mirror of
https://github.com/cozystack/cozystack.git
synced 2026-10-29 16:17:20 +09:00
Aleksei Sviridkin
b3b280ea73
## What this PR does Phase 1 of external database exposure via Gateway API TLS-passthrough (#2815): adds a `tlsPassthroughListeners` field to `TenantGateway` and renders one layer-4 `mode: Passthrough` listener per entry, on a native database port with a per-engine subdomain hostname, alongside the Gateway's terminate listeners. No engine is wired: no TLSRoute, no certificate or CA changes. The existing layer-7 `tlsPassthroughServices` field gains a 62-entry count bound, an item length and a DNS-1123 item pattern, and a repeated entry now fails the reconcile with `Ready=False` instead of rendering the same listener twice. `spec.apex` gains a 253-character bound and nothing else: the CEL rules concatenate it, so the install-time cost estimator refuses the CRD without a declared bound. It gains no format pattern, and that is not a claim that a mixed-case host works. Such a host reaches the field verbatim from a namespace label, the renderer then composes listener hostnames Gateway API refuses, and that tenant has no Gateway either way; what a pattern would change is only that the write is refused, which fails this HelmRelease where the same fault costs the one Gateway. An apex no listener hostname can sit within is reported by the controller instead, and only when `tlsPassthroughListeners` is in use. The constraints and what they do to objects that already exist are described further down. The bound on an entry is what the schema can state on its own. An entry also becomes a listener name and a hostname built from the apex, so the controller checks both composed values against the 253 characters Gateway API allows and names whichever one overflows. Validation rejects duplicate listener names or ports, ports reserved by the platform Gateway (80 and 443), out-of-range ports, invalid DNS-1123 names, and hostnames outside the tenant apex (mirroring the Gateway hostname admission policy so an invalid entry cannot make the whole Gateway rejected). The SNI-overlap rule refuses two passthrough listeners that answer the same name on different ports. That is what [cilium#42898](https://github.com/cilium/cilium/issues/42898) reports: only one of the two routes ever works. It does not extend to a terminate listener and a passthrough listener sharing a name across ports. No failure is reported for that shape, and Cilium counts a terminate/passthrough pair as conflicting only when they share a port. The per-engine subdomain hostname scheme follows the phase-1 gate. The flat-hostname alternative (pending the Cilium listener-isolation fix targeting 1.20) is a later scheduling decision that does not change this API field. One shape differs from #2815 on purpose. The ticket has `hostname` optional with a `*.<name>.<apex>` default; here it is required. Deriving the SNI from the listener name hides the one value an operator has to get right, and the two drift apart the moment the naming scheme changes. Found while checking that pairing, unrelated to this field: a stock `dns01` gateway already renders `tls-api` (passthrough, 443) beside `https` (terminate, 443, `*.<apex>`), one port with overlapping SNI, which is the shape Cilium 1.19.6 marks `Conflicted`. That belongs to the Cilium bump and is recorded on #3343. Also named rather than fixed: the controller-side rules on this field stop the whole reconcile when they refuse a spec. `renderGateway` returns an error, so the Gateway is not updated at all, and the tenant sees `Ready=False` with `ReconcileError` while new app listeners and every certificate the controller would issue or amend wait behind it. Certificates already issued go on renewing, since cert-manager drives that from the objects already in the cluster and an aborted reconcile writes nothing to them. Dropping only the conflicting listener and reporting it on status would be the better shape, but that changes the error model of the whole renderer rather than one rule, so it is out of scope here. The current behaviour is at least observable: `Ready=False` is a signal, not silent drift. On HTTP-01, a hostname a passthrough listener answers earns no HTTPS-terminate listener once a TLSRoute claiming that hostname can be served on the listener, matched by SNI overlap so a wildcard entry reaches a name beneath it as readily as the name written in the spec, and the field itself is accepted under certMode http01 alone. That refusal is stated as the set of modes that can carry a passthrough listener rather than the set that cannot, because a mode added to the enum would otherwise be admitted by default: dns01 and existingSecret serve the whole apex from one wildcard terminate listener the pinned Cilium cannot keep apart from a passthrough listener beneath it, and edge ends TLS at the class provider and renders no TLS listener for one to sit beside. The route half of that condition is load-bearing rather than incidental. On the pinned v1.19.5, tlsPassthroughFilterChains walks a listener's routes and skips one with no backends, so a declared passthrough listener nothing attaches to contributes no filter chain and matches no ClientHello, while the terminate listener's chain is built from its own Secret and carries the name alone. Keying the withdrawal on the declaration would therefore take a name that is being served and hand it to a listener that forwards nowhere, and that is the ordinary shape rather than a corner: the chart puts api, vm-exportproxy and cdi-uploadproxy on every tenant Gateway, while there is one platform TLSRoute per name cluster-wide and each names one tenant's Gateway as its parent, so every other tenant renders all three entries with a route on none. The backend half is that same rule reached by a different road: the chain is built per route out of the backends that survived resolution, so a route that attached and forwards nowhere puts no chain on the name either, a backendRef naming a Service that does not exist yet because manifests applied out of order, one deleted since, a name with a typo, or one in another namespace with no ReferenceGrant, and without that half an ordinary backend mistake takes a live endpoint offline while Cilium builds nothing to replace it. Resolution asks what v1.19.5 asks and no more: the reference allowed, the Service present, and neither its ports nor its endpoints read, because the translator reads neither. Services and ReferenceGrants are watched alongside routes, so both halves are deferrals rather than exemptions and the withdrawal lands on the pass that sees the missing piece arrive. The withdrawal reaches HTTP-01 alone, because `collectHostnameClaims` returns nothing under the other two modes and they render no per-hostname listener to withdraw. A TLSRoute that declares no `spec.hostnames` claims the hostname of each rendered passthrough listener its parentRef selects, because that is the name Cilium serves it on: `ComputeHosts` at v1.19.5 substitutes the listener hostname for a route that names none, so such a route takes the name over exactly as one that spells it out does. The tenant-namespace hostname policy requires a route there to name its hostnames, so this shape reaches a Gateway from the system namespaces where the platform routes live, or from an administrator, not from a tenant chart. A claim broader than the listener's counts the same way from the other side: a TLSRoute claiming `*.<apex>` is served on `api.<apex>` rather than on the wildcard, because `ComputeHosts` returns the listener's own hostname for a route hostname covering it, so a claim covering a reserved name is judged as a claim on that name while the route keeps one entry under the key its owner wrote. Both restrictions are tied to the Cilium pin, currently v1.19.5. That version translates the Gateway into a single Envoy listener whose filter chains match on SNI without the port, so a terminate chain and a passthrough chain carrying one name collide regardless of which Gateway port declared them; upstream states the consequence above NeedsCrossProtocolSplit in operator/pkg/model/model.go as of v1.19.6, the release that starts splitting Envoy listeners per port when NeedsPerPortListeners holds. That is a disjunction rather than a blanket change, and the passthrough side of every one of its three clauses is counted from attached routes, so a listener with no TLSRoute behind it contributes to none of them: the split arrives with the route, not with the bump. The same single-listener translation has a consequence that is not a restriction: the declared port is where the listener is published, not a bound on reach, because the backend answers its hostname's SNI on every port the Gateway exposes. Firewalling a tenant address down to 80 and 443 does not put a database out of reach; the hostname is the access surface, and the field's own doc and the chart README now say so. Both restrictions are validation-only, and they lift together on the pin plus a configuration the split actually covers rather than on the bump alone. A route whose hostname is withdrawn this way is told so under this controller's own name: Accepted=False with `NoMatchingListenerHostname`, and a message naming the passthrough hostname that answers it, which for a wildcard entry the route cannot derive on its own. It matters most there. A wildcard entry can withdraw the listener from several published names beneath it at once, each one a TLSRoute claims and can be served on, and the certificates are garbage-collected with them, and a rollback is cheaper than that sounds: cert-manager here runs with `enableCertificateOwnerRef: false`, so deleting a Certificate leaves its Secret behind and a re-created Certificate adopts a still-valid one rather than placing an order. Before this the only signal was Cilium's own RouteParentStatus entry under a different controllerName. A TLSRoute whose hostname no passthrough listener answers is told so as well, on the same condition and for the same reason: before this change that hostname got a terminate listener Cilium refused with ResolvedRefs=False, so withdrawing the listener would otherwise have removed the only object saying the route went nowhere. Two things stay named rather than fixed. A `tlsPassthroughListeners` hostname of `*.