Docker :Beta - Does Not Connect, Seems to Hang System

[hurricanehrndz 149]

Lol. Yeah I did that because I was one of the first individuals to use docker on unRAID before it even became a thing or included into the base os

 

Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk

[bungee91 98]

Well it was a good idea! 

 

I assume the fix for us poor saps is building the package for UnRAID to use ipv4 instead?

It's been 1.5 years, and I don't think they're in a hurry to add it at this point either.

[hurricanehrndz 149]

Well it was a good idea! 

 

I assume the fix for us poor saps is building the package for UnRAID to use ipv4 instead?

It's been 1.5 years, and I don't think they're in a hurry to add it at this point either.

You would need change code in the project. 

[bungee91 98]

You would need change code in the project. 

 

Hmm..  Ok, well I'll just stay optimistic with the previously mentioned "Luke is looking into it right now" reply...

[bungee91 98]

Any news on this issue?

 

This thread is not appropriate for this issue any longer since its creation was because of an error related to DB changes, currently this is an issue with ipv6 (no support on UnRAID), and the socket/port for the container failing (I think I've got that correct).

 

Should I start a new thread (hate to spam the board), or this is good enough and a fix for us on UnRAID (apparently not many of us on the beta) will eventually be implemented from the details/reports within this thread? Thanks for the support, miss the beta.. =(

Edited December 5, 2016 by bungee91

[hurricanehrndz 149]

Any news on this issue?

 

This thread is not appropriate for this issue any longer since its creation was because of an error related to DB changes, currently this is an issue with ipv6 (no support on UnRAID), and the socket/port for the container failing (I think I've got that correct).

 

Should I start a new thread (hate to spam the board), or this is good enough and a fix for us on UnRAID (apparently not many of us on the beta) will eventually be implemented from the details/reports within this thread? Thanks for the support, miss the beta.. =(

Luke and I talked about it. He is working on it. He is probably going to make it optional. That being said ipv6 is here to stay, and I feel as strongly about it as I did a year and a half ago. The unRAID community really needs to put pressure on the developers to get a move on.

[Luke 37065]

I kind of thought this may have been fixed with the changes, and the other thread with (what seems to be) the same issue.

 

Still no, same condition I reported earlier with unresponsive,etc...

 

I deleted all local images for the Docker, and upon startup it is still unusable.

Do I need to copy the file as listed in post #18 here still? 

I wouldn't think so (however I could be very wrong), but I also tried that in a previous version (prior to the announcement of package changes) and it didn't work for me either (or I did it incorrectly).

The logs it is generating are attached, thanks.

Not complaining, I have a stable version that works well, but would like to get back to using the beta soon.

 

Please try 3.1.247 when available. thanks.

[bungee91 98]

Luke and I talked about it. He is working on it. He is probably going to make it optional. That being said ipv6 is here to stay, and I feel as strongly about it as I did a year and a half ago. The unRAID community really needs to put pressure on the developers to get a move on.

 

I agree, and have added to the request on the UnRAID board. While I think end users asking is helpful, unfortunately the dev's pushing for it likely means more to them (which I am not).

I'm hopeful that the 6.4 series will add this in, as LT has been much better adding features and catching up to requests over the last year or so. Releases are much faster, and the addition of two staff members (so from 1 guy to 3) has really helped to move things forward (dual parity, regular CVE patching, QEMU/KVM, etc...). I have whipped up an Ubuntu VM with the beta for testing, but am getting some random write error messages at times in the notification using virtfs/9p. I've made some changes and think I may have fixed that, but the reliability, lack of complexity (end user), and overall needed resources for the Docker are hard to beat!

 

Please try 3.1.247 when available. thanks.

 

You had me at "please try"... I'm tickled pink!   Will test this out this evening and report back. Hats off to both of you!

[bungee91 98]

Please try 3.1.247 when available. thanks.

 

Just pulled the update, 3.1.248, and still getting a socket error/unusable condition.

 

See attached logs, they keep generating every 5-10 seconds or so.

System.AggregateException: One or more errors occurred. ---> System.Net.Sockets.SocketException: An address incompatible with the requested protocol was used

server-63616648963.txt

unhandled_67722366-f2fc-44b2-82a3-0419964cc8cf.txt

Edited December 7, 2016 by bungee91

[Luke 37065]

Hi @@bungee91 thanks for the report. Please try 3.1.249, once available. Thanks.

[bungee91 98]

Hi @@bungee91 thanks for the report. Please try 3.1.249, once available. Thanks.

 

Marking this as solved, thank you for your efforts (both of you)!

[Luke 37065]

Thanks for reporting back.

[bungee91 98]

One last question to calm my fears for the short term (as eventually IPv6 will be incorporated into UnRAID).

Is there any way that an update to the Docker will break whatever it is you fixed to resolve this issue?

 

I'd like to continue taking updates, but can't exactly roll back my container if an updated build is pushed that was updated without this workaround in mind.

Been very happy running the beta lately, thanks for the efforts.

[Luke 37065]

It should be fine.

[bungee91 98]

Jeez you're fast!!    

Thanks!