{"action":"created","issue":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667","repository_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant","labels_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667/labels{/name}","comments_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667/comments","events_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667/events","html_url":"https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667","id":122197306,"number":6667,"title":"docker network support for docker provider","user":{"login":"modius","id":20687,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/20687?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius","html_url":"https://github.com/modius","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/modius/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"labels":[{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/labels/enhancement","name":"enhancement","color":"207de5"},{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/labels/provider/docker","name":"provider/docker","color":"bfe5bf"}],"state":"open","locked":false,"assignee":null,"milestone":null,"comments":1,"created_at":"2015-12-15T05:33:39Z","updated_at":"2016-02-10T11:45:29Z","closed_at":null,"body":"Is there an ETA for `docker network` support for the Docker provider?\r\n\r\n> While links are still supported in this limited capacity, you should avoid them in preference of Docker networks. The link feature is expected to be deprecated and removed in a future release.\r\n\r\nhttps://docs.docker.com/engine/userguide/networking/dockernetworks/"},"comment":{"url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/comments/182327836","html_url":"https://github.com/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667#issuecomment-182327836","issue_url":"https://api.github.com/repos/mitchellh/vagrant/issues/6667","id":182327836,"user":{"login":"bogdando","id":2795820,"avatar_url":"https://avatars.githubusercontent.com/u/2795820?v=3","gravatar_id":"","url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando","html_url":"https://github.com/bogdando","followers_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/followers","following_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/following{/other_user}","gists_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/gists{/gist_id}","starred_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/starred{/owner}{/repo}","subscriptions_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/subscriptions","organizations_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/orgs","repos_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/repos","events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/events{/privacy}","received_events_url":"https://api.github.com/users/bogdando/received_events","type":"User","site_admin":false},"created_at":"2016-02-10T11:45:29Z","updated_at":"2016-02-10T11:45:29Z","body":"Very good point!\r\nFor now, I have to deal with w/a like to create a network manually, like this:\r\n# docker network create -d bridge --internal --ip-range=a.b.c.0/24 --subnet=a.b.c.0/24 foo\r\n\r\nand then I'm expecting this example be working (but it is not):\r\nconfig.vm.provider :docker do |d|\r\n  d.image = \"bar/qux\"\r\n  d.name = n1\r\n  d.has_ssh = true\r\n  d.cmd = [\"/usr/sbin/sshd\", \"-D\"]\r\n  args = \"-i -t --net=foo\"\r\nend\r\n\r\nThen, expected command is like\r\n# docker run -i -t  --net=foo --name ... snip ... -h n1 bar/qux\r\nBut something goes wrong and the container goes to the default \"bridge\" network, which defaults is 172.17.0.2/16 ... Note, that the expected command, if issued manually does exactly what wanted and puts the container to the foo network with the a.b.c.0/2 based IP!\r\n\r\nSo, would nice to have this implemented in a working and more friendly way :)"}}