kubespray

y to maintain if and only if your company is mature enough to follow that model and isn't subject to the soicotechnical issues that plague containers too. While the workflow changes, the hard parts of OS and k8s, including networking, monitoring, etc,.. are exactly the same. As a random example of what always screws this up let me point at kubespray, which is not unique at all. Note the: > Remove docker requirements https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubespray/issues/6400 That is because, like many projects, they didn't respect the natural boundaries of the node components, and they are now paying the price for that debt. k8s and OS from an infrastructure point of view are equal in complexity. It isn't instantiating a container with CRI foo, or libvirt command bar that is the hard part. It is the distributed computing, virtual networking , resource allocation, federation, API's etc... that is hard. Note, if you think that the "OS is dead" for all needs, especially in the telco space, you may want to dig into what containers actually are. They are just namespaces running on an OS, and it will still be horses for corses as to what is appropriate. Especially if you are using the easy ways of instantiating hardware for k8s, almost all of them are highly insecure by default and you are going to have to dig into the same style of systems with similar components or you will have a leak of data at some point. I wish there was something better than OS, but if you use a dev mindset and not a glass house IT mindset it is a very useful tool that may be the least worst option for you for some needs.

espray vagrant@amaster:~/kubespray$ declare -a IPS=(100.0.0.2 100.0.0.3) vagrant@amaster:~/kubespray$ CONFIG_FILE=inventory/mycluster/hosts.yml python3 contrib/inventory_builder/inventory.py ${IPS[@]} Step 10: Run the ansible-playbook on ansible node ansible-playbook -i inventory/mycluster/hosts.yml --become --become-user=root cluster.yml Step 11: Install kubectl on kubernetes master vagrant@node1:~$ curl -LO https://storage.googleapis.com/kubernetes-release/release/`c... -s https://storage.googleapis.com/kubernetes-release/release/st... vagrant@node1:~$ sudo cp /etc/kubernetes/admin.conf /home/vagrant/config vagrant@node1:~$ mkdir .kube vagrant@node1:~$ mv config .kube/ vagrant@node1:~$ sudo chown $(id -u):$(id -g ) $HOME/.kube/config Step 12: Verify the kubernetes nodes vagrant@node1:~$ kubectl get nodes NAME STATUS ROLES AGE VERSION node1 Ready master 13m v1.18.2 node2 Ready master 13m v1.18.2

espray ). My personal favorite is Typhoon ( https://typhoon.psdn.io/ ), because it uses a "package manager" (software delivery mechanism) that allows you to declare dependencies between packages and also allows you to deploy the entire cluster from the ground up -- Hashicorp's Terraform ( https://www.terraform.io/ ). The kubernetes package manager is helm ( https://helm.sh/ ), but if I were you I'd wrap helm charts in terraform modules using the helm provider ( https://github.com/mcuadros/terraform-provider-helm ). By contrast, Nomad is much simpler to set up and has a much better modular design. But then, so did the OS GNU Hurd. And no one uses that anymore. Kubernetes is much more monolithic in design (huh, so is Linux). Therefore, I would choose kubernetes, but treat it like an OS. It's complicated. Don't choose what ingress you will use. Instead choose what distribution you will use, and let the distribution guide your decisions, unless you have a good reason. Realize that you're learning an OS (resource scheduler = os in my head). Kubernetes has more complexity than Nomad up front, but at least it's not accidental complexity. K8s calls the resource scheduler problem what it is -- hard, and treats it appropriately. The other safe bet is Terraform as the package manager. Choose a kubernetes distro that uses it (Typhoon, Kops). It is getting huge. Kubernetes' extensible API is what really makes it cool. Having a prometheus operator ( https://github.com/coreos/prometheus-operator ) automatically monitor your services for you is pretty nice. Finally, don't expect the stability you see in the Linux OS. Kubernetes is still coming out of the primordial ooze, though it's way more mature than Nomad in its community. Still, when a google search for how to do something on a cluster mostly turns up github issues, you know we're still in the early stages. That said, Nomad is way easier to set up, and supports things like raw execution, JVM direct execution, and chrooted exec, so if you can't use containers at least you can still use a cluster. You'll be rigging everything yourself, but raw execution actually gives you a lot of rope ( https://github.com/hashicorp/nomad/issues/150 ). So if you need to do something really custom, Nomad might not be so bad. Kind of like embedded Linux.