ubuntu-docker-images team mailing list archive

[Bryce Harrington <bryce.harrington@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Wed, Aug 25, 2021 at 12:10:03PM -0300, Athos Ribeiro wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 24, 2021 at 07:22:47PM -0700, Bryce Harrington wrote:
> > I've adapted my bind9 oci to mirror Athos' work on the squid image.
> 
> Hi Bryce,
> 
> > This is super preliminary and not tested so consider very WIP, but I'd
> > appreciate a cursory look over for any course corrections needed:
> > 
> >  https://code.launchpad.net/~bryce/ubuntu-docker-images/+git/bind9
> > 
> > I haven't put much attention into the service parameters, so they're
> > inconsistent from place to place.  Advice welcomed but fine to ignore
> > for now.
> > 
> > Should I use the standard bind9 port?  I notice other images
> > (e.g. memcached) appear to be using semi-arbitrary port numbers?
> 
> IMHO, it would be more intuitive to just use the default port for the
> service. When launching the container, the exposed port in the container
> can be exposed through a different port in the host anyway (so no root
> access should be needed if the user is running a rootless container).
> 
> > Do I have the right VOLUME values?  I'm a bit fuzzy on what this
> > actually does.
> 
> These ensure the listed entries will be persisted in the host running
> the container runtime. While a user could specify those volumes when
> launching their containers to give those volumes names so they could
> re-use those volumes on different containers, if they do not (e.g., they
> do not pass --volume or --mount to the docker run command), then the
> volume will be mounted as an anonymous docker volume (you can check
> those with the `docker volume` command in case you are using docker as
> your runtime).
> 
> Hence, you just want to declare as a VOLUME, the data you'd suggest
> users should keep. That said, maybe you do not want to maunt the whole
> contents of /var/log. Monting the configurations at /etc/bind could be
> discussed as well. Note that the user can declare additinal volumes if
> they want to through those run parameters.

Thanks for looking at this.

I'll drop /var/log and /etc/bind.  The former is unlikely to be that
interesting either, and for the latter I suspect the more common use
case will be to provision the bind config via a configuration management
system.  And as you point out users can add that volume if they have a
use case that needs it preserved.

Bryce