all
I knew well about k8s' nodePort and ClusterIP type in services.
But I am very confused about the Ingress way, because how will a request come into a pod in k8s by this Ingress way?
Suppose K8s master IP is 1.2.3.4, after Ingress setup, and can connect to backend service(e.g, myservice) with a port(e.g, 9000)
Now, How can I visit this myservice:9000 outside? i.e, through 1.2.3.4? As there's no entry port on the 1.2.3.4 machine.
And many docs always said visit this via 'foo.com' configed in the ingress YAML file. But that is really funny, because xxx.com definitely needs DNS, it's not a magic to let you new-invent any xxx.com you like be a real website and can map your xxx.com to your machine!
The key part of the picture is the Ingress Controller. It's an instance of a proxy (could be nginx or haproxy or another ingress type) and runs inside the cluster. It acts as an entrypoint and lets you add more sophisticated routing rules. It reads Ingress Resources that are deployed with apps and which define the routing rules. This allows each app to say what the Ingress Controller needs to do for routing to it.
Because the controller runs inside the cluster, it needs to be exposed to the outside world. You can do this by NodePort but if you're using a cloud provider then it's more common to use LoadBalancer. This gives you an external IP and port that reaches the Ingress controller and you can point DNS entries at that. If you do point DNS at it then you have the option to use routing rules base on DNS (such as using different subdomains for different apps).
The article 'Kubernetes NodePort vs LoadBalancer vs Ingress? When should I use what?' has some good explanations and diagrams - here's the diagram for Ingress:
Related
Exposing Service from a BareMetal(Kubeadm) Build Kubernetes Cluster to the outside world. I am trying to access my Nginx as a service outside of the cluster to get NGINX output in the web browser.
For that, I have created a deployment and service for NGINX as shown below,
As per my search, found that we have below to expose to outside world
MetalLb
Ingress NGINX
Some HELM resources
I would like to know all these 3 or any more approaches in such way it help me to learn new things.
GOAL
Exposing Service from a BareMetal(Kubeadm) Built Kubernetes Cluster to the outside world.
How Can I make my service has its own public IP to access from the outside cluster?
You need to set up MetalLB to get an external IP address for the LoadBalancer type services. It will give a local network IP address to the service.
Then you can do port mapping (configuration in the router) of incoming traffic of port 80 and port 443 to your external service IP address.
I have done a similar setup you can check it here in detail:
https://developerdiary.me/lets-build-low-budget-aws-at-home/
You need to deploy an ingress controller in your cluster so that it gives you an entrypoint where your applications can be accessed. Traditionally, in a cloud native environment it would automatically provision a LoadBalancer for you that will read the rules you define inside your Ingress object and route your request to the appropriate service.
One of the most commonly used ingress controller is the Nginx Ingress Controller. There are multiple ways you can use to deploy it (mainfests, helm, operators). In case of bare metal clusters, there are multiple considerations which you can read here.
MetalLB is still in beta stage so its your choice if you want to use. If you don't have a hard requirement to expose the ingress controller as a LoadBalancer, you can expose it as a NodePort Service that will accessible across all your nodes in the cluster. You can then map that NodePort Service in your DNS so that the ingress rules are evaluated.
I used to work with Openshift/OKD cluster deployed in AWS and there it was possible to connect cluster to some domain name from Route53. Then as soon as I was deploying ingress with some hosts mappings (and the hosts defined in ingres were subdomains of the basis domain) all necessary lb rules (Routes in Openshift) and subdomain itself were created by Openshift and were directly available. For example: Openshift is connected to domain "somedomain.com" which is registered in Route53. In ingress I have the host mapping like:
hosts:
- host: sub1.somedomain.com
paths:
- path
After deployment I can reach sub1.somedomain.com. Is this kind of functionality available in GKE?
So far I have seen only mapping to static IP.
Also I red here https://cloud.google.com/kubernetes-engine/docs/how-to/ingress-http2 that if I need to connect service with ingress, the service have to be of type NodePort. Is it realy so? In Openshift it was not required any normal ClusterIP service could be connected to ingress.
