Getting error connection refused with IPv6 only.

[silmarine]

I'm not sure where exactly I should report this so I thought I would just start with a discussion here. I set up my docker to support IPv6 and have a bunch of containers in docker working with IPv6 just fine. However MKDocs give me the connection refused when using the docker container name for the URL (which resolves to both IPv6 and IPv4 but v6 is default). But when I hard set anything to use the IPv4 address of the container then everything works fine.

[niclasheinz]

Hello @silmarine

Material for MkDocs is a theme for MkDocs, which as far as I know does not provide a container that works like a web server and provides your documentation.

I don't think the problem you describe depends on MkDocs material. And that's what this forum is for.

But if we can help you, we need more information about your setup.

[silmarine]

I did pull a the docker image related to this repo: docker pull squidfunk/mkdocs-material. And the repo here has a dockerfile in it that builds that image, as far as i can tell. Is that not a docker container provided here that works like a webserver? I don't mind going to where ever else to report a bug like base mkdocs repo but I just suspected if I am using this image that original mkdocs wouldn't be to blame. But I might not be understanding how Material for MkDocs is managed/built/whatever.

[niclasheinz]

The Docker image provided by the project is not suitable for deployment in a production environment.

You can start a live server where you can see your changes. It is also intended that you can generate your documentation with the image

For a deployment in the production environment you can use a webserver like nginx or apache2.

References:

• https://squidfunk.github.io/mkdocs-material/creating-your-site/#previewing-as-you-write
• https://squidfunk.github.io/mkdocs-material/publishing-your-site/
• Running mkdocs-materials with docker/portainer #7899

[silmarine]

Huh, nothing in the docs clued me that the docker image wasn't suitable for production. I thought it was just another option for hosting it. I've literally been using the docker container as the "site" and pointed my reverse proxy to the mkdocs-material container. Maybe that's why I'm getting this error then, if it's not actually intended to work as a production web server.

[kamilkrzyskow]

The docker image runs on 0.0.0.0:8000 set via the --dev-addr flag:

• mkdocs-material/Dockerfile

  Line 108 in a2dc66d

  CMD ["serve", "--dev-addr=0.0.0.0:8000"]

The implementation seems to allow to use IPv6, however you need to explicitly write the <IP:PORT> in IPv6 syntax, I don't know what's the equivalent of 0.0.0.0:8000, but it's probably something like [::]:8000?

• https://github.com/mkdocs/mkdocs/blob/7e4892ab2dd4a52efd95a9de407eee63310e0780/mkdocs/livereload/__init__.py#L110
• https://github.com/mkdocs/mkdocs/blob/7e4892ab2dd4a52efd95a9de407eee63310e0780/mkdocs/config/config_options.py#L476

Like Niclas said, MkDocs has a very simple webserver implementation, and people fought for the option to even run with 0.0.0.0 to expose the server from inside docker, I was not there when the battle happened, but I've read the holy archives and know people have lost their lives 😰 (not literally, but in the "died on the hill" sense ✌️):

• Change to prevent 0.0.0.0 makes containerized usage painful mkdocs/mkdocs#2108

[silmarine]

It is really convenient to just edit the markdown file on my server and it just updates the webpage automatically. I'm trying to decide if I want to move away from it for my small little use-case. I'm literally just using this as a wiki/guide for my friends and family for all the services I provide to them. It changes a lot so the auto update is nice and it's secured via many different methods. Either way I definitely don't want to add to the pile of "dead bodies" regarding this. I'm happy with what I've got and if that's not even recommended then I can't complain.