Leveraging User Defined Linux Containers for Virtualization
Keywords:
Linux, Docker, Marshall, container, virtualizationAbstract
This article explores the convergence of containerization and virtualization technologies within the Linux ecosystem. This article investigates how user-defined Linux containers, such as Docker and LXC (Linux Containers), are reshaping the landscape of virtualized environments. By encapsulating applications and their dependencies into lightweight, isolated execution environments, user-defined containers offer a flexible and efficient approach to deploying and managing virtualized workloads. The abstract delves into the merits of this approach, including improved resource utilization, simplified deployment processes, and enhanced security. Additionally, it discusses future challenges and opportunities in leveraging user-defined Linux containers for virtualization, such as optimizing performance, strengthening security mechanisms, and integrating with emerging technologies. Overall, this abstract provides insights into the transformative potential of user-defined Linux containers in revolutionizing virtualization practices and driving innovation in modern computing environments.
References
Masood A, Sharif M, Yasmin M, Raza M. Virtualization tools and techniques: Survey. Nepal J Sci Technol. 2014; 15 (2): 141–150.
Camargos F, Girard G, Ligneris B. Virtualization of Linux servers: a comparative study. In: Proceedings of the Linux Symposium 2008; [Online] Available at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/254415367_Virtualization_of_Linux_servers
Jain SM. Linux containers and virtualization. a kernel perspective. New York, NY, USA: Apress, Springer; 2020.
Segeč P, Moravčík M, Kontšek M, Papán J, Uramová J, Yeremenko O. Network virtualization tools–analysis and application in higher education. In: 2019 17th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA); 2019 Nov 21–22; Starý Smokovec, Slovakia: IEEE; pp. 699–708.
Calarco G, Casoni M. On the effectiveness of Linux containers for network virtualization. Simul Model Pract Theory. 2013; 31: 169–185.
Horalek J, Matyska J, Sobeslav V. Performance comparison of selected virtualization platforms. In: 2013 IEEE 14th International Symposium on Computational Intelligence and Informatics (CINTI). 2013 Nov 19. Budapest, Hungary: IEEE; pp. 327–332.
Ben-Yehuda M, Mason J, Xenidis J, Krieger O, Van Doorn L, Nakajima J, et al. Utilizing IOMMUs for virtualization in Linux and Xen. In: OLS’06: The 2006 Ottawa Linux Symposium; 2006 Jul 19; pp. 71–86. https://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/document? [Online] Available at chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/https://www.kernel.org/doc/ols/2006/ols2006v1-pages-71-86.pdf.
Quétier B, Neri V, Cappello F. Scalability comparison of four host virtualization tools. J Grid Comput. 2007; 5: 83–98.
Aliev I, Gazul S, Bobova A. Virtualization technologies and platforms: comparative overview and updated performance tests. In: AIP Conference Proceedings; 2023 Mar 9; Vol. 2700, No. 1. Location: AIP Publishing.
Satra R, Syafie L, Tubagus M. Comparison of server technologies using Kernel-based virtual machine and container virtualization. In: AIP Conference Proceedings; 2023 May 15; Vol. 2595, No. 1. College Park, MD, USA: AIP Publishing.