Thanks in advance!
I think you should consider the other Ingress Controllers for your use cases.
I'm not an expert of the GKE, but as I can see Best practices for enterprise multi-tenancy as follows,
you need to consider how to route the multiple Ingress hostnames through wildcard subdomain like the OpenShift additionally.
Set up HTTP(S) Load Balancing with Ingress
:
You can create and configure an HTTP(S) load balancer by creating a Kubernetes Ingress resource,
which defines how traffic reaches your Services and how the traffic is routed to your tenant's application.
By registering Services with the Ingress resource, the Services' naming convention becomes consistent,
showing a single ingress, such as tenanta.example.com and tenantb.example.com.
The routing feature depends on the Ingress Controllers basically.
In my finding, the default Ingress Controllers of the GKE just creates a Google Cloud HTTP(S) Load Balancer, but it does not consider multi-tenancy by default like the OpenShift.
In contrast, in the OpenShift, the Ingress Controller was implemented using HAProxy with dynamic configuration feature as follows.
LB -tenanta.example.com--> HAProxy(directly forward the tenanta.example.com traffic to the target pod IPs) ---> Target Pods
The type of service exposition depends on the K8S implementation on each cloud provider.
If the ingress controller is a component inside your cluster, a ClusterIP is enough to have your service reachable (internally from inside the cluster itself)
If the ingress definition configure an external element (in case of GKE, a load balancer), this element isn't a part of the cluster and can't know the ClusterIP (because it is only accessible internally). A node port is required in this case.
So, in your case, either you expose your service in NodePort, or you configure GKE with another Ingress controller, locally installed in the cluster, instead of using this one by default.
So far GKE does not provide the possibility to dynamically create subdomains. The wished situation would be if GKE cluster can be set some DNS zone managed in GCP and there is a mimik of OpenShift Routes using for example ingress annotations.
But the reality tight now - you have to create subdomain or domain youself as well as IP address wich you connect this domain to. And this particular GCP IP address (using name) can be connected to ingress using annotations. Or it can be used in loadbalancer service.
We have a request to expose certain pods in an AKS environment to the internet for 3rd party use.
Currently we have a private AKS cluster with a managed standard SKU load balancer in front using the advanced azure networking (basically Calico) where each Pod gets its own private IP from the Vnet IP space. All private IPs currently route through a firewall via user defined route in order to reach the internet, and vice versa. Traffic between on prem routes over a VPN connection through the azure virtual wan. I don’t want to change any existing routing behavior unless 100% necessary.
My question is, how do you expose an existing private AKS cluster’s specific Pods to be accessible from the internet? The entire cluster does not need to be exposed to the internet. The issue I foresee is the ephemeral Pods and ever changing IPs making simple NATing in the firewalls not an option. I’ve also thought about simply making a new AKS cluster with a public load balancer. The issue here though is security as it must still go through the firewalls and likely could with existing user defined routes
What is the recommended way to setup the architecture where certain Pods in AKS can be accessible over the internet, while still allowing those Pods to access the Pods over the private network. I want to avoid exposing all Pods to the internet
There are a couple of options that you can use in order to expose your application to
outside your network, such as: Service:
NodePort: Exposes the Service on each Node’s IP at a static port (the NodePort). A ClusterIP Service, to which the NodePort Service routes, is automatically created. You’ll be able to contact the NodePort Service, from outside the cluster, by requesting <NodeIP>:<NodePort>.
LoadBalancer: Exposes the Service externally using a cloud provider’s load balancer. NodePort and ClusterIP Services, to which the external load balancer routes, are automatically created.
Also, there is another option that is use an ingress, IMO this is the best way to expose HTTP applications externally, because it's possible to create rules by path and host, and gives you much more flexibility than services. For ingress only HTTP/HTTPS is supported, if you need TCP then go to Services
I'd recommend you take a look in this links to understand in deep how services and ingress works:
Kubernetes Services
Kubernetes Ingress
NGINX Ingress
AKS network concepts
Deploy nginx ingress controller and bind the ingress controller service to a public Load Balancer. Define Ingress rules for the kubernetes services that you want to access from internet. Note that ingress controller enables entry point to the services running inside kubernetes
Several years later and wanted to update.
