Docker Container

Answered

Follow

Sam Buratto

• February 27, 2019 23:31

An official docker NX server with working licensing would be great!

1

• 

  Evgeny Balashov

  • February 27, 2019 23:34

  Hi Sam, our team is currently working on it. We will let you know once we have it for beta testing!

  1

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Sam Buratto

  • February 28, 2019 00:05

  This just made my day! :)

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Pieter Viljoen

  • April 28, 2019 05:07

  +1

  I'd love to run the server in docker on unraid instead of an ubuntu vm.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Kyle Epperson

  • May 03, 2019 00:23

  Hi everyone,

  Pieter and Sam, when you say "working licensing" can you describe what isn't working and how you would expect it to work if properly supported?  We want to ensure we are providing features that you actually want.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Sam Buratto

  • May 03, 2019 00:45

  Hey Kyle,

  I guess its a fix for the changing HWID issue, where the docker container HWID changes on a reboot.

  Not sure how this could be resolved, short of maybe attaching the license to the cloud account instead of the local NX server?

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Kyle Epperson

  • May 03, 2019 00:56

  So you're saying you stop the docker container and when you start it back up the license is invalid?

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Pieter Viljoen

  • May 03, 2019 02:00
  • Edited

  I don't know, I never got it to the point of a working container, permission problems prevented mine from starting.

  But, in a VM and Docker Container the MAC and IP is dynamic, thus they should not be used for licensing or ID'ing purposes, as they can change on every invocation.

  It is possible to fix the MAC in a VM, and with hacking it is possible in a container, but assigning a static MAC to a container is a non-standard usage, and should not be relied on.

  I do like the cloud account idea, I buy licenses, they are associated with my cloud account, I get to assign them to systems I manage. 

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Kyle Epperson

  • May 07, 2019 19:39
  • Edited

  In my testing it seems to me that so long as the container is not removed it maintains licensing etc.  Though I am maintaining the database in an a volume on the host.  What I am trying to clear up is the expected operation here.  Is it expected that:

  A. The image can be saved, transferred to another computer, run as a new container with valid licensing etc.

  OR

  B. So long as the container is not removed from Docker (e.g. docker container prune) while stopped, starting up the container should continue as it was.

   

  Currently, in the testing I have been doing, B is how it works.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Pieter Viljoen

  • August 09, 2019 19:51

  Any update on when we can expect to see official docker support?

   

  FYI, these do work, but I'm still using an Ubuntu Server VM for my paid licenses:

  https://hub.docker.com/u/thehomerepot/

   

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Evgeny Balashov

  • August 12, 2019 17:25

  Hi Pieter,

  4.0 version will be supporting docker in 'experimental' mode.

  We don't know yet what does that mean exactly. It is not going to be an officially supported platform yet, because we won't do full regression testing on it, but we will try to address docker-related issues when possible.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Pieter Viljoen

  • August 12, 2019 17:28

  How will licensing work, i.e. do not rely on hardware attributes as that can change in a container on every update?

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Kyle Epperson

  • August 12, 2019 17:37

  Hi Pieter,

  As stated above, in my testing I have been able to bring down the container and boot it back up without licensing issues so long as the database is maintained on the host.  The only time licensing will not operate is if you try to move the image and database to another computer.  

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Pieter Viljoen

  • August 12, 2019 18:03

  That is exactly that must be supported.

  Automated updates do not bring a container up and down, when an update happens the old container gets deleted, a new one gets created, pointing to the same config and recording mount, but the hardware can change any time.

  Hardware as seen by the container can also change as the underlying container management ecosystem changes.

  The licensing must be tied to something other than hardware, e.g. purely a configuration in the config folder, connected to a cloud license, etc., but not hardware.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Danny van den Berg

  • August 13, 2019 06:59

  I agree with Pieter, it would be nice if we can run the container in a multi-node Docker enviroment orchestrated by Kubernetes for example.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Matthew Del Salto

  • August 17, 2019 17:47

  I am working on a production level docker image that works with autoupdates/server reboots.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Ryan Flagler

  • August 20, 2019 20:36

  To be fair here, the licensing change people are asking for is not specific to docker. This has been the licensing model for nxwitness for as long as I recall.

  0

  Comment actions Permalink
• 

  Norman - Nx Support

  • June 13, 2022 09:54
  • Edited

  Gentlemen,

  We have released an experimental package to run Nx in a Docker environment. More about this can be read HERE. 

  0

  Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.