Open ES-Alexander opened 3 months ago
I agree there should be official guidance here. But I think these two suggest different things:
host.docker.internal
means "Docker hosting the service". I expect this even in non-BlueOS environments.blueos
means "I should expect the BlueOS core services here". In particular, if you have a container running alongside blueos-core
, I'd expect this to refer to the peer container. This also has the drawback that it is not googlable.blueos.local
means "I should connect to whatever is advertising itself as blueos
on mdns". I think it's wrong to use this.I recommend making the host reachable at blueos.internal
. I recommend not using blueos
because this is not very googlable.
I also think it's a good idea to expose services as subdomains of blueos.internal
so e.g. an extension could connect to ws://mavlink2rest.blueos.internal
instead of the more opaque ws://blueos.internal:6040
.
Current behaviour
In a similar vein to #1640, it would be nice if each extension was automatically set up with a network bridge to the local network of the host computer.
With a default approach we could avoid extensions needing to define it manually, and the confusion that may come from doing that.
Expected or desired behaviour
Inject an
ExtraHosts
binding (e.g.blueos.internal:host-gateway
) into the Docker permissions for any extension that doesn't already have ExtraHosts defined. This allows extension code to be obvious when it is connecting to the internal BlueOS network.Considered alternative host addresses include:
host.docker.internal
blueos.local
blueos
Prerequisites