - but while trying to use with private it is giving following error: ============= ef797df93a34: Pull complete af28fa31b54b: Pull complete Digest: sha256:e45cc262f5d783ecbe07b7fe1a634342205d4a9eae209f9a9731a94b09493146 Status: Downloaded newer image for anuj17280/public:v1 Docker image pulled. Docker image will be cached as docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/b0aad5a4-50e7-46d7-7085-b7e7fb0b2abf Tagging docker image anuj17280/public:v1 as docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/b0aad5a4-50e7-46d7-7085-b7e7fb0b2abf ... Docker image tagged. Pushing docker image docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/b0aad5a4-50e7-46d7-7085-b7e7fb0b2abf The push refers to a repository [docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/b0aad5a4-50e7-46d7-7085-b7e7fb0b2abf] (len: 1) unable to ping registry endpoint https://docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/v0/ v2 ping attempt failed with error: Get https://docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/v2/: tls: oversized record received with length 20527 v1 ping attempt failed with error: Get https://docker-registry.service.cf.internal:8080/v1/_ping: tls: oversized record received with length 20527 failed to cache image anuj17280/public:v1 exit status 1 Staging process failed: Exit trace for group: builder exited with error: exit status 1 docker_daemon exited with nil Exit status 2 Staging Failed: Exited with status 2 FAILED StagingError ============================ - Anuj |
|
|
|
Ted Young
We don't currently support private docker registries, because as far as we
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
are aware the only auth scheme currently supported by private docker registries is username/password. It is a violation of our security protocols to flow through and retain user credentials, such as passwords, in our system. We are waiting for an access token or similar scheme to be offered. On Wed, Dec 16, 2015 at 7:13 AM, Anuj Jain <anuj17280(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi, |
|
|
|
Anuj Jain <anuj17280@...>
Thanks for the quick reply - is there any workaround till the time long
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
term solution will be in place. On Dec 17, 2015 12:17 AM, "Ted Young" <tyoung(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
We don't currently support private docker registries, because as far as we |
|
|
|
Tom Sherrod <tom.sherrod@...>
A 0.1441.0 install without the docker cache, pulled from a private registry, no auth, no problems.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
I'm confused by this thread. On Dec 16, 2015, at 1:56 PM, Anuj Jain <anuj17280(a)gmail.com> wrote: |
|
|
|
Ted Young
Sorry. I meant to say we don't support private repositories which require
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
credentials, not private (non-hub) registries. I believe password-protected private repositories on docker hub (or elsewhere) is what Anuj is asking about. On Wednesday, December 16, 2015, Tom Sherrod <tom.sherrod(a)gmail.com> wrote:
A 0.1441.0 install without the docker cache, pulled from a private |
|
|
|
Anuj Jain <anuj17280@...>
Correct Ted, was looking to get working password protected private registry
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
- like docker hub user's private registry and/or artifactory docker password protected private registry - do we know when you guys will start supporting it. On Dec 17, 2015 5:23 AM, "Ted Young" <tyoung(a)pivotal.io> wrote:
Sorry. I meant to say we don't support private repositories which require |
|
|