by being able to specify network ranges etc so they can be compatible with existing networks, or by being able to specify existing storage shares to the РІР‚СљcloudstorРІР‚Сњ plugin. For our use-case which is trying to move existing legacy systems to a more modern platform, the current template would benefit from being more customisable. For greenfield deployments the current template is probably fine, but you would have to fit other non-docker systems around the docker configuration. IРІР‚в„ўm not sure what most peoples use-cases are for this project. I donРІР‚в„ўt know how it to change the docker0 bridge, this is created earlier in the init process. This seems to survive OK across rolling swarm updates as well, so I think we are going to go with this. So I tried adding 'docker network create -subnet 192.168.128.0/17 -opt .name=docker_gwbridge -opt .enable_icc=false docker_gwbridge' to the customData part of the template, and that has put the bridge onto the network specified. For the РІР‚Сљdocker_gwbridgeРІР‚Сњ (which for us happens to be the one that conflicts with our network) the docker docs say you can create the bridge in advance. IРІР‚в„ўve actually just managed to half solve this, but it feels very hacky and brittle.

This range conflicts with the range the РІР‚Сљdocker_gwbridgeРІР‚Сњ is on. This vnet has routing (actually itРІР‚в„ўs a VPN) to an onsite network that coincidentally is on 172.18.0.0/16. We need the Docker Swarm to connect to our existing systems, and so have modified the ARM template slightly to deploy into an existing VNET and subnet, rather than provisioning itРІР‚в„ўs own. Sorry with hindsight there wasnРІР‚в„ўt anywhere near enough detail in this.

Docker ip range