On 11/18/2014 08:36 PM, John W. Linville wrote: > Given the description above (and whatever other sources you might have > at your disposal), does anyone have any objections to using this as a > default Kubernetes networking solution in Atomic? Or any questions > about the use of Flannel in general? It looks reasonable to me. I've forwarded this to cloud lists fedoraproject org and centos-devel, but barring any major objections / suggestions for alternatives that haven't been addressed, this seems the right direction to go in. Best, jzb -- Joe Brockmeier | Principal Cloud & Storage Analyst jzb redhat com | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature