Personally, I find this option very appealing, since it would facilitate adding specialized modules to a RouterOS system, without incurring a lot of overhead or complexity in system management. This could be an alternative to KVM or Xen options. (2) RouterOS could also directly support the Docker Engine so that Docker containers (via images) could be supported directly on a RouterOS host system. Docker would also make it easy to mix CHR containers with other network tools, or even applications. This would avoid the requirement to deploy and maintain a more robust (also higher overhead) virtualization system. For many people, this would probably be the easiest way to run a CHR variant, given the low overhead and easy setup of Docker containers. (1) A new CHR variant could be added that would be a Docker container. I'll use Docker as a viable/practical example: There are two ways that a containerized approach could be used with RouterOS. CHR should run containers, docker or whatever.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |