docs: Plan native Kubernetes Cleanroom#507
Draft
lox wants to merge 1 commit into
Draft
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
1 participant
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Cleanroom's current server-oriented control model is awkward for Kubernetes-scale deployment because a small pod or central service can hide VM CPU, memory, disk, KVM, and storage pressure from the scheduler. That makes bin packing, quotas, autoscaling, and failure recovery harder to reason about.
This draft plan proposes a Kubernetes-native shape where each Cleanroom sandbox is represented as one schedulable unit, with Kubernetes owning desired state, placement, lifecycle visibility, coarse tenancy, and routing. Cleanroom stays responsible for the runtime semantics that matter to repository sandboxes: policy compilation, microVM isolation, deny-by-default egress, gateway and cache mediation, exact-principal ownership, execution/file APIs, snapshots, and backend-specific setup.
The plan prefers integrating under Kubernetes SIG Agent Sandbox for the user-facing API, starts with a Firecracker-backed adapter pod and node-local runtime, and treats KubeVirt as a later backend option rather than the product API. It also calls out the first delivery slices, validation strategy, open questions, and pressure-test findings around hidden capacity, warm pools, NetworkPolicy boundaries, and CRD status scope.