apisix-dashboard VS gRPC

With various access control models and implementation methods available, constructing an authorization system for backend service APIs can still be challenging. However, the ultimate goal is to ensure that the correct individual has appropriate access to the relevant resource. In this article, we will discuss how to enable the Role-based access control(RBAC) authorization model for your API with open-source API Gateway Apache APISIX and Open Policy Agent (OPA).

The API Create phase is the first stage in the API product lifecycle management process where you design, orchestrate, transform, document, and test your API. At this stage, modern API gateways like Apache APISIX can be helpful to build your API from scratch or import API definitions from a range of sources like OpenAPI YAML/JSON structure to register Route and Upstreams.

Apache APISIX is an API Gateway. By default, it stores its configuration in etcd, a distributed key-value store - the same one used by Kubernetes. Note that in real-world scenarios, we should set up etcd clustering to improve the resiliency of the solution. For this post, we will limit ourselves to a single etcd instance. Apache APISIX offers an admin API via HTTP endpoints. Finally, the gateway forwards calls from the client to an upstream. Here's an overview of the architecture and the required certificates:

One of the key features of modern API Gateways such as Apache APISIX is its support for GraphQL APIs. APISIX makes it easy to manage and scale GraphQL APIs using its flexible configuration system and powerful plugins. One such plugin is the degrapghql plugin, which allows us to convert the GraphQL API into a REST API. In this post, we will explore this feature with an example.

Secure your API: Use an to secure API Gateway by adding authentication, rate limiting, and other security features. It reduces the number of exposed APIs, organizations can reduce surfaces of attacks.

An alternative exists, though, if you're using an API Gateway. I'll describe how to do it with Apache APISIX, but perhaps other gateways can do the same. grpc-transcode is a plugin that allows transcoding REST calls to gRPC and back again.

I've used Kong but currently evaluating APISix as it's a more 'free/open' API gateway.

In this article, we will show you how to create a custom connector for the open-source Apache APISIX API Gateway in Power Platform as an alternative to Azure API Management in case you are building up additional components to an existing system with usable APIs and your system's infrastructure is hosted on-premises or on other cloud services provider rather than Azure.

Here's how to do it with Apache APISIX.

Apache APISIX is an open-source, high-performance API gateway built on top of Nginx. One of its powerful features is the ability to create serverless functions, which are small, stateless programs that can extend the functionality of Apache APISIX. In this article, we'll cover the basics of the Apache APISIX serverless plugin and how it can be used to trigger serverless functions in response to events.

gRPC, built on HTTP/2, inherently supports flow control. The server can push updates, but it must also respect flow control signals from the client, ensuring that it doesn't send data faster than what the client can handle.

Yes, grpc_cli tool uses essentially the same mechanism except implemented as a grpc service rather than as a stubby service. The basic principle of both is implementing the C++ proto library's DescriptorDatabase interface with cached recursive queries of (usually) the server's compiled in FileDescriptorProtos.

See also https://github.com/grpc/grpc/blob/master/doc/server-reflecti...

The primary difference between what grpc does and what stubby does is that grpc uses a stream to ensure that the reflection requests all go to the same server to avoid incompatible version skew and duplicate proto transmissions. With that said, in practice version skew is rarely a problem for grpc_cli style "issue a single RPC" usecases: even if requests do go to two or more different versions of a binary that might have incompatible proto graphs, it is very common for the request and response and RPC to all be in the same proto file so you only need to make one RPC in the first place unless you're using an extension mechanism like proto2 extensions or google.protobuf.Any.

While gRPC and Apache Thrift have served the microservice architecture well, CloudWeGo's advanced features and performance metrics set it apart as a promising open source solution for the future.

The loadBalancingConfig is what we use in order to decide which policy to go for (round_robin in this case). This JSON representation is based on a protobuf message, then why does the name resolver returns it in the JSON format? The main reason is that loadBalancingConfig is a oneof field inside the proto message and so it can not contain values unknown to the gRPC if used in the proto format. The JSON representation does not have this requirement so we can use a custom loadBalancingConfig .

The Dart implementation of gRPC which puts mobile and HTTP/2 first. It's built and maintained by the Dart team. gRPC is a high-performance RPC (remote procedure call) framework that is optimized for efficient data transfer.

gRPC is a high-performance, open-source RPC (Remote Procedure Call) framework initially developed by Google. It uses Protocol Buffers for serialization and supports bidirectional streaming.

In general, tunneling through HTTP2 turns out to be a great choice. There is a RPC protocol built on top of HTTP2: gRPC[1].

This is because HTTP2 is great at exploiting a TCP connection to transmit and receive multiple data structures concurrently - multiplexing.

There may not be a reason to use HTTP3 however, as QUIC already provides multiplexing.

I expect that in the future most communications will be over encrypted HTTP2 and QUIC simply because middleware creators can not resist to discriminate.

[1] <https://grpc.io>

Even in the https://grpc.io blog says this

gRPC