preload
Mar 31


Presented at CloudNativeCon + KubeCon EU 2017.

Tagged with:
Mar 11

Ship with tug (source: tpsdave via Pixabay).

Cloud-native applications are designed to draw upon the performance, scalability, and reliability benefits of distributed systems. Unfortunately, distributed systems often come at the cost of added complexity. As individual components of your application are distributed across networks, and those networks have communication gaps or experience degraded performance, your distributed application components need to continue to function independently.

To avoid inconsistencies in application state, distributed systems should be designed with an understanding that components will fail. Nowhere is this more prominent than in the network. Consequently, at their core, distributed systems rely heavily on load balancing—the distribution of requests across two or more systems—in order to be resilient in the face of network disruption and horizontally scale as system load fluctuates. Continue reading »

Tagged with:
Nov 10

Presented at KubeCon + CloudNativeCon 2016 on Nov. 9th, 2016 –> Slides

See also Cloud Native Ambassadors and Docker Captains navigate users through the container ecosystem.

Tagged with:
Oct 04

Presented at ContainerizeThis 2016 on Sept. 30th, 2016.

An introduction to container runtimes (engines) and an understanding of when container orchestrators enter and what role they play. We’ll look at what makes them alike, yet unique.

Tagged with:
Sep 17

Microservices present challenges of coordination, SSL termination and socket connection among others. Looking to different cloud providers to assist with their load-balancers leaves you wanting as features socket connection support, SSL termination and geo-distributed load-balancing are often absent.

Presented at Nginx Conference 2016 on Sept. 8th, 2016.

Tagged with:
Sep 16

glen-canyon

Originally published on The New Stack on Sept. 4th, 2016.

There are two proposed standards for configuring network interfaces for Linux containers: the container network model (CNM) and the container network interface (CNI). Networking is complex, and there are many ways to deliver functionality. Arguments can be made as to which one is easier to adopt than the next, or which one is less tethered to their benefactor’s technology.

When evaluating any technology, some important considerations are community adoption and support. Some perspectives have been formed on which model has a lower barrier to entry. Finding the right metrics to determine the velocity of a project is tricky. Plugin vendors also need to consider the relative ease by which plugins may be written for either of these two models. Continue reading »

Tagged with:
Previous Entries Next Entries