Create kind metal-control-plane via containerlab #170
Conversation
|
It should be still possible to only spin up the control plane without any switches ? Is this the case ? If yes this would be awesome. |
|
Would be possible with a third topology file. |
|
@simcod Could you test https://containerlab.dev/cmd/deploy/#node-filter and document the behavior? We could introduce the additional make targets "only-control-plane" and "only-partition". |
| - kvm as hypervisor for the VMs (you can check through the `kvm-ok` command) | ||
| - [docker](https://www.docker.com/) >= 20.10.13 (for using kind and our deployment base image) | ||
| - [kind](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kind/releases) == v0.20.0 (for hosting the metal control plane) | ||
| - [containerlab](https://containerlab.srlinux.dev/install/) >= v0.47.1 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should also update the dependency to >= v0.55.0
| - Linux machine with hardware virtualization support | ||
| - kvm as hypervisor for the VMs (you can check through the `kvm-ok` command) | ||
| - [docker](https://www.docker.com/) >= 20.10.13 (for using kind and our deployment base image) | ||
| - [kind](https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kind/releases) == v0.20.0 (for hosting the metal control plane) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Tested without local kinD installation. Besides the .kubeconfig file created with root ownership, the setup still works.
|
At the moment, the use of kinD via containerlab is not stable enough. Therefore, we should stick with the current configuration. |
|
Should we close then? |
We should discuss together, still find this approach reasonable |
@simcod Why is not stable enough? 😅 |
It is possible to create the cluster with the |
No description provided.