Back

Kubernetes on Oxide: How customer needs shaped our integrations

59 points2 hoursoxide.computer
wolttam6 minutes ago

So you’d be attaching a new volume to the running worker VM for each PVC? This seems a little odd to me. Could you attach a single large volume, and do path-based provisioning on that?

stevehipwell1 hour ago

I'm interested to see how the `oxide-cloud-controller-manager` is being built for "modern" Kubernetes and if it leads to any signify difference compared to CCMs that originated in-tree. Given the way Oxide engineer their solutions this could be really interesting.

FYI I've got `karpenter-provider-oxide` on my bingo card...

sudomateo15 minutes ago

There are few paths we can take here. The CCM's primary responsibility is to implement the cloudprovider.Interface[0] which has node, route, and service controllers. However, the CCM can run arbitrary named controllers as well, giving us a fun extension point for the future. The in-tree CCMs are being phased out in favor of out-of-tree CCMs. The AWS Cloud Provider[1] is a good example of what that's starting to look like.

My colleague demo'd Karpeneter internally. We haven't committed releasing it yet but we're discussing it.

[0] https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider/blob/master/clo...

[1] https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-aws

thegagne33 minutes ago

Yes this would be great addition! Also it would be awesome to see proper load balancer, ingress controller with `gateway api` and a `api gateway` (two separate things).

I’m not an oxide customer, just a fan. I have lots of ideas around how something like this should look, being disappointed with the complexity and also shortcomings of products on the market for this stuff, both in the cloud and on prem.

sudomateo10 minutes ago

I'll need to record a video on what's possible today. My personal Kubernetes cluster running on Oxide uses the CCM for LoadBalancer services and NGINX Gateway Fabric for Gateway API things. I'm mostly using HTTPRoute resources today.

There's an opportunity to more tightly integrate at the network layer but we'll want to get our load balancer released first.

whazor23 minutes ago

Kubernetes is where Oxide, from my armchair, doesn't yet quite match the public cloud.

On AWS EKS Fargate, each pod runs in its own dedicated VM. With Oxide each k8s node is a VM, so you still need something like Talos.

On networking it looks like it is getting closer. Where you can have external subnet give pod routed IPs without overlay. But the gap, as marked by the article, is also the load balancing.

It would be nice if Kubernetes were a native feature out-of-the-box. Also integrated within the existing user/access control.

moondev25 minutes ago

Love to see the CAPOx provider and buy in to Cluster API

overflowy1 hour ago

I would absolutely kill for them to open source their documentation system.

bcantrill51 minutes ago
overflowy48 minutes ago

OMG, you just made my day!

ahl15 minutes ago

does this mean that you won't be killing anyone?

pianoben56 minutes ago

I have seldom wanted anything as much as I want an Oxide rack at home. Maybe in 40 years we'll start to see the first ones show up in surplus auctions...