4 ms·
Welp, I wonder when this will make sense to look at -- I'm pretty happy with `IngressRoute`[0] and related CRDs that are used with traefik. I guess when traefi
by hardwaresofton 3y ago
Welp, I wonder when this will make sense to look at -- I'm pretty happy with `IngressRoute`[0] and related CRDs that are used with traefik.
I guess when traefik goes all-in on gateway (they were one of the earliest with support for it), then it will make sense.
[0]: https://doc.traefik.io/traefik/routing/providers/kubernetes-crd/#kind-ingressroute https://doc.traefik.io/traefik/routing/providers/kubernetes-...
- Already__Taken 3y agoingressRoute crd exists because builtin ingress isn't quite good enough. so it'll probably live on a good while.
- hardwaresofton 3y agoNote that I was talking about Gateway, which is the tool that the original article is about. I was referring to whether it would make any sense for me to move from IngressRoute to Gateway any time soon.
- Already__Taken 3y agoAye that's what I meant, if you're happy with ingressRoute you've probably got a longer migration clock than just Ingress as traefik has an additional vested interest in keeping it working. It might even be able to be re-implemented into a gatewayClass without changes.
- hardwaresofton 3y agoAhh got you, thanks for the note!
- no_carrier 3y agoThe problem with IngressRoute is that Helm charts are mostly using Ingress. Luckily, traefik have solved this through the use of annotations, which allows me to avoid using IngressRoute entirely.
- Already__Taken 3y agoAh that's clever, I avoided it because it's a same-but-different technology and I try to avoid leaving the defaults. Just ingress wasn't so bad that was worth it. That is a good solution though.