Good question. We use our own hypervisor[0] that's not KVM/QEMU. We don't have nested virtualization today so we don't follow the KubeVirt model, though we are discussing what CRDs like OxideInstance would look like for those that want to operate solely in Kubernetes manifests.

The core primitive on Oxide is the instance (virtual machine). We could support some container primitive, but that's a larger product direction discussion. Our host OS is Helios (Illumos) so there are details to iron out there regarding what abstractions we would build and expose to the users. Not impossible but not something we're currently pursuing either given that we have other immediate product asks.

If you're at a scale where compute density, power efficiency, security, and rack-level API management matters then that's where Oxide makes sense for you.

[0] https://github.com/oxidecomputer/propolis

Oxide is shipping the baremetal server as well, with integrated hypervisor - so running kubernetes with kubevirt on it makes less sense than integrating with the host hypervisor

You would use Oxide if you hate Dell/HPE/Lenovo/Supermicro. Also most people won't run k8s on bare metal because they want to dynamically provision a bunch of clusters.

Yeah me too. Like I kinda compare oxide to coreweave and coreweave is built on top of k8s afaik. I'm wondering what the underlying tech oxide leans on. If I was doing this I would be using talos and k8s on baremetal and building on top of that. Container first rather than VM first seems like a big advantage imo. Most workloads will be containers.

When oxide provide your metal?