[HN Gopher] Warewulf is a stateless and diskless container OS pr...
___________________________________________________________________
Warewulf is a stateless and diskless container OS provisioning
system
Author : mooreds
Score : 49 points
Date : 2025-03-06 18:45 UTC (4 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (github.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (github.com)
| mooreds wrote:
| Website: https://warewulf.org/
|
| Docs: https://warewulf.org/docs/main/
| bluedino wrote:
| And if you want to pay for support you can reach out to CIQ
|
| https://ciq.com/products/warewulf/
| mkesper wrote:
| Weird this does not make use of IPv6. I'd thought this was a
| given if you have tens of thousands of nodes.
| 8organicbits wrote:
| 10.0.0.0/16 supports 64k hosts, so it seems it would fit in
| IPv4.
| anderbubble wrote:
| That's the thing: people don't put their HPC clusters on the
| public Internet; so an internal IPv4 network just keeps being
| fine.
| wmf wrote:
| It's from 2001 when IPv6 didn't really exist. I love IPv6 but
| it's basically crackpot retrocomputing tech at this point.
| generalizations wrote:
| Can't decide if the retrocomputing you mean is the warewulf
| or the ipv6.
| wmf wrote:
| IPv6 is retrocomputing. I don't know much about Warewulf.
| generalizations wrote:
| Huh. Did not realize we'd given up on that. Did the
| industry just settle on IPv4 after all?
| mcpherrinm wrote:
| Really depends on who you ask. You still need v4 to be
| "globally reachable", but v6 is optional.
|
| AWS seems to finally be feeling the pinch of IPv4
| exhaustion and is pushing v6 support everywhere now, and
| starting to charge for v4.
|
| Mobile networks already have, and many are natively IPv6,
| with NAT64/464XLAT or other tech for bridging to v4.
| Apple's App store requires apps to support IPv6-only
| networks.
|
| CDNs and clouds etc mean that websites don't even really
| need to worry about their own IP allocation, and just let
| their provider figure out exposing things worldwide.
| anderbubble wrote:
| We're always looking towards IPv6 support! And you _can_ do it
| today, with a little bit of work. But it's been difficult to
| prioritize in the main project when so few of our users (read:
| maybe one) have expressed interest.
| MortyWaves wrote:
| Where does this fit in the Ansible + PXE boot vs Terraform vs
| NixOS scale? Seems to be within that space, but before the
| "infrastructure as code" phrase was coined.
| anderbubble wrote:
| It's PXE boot for mostly stateless node / disk images, with a
| template-based overlay system for customizing the image as it's
| applied to the node.
| PAPPPmAc wrote:
| I've been using Warewulf (&co.) for provisioning bare-metal
| clusters for decades (back into the Perceus days between Warewulf
| 1 and 2), it's a solid easy-to-comprehend tool that does things
| in ways that are transparent and built from generic [u/li]nux
| tools enough that they're not hard to think about when needed,
| but automated enough you usually don't have to.
|
| Definitely shows its research roots, best-tested with RHEL-
| alikes, reasonably well tested with Suse and Debian, and you may
| be in for some extra work if you need provision something else,
| but that pretty much covers the common cases (and it integrates
| with containerization tools if you need some specific environment
| on the nodes).
|
| It's a nice to have when you need to spin many nodes.
| generalizations wrote:
| Why use warewulf? Seems like there have got to be simpler
| solutions for dealing with bare metal clusters than all of
| this.
| anderbubble wrote:
| Perhaps you have not seen some of the other solutions out
| there in this space.
|
| Warewulf _is_ the simpler solution.
| superb_dev wrote:
| It's that old? I can't believe it took me this long to find
| Warewulf! I've tried the more complex solutions and this looks
| like what I've always dreamed of
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2025-03-06 23:00 UTC)