Converting ports from short to long syntax should not assume "ingress"

[lionello]

Converting ports from short to long syntax should not assume "ingress"

[ndeloof]

I prefer we fix the spec to match docker run -p ... behavior so Docker Compose user don't get into weird issues with compose to configure ports in some unexpected way due to non-consistent defaults

[lionello]

@ndeloof Docker doesn't have ingress, so that would imply host mode as well.

[ndeloof]

non-swarm docker engine is single node and then those are just the same

[lionello]

@ndeloof the problem is that most ingress controllers won't let you map any host port to any ingress port, so it often doesn't make sense to consider - "1234:1234" to mean "ingress on 1234 mapped to host port 1234".

Generally, I find it surprising that - 1234 behaves differently from - target: 1234, and - "1234:1234" differently from

- target: 1234
  published: 1234

The long syntax leaves mode undefined, does not assume "ingress". (In fact, they also leave protocol undefined, too, whereas the short syntax results in protocol: tcp)

[ndeloof]

it often doesn't make sense to consider - "1234:1234" to mean "ingress on 1234 mapped to host port 1234".

it doesn't, it just means "ingress on 1234 mapped to container port 1234"

[ndeloof]

I find it surprising that ...

sure, this is docker run legacy

[lionello]

it often doesn't make sense to consider - "1234:1234" to mean "ingress on 1234 mapped to host port 1234".

it doesn't, it just means "ingress on 1234 mapped to container port 1234"

You’re right, that’s what I meant.

What to do when a host IP is mentioned in the short syntax? Surely that means host mode.