kraken VS external-dns

https://github.com/uber/kraken?tab=readme-ov-file#comparison...

"Kraken was initially built with a BitTorrent driver, however, we ended up implementing our P2P driver based on BitTorrent protocol to allow for tighter integration with storage solutions and more control over performance optimizations.

Kraken's problem space is slightly different than what BitTorrent was designed for. Kraken's goal is to reduce global max download time and communication overhead in a stable environment, while BitTorrent was designed for an unpredictable and adversarial environment, so it needs to preserve more copies of scarce data and defend against malicious or bad behaving peers.

Despite the differences, we re-examine Kraken's protocol from time to time, and if it's feasible, we hope to make it compatible with BitTorrent again."

Kraken seems unmaintained: https://github.com/uber/kraken/issues/313

For within your boundary of control, whether that be r/selfhosting, r/homelab, or enterprise a small registry or something like uber's kraken registry makes more sense.

First hit on Google is https://github.com/uber/kraken Did not know such thing exists.

Uber Engineering open-sourced Kraken [1], their peer-to-peer docker registry. I remember it originally using the BitTorrent protocol but in their readme they now say it is "based on BitTorrent" due to different tradeoffs they needed to make.

As far as I know there aren't any projects doing peer-to-peer distribution of container images to servers, probably because it's useful to be able to use a stock docker daemon on your server. The Kraken page references Dragonfly [2] but I haven't grokked it yet, it might be that.

It's also possible that in practice you'd want your CI nodes optimized for compute because they're doing a lot of work, your registry hosts for bandwidth, and your servers again for compute, and having one daemon to rule them all seems elegant but is actually overgeneralized, and specialization is better.

1 https://github.com/uber/kraken

If you're pulling big images you could try kube-fledged (it's the simplest option, a CRD that works like a pre-puller for your images), or if you have a big cluster you can try a p2p distributor, like kraken or dragonfly2.

Also there's that project called Nydus that allows starting up big containers way faster. IIRC, starts the container before pulling the whole image, and begins to pull data as needed from the registry.

https://github.com/senthilrch/kube-fledged

https://github.com/dragonflyoss/Dragonfly2

https://github.com/uber/kraken

https://nydus.dev/

Uber Kraken: Kraken is a P2P Docker registry capable of distributing TBs of data in seconds (URL: https://github.com/uber/kraken)

Might want to consider a private p2p solution like https://github.com/uber/kraken or similar.

Cost, availability, upkeep. Same as any other service. There are alternatives… https://github.com/uber/kraken

The second one is a combination of tools: External DNS, cert-manager, and NGINX ingress. Using these as a stack, you can quickly deploy an application, making it available through a DNS with a TLS without much effort via simple annotations. When I first discovered External DNS, I was amazed at its quality.

One of the reasons why I chose Hetzner was that it WAS supported by the ExternalDNS project. I didn't quite understand why the Hetzner provider was pulled, but I saw that an attempt of re-adding it was refused, on the ground that the upcoming webhook architecture would have allowed to better maintain providers.

Write a custom controller for the external DNS controller, or setup some form of ArgoCD app / appset templating.

so I am looking at having an automated way for new routers registered in Traefik to also have the corresponding DNS entry added to my Pihole instance similar to external-dns but obviously, this is exclusive to ingress on k8s environments. my current setup is traefik in a container on unraid.

You technically don’t need to run a load balancer or have a virtual IP for your control plane. If you control your dns, you can add an A record pointing to all IPs for your control plane nodes. It won’t load balance your traffic, but combined with something like External DNS it gives you HA for the control plane.

I normally deploy external-dns, which automatically updates DNS with the ingress controller's external IP address.

Background: Having a look I can see this https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns

3) Use the Kubernetes External-DNS. I've never used this, but this is assuming it can update DNS for each pods/app to point to the correct Node (it'd need to update my Homelab DNS running on Windows Server)

So here’s the solution I have taken for our current stack. EKS and its dependencies are created through terraform using the eks module as well as provision a route53 subdomain and a wildcard cert. Once we have that created, I have installed this deployment into the cluster via the helm module: https://kubernetes-sigs.github.io/aws-load-balancer-controller/v2.4/. This allows me to use kuberentes resources (load balancers or ingress objects) and it will handle all the provisioning of load balancers and security groups for me, based on my application yaml and annotations. We also use https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns to manage all of our specific host names for the applications through annotations. So to generally put, terraform manages out Kubernetes clusters, and Kubernetes manages the deployment of anything needed for the application including volumes, load balancers, hostnames though Kubernetes system deployments

Metallb for your load balancer (layer2 mode will do) NginX-ingress, will be spot on for internal home apps External-dns to publish your dns record to your Dns server at home, https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/external-dns