<apex>` is refused only indirectly: the overlap rule rejects it while `tlsPassthroughServices` carries its defaults, because the wildcard covers api.<apex>, so emptying that list is enough to let it through, and the terminate listener then goes from every published name a TLSRoute claims under the wildcard. The README states this; refusing the apex and its wildcard on their own terms is a one-line rule worth adding when the field is wired up to chart values. A wildcard hostname on an attached HTTPRoute used to render a listener name the shipped Gateway CRD refuses, `https-*-<hash>`, which failed the whole Gateway write while the README said the shape worked. Listener and Certificate names now spell a leading `*` as `wildcard`, with the hash still covering the whole hostname, and a test reads both the listener-name and the hostname patterns off the shipped CRD bundle and renders wildcards through them; every name that was already admissible is pinned byte for byte, so nothing is renamed on upgrade. Under http01 an HTTPRoute wildcard claim is refused before the race and the overlap are read, with `NoMatchingListenerHostname`, because the HTTP-01 challenge issues no wildcard certificate and a terminate listener could never have carried the name. A route status write that fails no longer leaves the route carrying its previous condition: `updateRouteStatuses` and the whole-apex pass collect every failed write and return them after the loop, so the reconcile fails, the TenantGateway reports `Ready=False` with `ReconcileError` and controller-runtime requeues, while the loop still runs to the end so one route's conflict does not hold the others back. Conditions this controller wrote under http01 are retracted when the tenant moves to dns01, existingSecret or edge, for HTTPRoutes and hostname-less TLSRoutes alike, so a refusal does not outlive the mode that produced it. And a TLSRoute claiming a wildcard passthrough entry itself leaves the names beneath the wildcard alone, since Envoy ranks an exact server name above the wildcard and nothing collides. One thing this does not cover yet: Accepted is computed from the hostname race and the withdrawals above, so a route is still told it is fine when an HTTPRoute holds the name and the TLSRoute claiming it cannot attach to the terminate listener that answers it. That one predates this change. Two neighbours of it no longer fall in the gap. A `parentRef` port that names no listener answering the hostname is compared alongside the `sectionName`, since Gateway API requires every key a route pins itself with to match the listener it selects. An HTTPRoute's `parentRef.port` is judged the same way: the terminate listener sits on 443, so any other pinned port earns no listener and no certificate through that parentRef and reads the port-mismatch cause; port 80, or `sectionName: http`, from a namespace the plain-HTTP listener admits (the publishing tenant and cozy-cert-manager) is served plain with no terminate listener and no refusal, from any other namespace it is refused with `NotAllowedByListeners`, and a `sectionName` and a port that select different listeners select none and read `NoMatchingParent`. A plain-served route stays in the hostname race on the same footing as a terminating one, in every recount as well as the first count. And a `sectionName` naming a `tls-<name>` listener this Gateway does not render now reports `Accepted=False` with `NoMatchingParent`, Gateway API's reason for a parentRef matching no listener: the controller renders every listener in that namespace, so an absent name there is a fact rather than a guess, while a `sectionName` naming the plain-HTTP listener is judged like port 80 below, and any other name outside the prefix is written Accepted like an attached route, with the class controller's own status entry answering for the listener it named. The namespace case is off that list. Native-port listeners admit the publishing tenant alone, and a TLSRoute elsewhere on one of their hostnames is refused with `NotAllowedByListeners`. An HTTPRoute that pins itself by `sectionName` to a rendered `tls-<name>` passthrough listener is refused with the same reason: that listener forwards the stream it matched by SNI and terminates nothing, so it takes TLSRoute alone by protocol and cannot serve the route whatever answers its hostname. Its claim also leaves the hostname race before ownership is ranked, so the TLSRoute that can be served is not told it lost to a route that could never attach. Cilium does not report this refusal at the pin. The port-443 passthrough listeners name HTTPRoute in `allowedRoutes.kinds` to keep the port-443 set uniform (cilium#45559), the Gateway reports that entry back as `ResolvedRefs=False/InvalidRouteKinds` on the listener, and Cilium's route-side kind check reads a listener's kinds against every route on the Gateway rather than against the routes that named it, so it reports the route Accepted and the condition this controller writes is the only refusal the route gets. A hostname whose every claimant is refused this way earns no HTTPS-terminate listener and no certificate, where before it earned both. The refusal is decided per route rather than per hostname, which matters once a claim overlaps more than one reserved name: a wildcard covering both a port-443 service hostname and a native-port one is attachable through the first and refused through the second, so the answer comes from the listener the `parentRef` names, its own hostname and its own attach set. The row that pinned a `sectionName` naming no rendered listener as a known gap now pins the verdict instead. On the port-443 listeners the two namespace sets agree by construction, since `collectHostnameClaims` and the listeners' allowedRoutes selector run off the same list. And the justification for the pin is written out at every site that depends on it rather than once, so the day the pin moves they all have to move together and the one that does not is a false statement no diff can catch. That is not hypothetical here: three claims of exactly that shape were wrong in this branch and were caught by reading the source they described rather than by any diff, so the volume of restated reasoning is itself what produces them. One canonical block with references to it would carry the same knowledge with one place to update, and rewriting the narrative under review would be a documentation change rather than a fix, so it is tracked on #3842 instead. The gateway chainsaw suite now covers the withdrawal, which it did not before: a tenant owning its own Gateway renders the shipped passthrough entries with nothing routed to them, an HTTPRoute on api.<apex> keeps its terminate listener, its certificate and Accepted=True there, and attaching a TLSRoute to the same listener, pointed at a Service in the tenant's own namespace, since a route that forwards nowhere is the case the first phase already measures, withdraws all three and moves the route to NoMatchingListenerHostname. A third phase patches in a native-port entry and reads the per-listener readiness flag, which is the claim no test against a fake client can settle. The first two phases are one measurement: withdrawing on demand is what dates the earlier assertion to settled state rather than to a withdrawal that had not arrived yet. The `Require API owner review for sizeable API changes` check is red on purpose and does not clear with a code change. A new field plus tightened validation on already-shipped fields counts as a sizeable API change, so `.github/workflows/api-review-gate.yaml` holds the PR until an API owner approves it. The gate counts each owner's latest review on the current head commit, so the approval has to land on the head as pushed and any later push invalidates it; the job re-runs on review submission, so no push is needed to flip it. Reading that red as "not ready" is the mistake this paragraph exists to prevent. Part of #2815. ### Release note ```release-note feat(gateway): TenantGateway supports layer-4 TLS-passthrough listeners on native database ports for SNI-based external exposure. On HTTP-01 gateways a hostname a TLS-passthrough listener answers, including any name beneath a wildcard entry, no longer earns an HTTPS-terminate listener or a Gateway-issued certificate once a TLSRoute claiming that hostname can be served on the listener and forwards to a backend that resolves; a hostname claimed only by a TLSRoute stops earning one too. A TLSRoute with no spec.hostnames counts as claiming the hostname of each passthrough listener its parentRef selects, and one whose hostname covers a listener's counts as claiming that listener's name, both being the name Cilium serves it on. A declared passthrough listener with no route on it changes nothing, because it emits no filter chain and the terminate listener is what answers the name, and neither does a route whose backendRefs resolve to nothing, a Service that does not exist, or one in another namespace with no ReferenceGrant, since such a route emits no filter chain either. The controller watches Services and ReferenceGrants, so the withdrawal it defers lands once the backend appears. So the tenant whose Gateway the platform TLSRoutes name, tenant-root unless the cluster's expose-ingress says