ingress VS caddy-ratelimit

Caddy

That is true, unfortunately. We, the core maintainers, don't use k8s ourselves, so we need to defer to the community for help. See https://github.com/caddyserver/ingress

Caddy at its simplest form is an HTTP server. So you could use it to front end your application that otherwise isn't well suited for taking direct HTTP requests. Caddy would bring you other features like TLS support.

However I think in K8s world Caddy would make the most sense as an Ingress Controller. There is even a project as such: https://github.com/caddyserver/ingress

All traffic would terminate first at Caddy. Handling TLS, HTTP1/2/3, etc. Then passing it back to your application service/pod.

Sorry actually I'm mixing up caddy with traefik. And ingress is an http lb + something that talks to k8s to dynamically update the configuration. Caddy has a WIP ingress project https://github.com/caddyserver/ingress

We have an ingress controller in the works by the community here: https://github.com/caddyserver/ingress

You can rate limit HTTP requests (agnostic of specific HTTP versions): https://github.com/mholt/caddy-ratelimit

If you can't already do it with the rate limit module I wrote, open an issue with your detailed requirements: https://github.com/mholt/caddy-ratelimit -- should be pretty straightforward for the most part.

> QoS for a shared-multitenant system, in the presence of customers with really badly tuned and spiky request workloads, whose traffic you must nevertheless mostly accept.

Yah, we see that sometimes. Caddy usually handles it fine, sometimes with a bit of massaging the config.

I'm using caddy for my web server due to it's awesome automatic certificate functionality using Let's Encrypt behind the scenes. Caddy supports rate limiting via this plugin so I don't have to worry about folks killing my API.