kraken VS ipdr

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

IPDR is a service to allow for images stored on IPFS to be accessible over Docker Registry HTTP API V2 Spec

Probably. You still need to store and serve the data somewhere of course but for even moderately successful open source organizations they will likely find volunteer mirrors. The nice thing about IPFS is that new people can start mirroring content without any risk or involvement, new mirrors are auto-discovered, like bittorrent.

It seems like the docker registry format isn't completely static so I don't think you can just use a regular HTTP gateway to access but there is https://github.com/ipdr/ipdr which seems to be a docker registry built on IPFS.

> We'd still need a registry for mapping the image name to CID, along with users/teams/etc.

IPNS is fairly good for this. You can use a signing key to get a stable ID for your images or if you want a short memorable URL you can publish a DNS record and get /ipns/docker.you.example/.

Of course now you have pushed responsibility of access control to your DNS or by who has access to the signing key.