Juju features supported on each cloud

Different cloud providers expose different capabilities. Which supports what? Here is a (late draft) feature matrix:

https://discourse.jujucharms.com/t/juju-feature-and-compatibility-matrix/1589

Before it’s officially published - is it missing anything?

I would have thought with the recent changes for Openstack and spaces work, that we would have spaces management on Google and Azure as long as we detect the subnets, which I thought we already did.
I’m also sure that we manage the Firewall on AWS/Google/Azure, I wasn’t aware that we did anything for LXD clustering.

You’re also certainly missing VSphere as one of the providers.

For container networking, it would depend whether you consider containers that are directly bridged to their host networks, or containers that are on the Fan network. Because I thought for AWS/Google/Azure we use Fan networking (which means you can run workloads in containers, and have them talk to each other, but cannot expose those workloads to the outside world.)

Thanks for taking a look @jameinel. It looks like there’s still quite a bit to do.

For spaces, I’ve gone with the philosophy that it’s better to be conservative with what we say we support than raise hopes too far.

Re firewalling, I think I’ve made several mistakes with the source ASCII-art table.

Yes, I did mean to include ESXi/vSphere.

That column refers to the first concept, I believe. Perhaps that should be broken into further columns?

Apologies, I replied to the doc itself vs here. It might be worth having the conversations in that page.

Yeah, I came across the doc because of this post, and it seemed to be asking for feedback here. I agree that bringing it up in the doc could be a better location. I didn’t want to comment on that post itself, because it felt like ‘public documentation’ rather than discussion.
I don’t feel like discourse having a long tail of “this is an item in the doc to be updated” is useful for external people to see.

right but those are able to be hidden or deleted as they’re addressed and facilitate keeping discussion with the material.

That’s an expensive cost to bear. The discussion and history is also worth retaining. Reference pages shouldn’t include lots of chatter about what to include, however.

My fault. I’ve reduced the necessary permissions to view posts in that category now.

1 Like