We did successfully implement a scalable ingress option into our private AKS cluster using NGINX as the ingress. The basic flow was
Public IP > NAT to frontend private IP of NGINX > NGINX path rules that point to your pod/service
Taking a URL as an example for a microservice of www.example.com/service1, the public DNS entry you create is what resolves www.example.com to the public IP that you will NAT to the private IP of NGINX. Then, the rules you create within NGINX take the specific /service1 path of the URL and use it to route to the specific service you pointed it at. It behaves much like URL switching in other load balancers. That is really all NGINX is doing for you. In NGINX syntax, this involves specifying a hosts name (URL) and an associated rule with a backend path and service name. The service name in this example is service1 and the path is / because service1 sits just behind the root.
Something like this saves cost by using less public IPs. For example, you can use a subdomain to easily NAT traffic to a seperate test environment. www.test.example.com and www.example.com can point to separate public IPs, which you can NAT to separate AKS clusters running NGINX. In this way, your NGINX rules can be identical because it's only looking for /service1 which hopefully you've mirrored test and prod environments.
Many ways to do this but a few recommendations from lessons learned
use subdomains to break out multiple environments
standardize your NGINX private front end IP across envronments (make them all end in .100 as an example
create a standard NGINX ingress template where you really only need to modify the serviceName. Your hostName should be static within an environment
have your devs include this and deploy their microservices with helm rather than relying on an infrastructure team to update NGINX services. Sort of defeats the devops mentality and speed gains
This is more a design question than an issue. We have deployed in our company our own Kubernetes infrastructure and we are trying to use ingresses and NGINX ingress controller to externally expose our services, but since it is not a cloud environment such as GCP or AWS, we can't use service type "LoadBalancer". Should we just expose our ingress controller through a service type "NodePort"? Is that the normal way to go for production environments (non-cloud)?
From what I've read in another post, one suitable recommendation is to use NodePort, and manually point yet another external load balancer to the port on your Kubernetes nodes.
It just seems that exposing the ingress controller through this mechanism is somehow not very practical or robust (e.g. you don’t know what port your service is going to be allocated, and the port might get re-allocated at some point, etc.)
Is there any other mechanism maybe to expose the ingress controller to the external world?
The Loadbalancer service approach is one way to do it but behind it it's nothing more than a nodeport on the cluster.
Even if you use a service that create a LB on cloud provider, the LB needs to have a target port to communicate with the cluster.
When using a nginx-ingress that will mostly handle web requests, it's common usage to put an ingress in front of a nodeport service.
So with this I think using NodePort services is a good idea to do what you want ;)
This is my opinion, I'm interested if anyone else has another way to do it.
You can specify the port via nodePort in the service. Then it would not be random.
I have deployment that hosts a website on port 9001 and a service attached to it. I want to allow anyone (from outside cluster) to be able to connect to that site.
Any help would be appreciated.
I want to allow anyone (from outside cluster) to be able to connect to that site
There are many ways to do this using kubernetes services to expose port 9001 of the website to the outside world:
Service type LoadBalancer if you have an external, cloud-provider's load-balancer.
ExternalIPs. The website can be hit at ExternalIP:Port.
Service type NodePort if the cluster's nodes are reachable from the users. The website can be hit at NodeIP:NodePort.
Ingress controller and ingress resource.
As you wrote that this is not a cloud deployment, you need to consider how to correctly expose this to the world in a decent fashion. First and formost, create a NodePort type service for your deployment. With this, your nodes will expose that service on a high port.
Depending on your network, at this point you either need to configure a loadbalancer in your network to forward traffic for some IP:80 to your node(s) high NodePort, or for example deploy HAProxy in a DeamonSet with hostNetwork: true that will proxy 80 to your NodePort.
A bit more complexity can be added by deployment of Nginx IngressController (exposed as above) and use of Ingress to make the Ingress Controller expose all your services without the need to fiddle with NodePort/LB/HAProxy for each of them individualy any more.