otherwise, sheds the terminate listeners and certificates for api, vm-exportproxy and cdi-uploadproxy on upgrade (those TLSRoutes ship with the cozystack-api, kubevirt and kubevirt-cdi packages, each rendered only where the Gateway integration is enabled and the service is among the platform's exposed services), and a tenant that renders the same three entries with no route on them keeps what it has. The shed certificates leave their TLS Secrets behind: cert-manager here ships enableCertificateOwnerRef: false, so each Secret stays in the namespace with no owner, nothing renewing it and nothing deleting it. That cuts both ways, as stale Secrets to remove by hand and as a cheap way back, since a re-created Certificate adopts a still-valid Secret instead of placing an order. A route the controller renders no listener it can attach to now carries Accepted=False from this controller instead of Accepted=True. Five shapes report NoMatchingListenerHostname and the message tells them apart: the HTTPRoute whose hostname a passthrough listener answers, the TLSRoute with no passthrough listener behind it, the route whose parentRef names a listener that answers a different hostname, the route whose parentRef names a port no listener answering its hostname is published on, and the HTTPRoute claiming a wildcard hostname under http01, which the HTTP-01 challenge cannot certify. A route pinned by sectionName to a tls-<name> listener the Gateway does not render carries NoMatchingParent instead, which is what Gateway API calls a parentRef matching no listener, and so does an HTTPRoute whose sectionName and parentRef port select different listeners. A TLSRoute outside the publishing tenant's namespace claiming a native-port hostname carries NotAllowedByListeners instead, since those listeners admit the tenant alone. So does an HTTPRoute pinned by sectionName to a rendered tls-<name> passthrough listener, which cannot serve its kind, and an HTTPRoute selecting the plain-HTTP listener from a namespace it does not admit; a refused route also stops counting in the hostname race, so a hostname whose every claimant is refused earns no terminate listener and no certificate. Listener and Certificate names derived from a wildcard hostname are admissible now, names that were already admissible do not change, a failed route-status write fails the reconcile instead of being logged away, and conditions written under http01 are retracted when certMode leaves it. The dns01 and existingSecret cert modes shed nothing, because neither renders per-hostname listeners at all, and tlsPassthroughListeners is accepted under http01 alone: those two serve the whole apex from one wildcard terminate listener, and edge terminates TLS upstream and renders no TLS listener a passthrough entry could sit beside. The withdrawal does not take a working path away: on the pinned Cilium both port-443 filter chains already carry these hostnames and nothing on the objects says which one answers a connection, so a race that was previously undetermined and unobservable now resolves the same way every time. Treat this as a change of serving path rather than the removal of something idle: today each of those three hostnames has a terminate listener and a passthrough listener on port 443, both filter chains carry the SNI, and nothing on the objects says which one answers a connection. Gateway API calls for both listeners to report Conflicted; the pinned v1.19.5 has no Conflicted condition at all, so there is nothing to read, and you cannot tell from the cluster whether api.<apex> is terminated by the Gateway or passed through. Afterwards it is passed through, always. Read the Gateway's listener conditions before upgrading to see what those listeners were serving. Before upgrading, confirm the management apiserver serving certificate carries api.<apex> in its SANs, because once the ACME certificate is withdrawn that is the only certificate left on the name; a cluster that came from the ingress-nginx path already meets that, a cluster served by the Gateway's ACME certificate since it moved does not necessarily and loses the name until the SAN is added. If something depends on the terminate path for one of those names, the package README lists three ways forward and what each costs. Moving the consumer to another hostname under the apex is the only one that gives up nothing. ``` ### Downstream repositories Walked the trigger map in `docs/agents/contributing.md` against this diff: `api/gateway/v1alpha1/{tenantgateway_types.go,zz_generated.deepcopy.go}`, `internal/controller/tenantgateway/{reconciler,renderers,conflict,mapper,status,backends,reconciler_test,crdcel_test,mapper_test,backends_test}.go`, `internal/controller/tenantgateway/rbac_test.go`, `cmd/cozystack-controller/main.go`, `hack/e2e-chainsaw/gateway/chainsaw-test.yaml`, `packages/system/cozystack-controller/definitions/gateway.cozystack.io_tenantgateways.yaml`, `packages/system/cozystack-controller/templates/rbac.yaml`, `packages/core/platform/values.yaml`, and `packages/extra/gateway/README.md`. No trigger fires, and the two repositories worth ruling out explicitly are below rather than waved off. `cozystack/website`: no package under `packages/apps/` or `packages/extra/` is added, renamed or removed. `packages/extra/gateway/README.md` is edited in place. The docs generator regenerates a reference page from a package README only for the apps hardcoded in the website `Makefile`, and `gateway` is in none of `APPS`, `K8S`, `VMS`, `NETWORKING` or `SERVICES`, so there is no generated page for this package to drift out of step with. That gap is the same shape the trigger map already records for `packages/apps/opensearch` and `packages/apps/bucket`; it predates this change and is neither created nor widened here. None of the other website triggers apply: `packages/core/platform/values.yaml` changes only in a comment, which now says that api, vm-exportproxy and cdi-uploadproxy render a TLSRoute rather than an HTTPRoute, with no key added, moved or given a new default, no platform variant or component moves, no release asset is renamed, `ApplicationDefinition` semantics are unchanged, there is no Talos bump and no developer-tooling change. `cozystack/terraform-provider-cozystack`: this adds an API field, so the field-level triggers are the ones to check, and they are keyed to app charts rather than to this CRD. No app is added under `packages/apps/`; no `values.schema.json` gains, loses or renames a field; no version enum, `values.yaml` default, `kind`, `plural`, `release.prefix` or output Secret/Service name changes. `TenantGateway` is not among the CRDs the provider types by hand. Those are `Package` under `cozystack.io` and `Plan`/`RestoreJob` under `backups.cozystack.io`, and the provider carries no reference to `gateway.cozystack.io` at all. It therefore falls under the map's last bullet: the spec travels as opaque JSON, so the provider keeps working and simply offers no typed access to `tlsPassthroughListeners`, which is the position it already holds for every other field it does not model, and not a break. The provider's new-top-level-field test guard is scoped to `api/apps/v1alpha1`, which this diff does not touch. `cozystack/ansible-cozystack`: nothing in reach. `packages/core/installer/values.yaml` and the `cozy-system`/PSA contract are untouched, no platform variant is added or renamed, none of the `packages/core/platform/values.yaml` keys the role sets are involved (the file changes in a comment alone), no object the role waits on is renamed, and `hack/e2e-prepare-cluster.bats` node prerequisites are unchanged. The schema constraints this diff adds to already-shipped fields all reach objects that already exist, and every one of them is a kind the apiserver ratchets. `spec.apex` gains a 253-character limit (no pattern: a mixed-case apex is admitted and refused by the controller only when passthrough listeners are declared), and `spec.tlsPassthroughServices` gains a DNS-1123 item pattern and a length bound. A stored value that violates one still passes any write that leaves it unchanged, so the rule bites only once the value itself changes. A repeated `tlsPassthroughServices` entry is reported by the controller as `Ready=False` rather than refused at admission, and the reason is not the one this section used to give. Ratcheting does reach a list-type error: `customresource.ValidateUpdate` validates an incoming object's list-type semantics only when the stored object passes them, so a stored duplicate is ratcheted through rather than blocking every write. What makes the marker the wrong tool is the grain of that ratchet, which is the whole object rather than the field, so one stored duplicate would switch list-type checking off for every list on the `TenantGateway` at once and say nothing about it. Documented in `packages/extra/gateway/README.md`, and pinned by `TestTightenedConstraintsOnExistingObjects` together with `TestListTypeSetWouldNotRefuseAStoredDuplicate`, which compiles a copy of the shipped schema carrying the marker to show what the apiserver actually does with one. Shipped defaults conform and the chart already fails on an empty host, so this is a no-op in practice. - [x] No downstream repository is affected by this change - [ ] [cozystack/website](https://github.com/cozystack/website) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/terraform-provider-cozystack](https://github.com/cozystack/terraform-provider-cozystack) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/ansible-cozystack](https://github.com/cozystack/ansible-cozystack) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/ccp](https://github.com/cozystack/ccp) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/talm](https://github.com/cozystack/talm) - follow-up: - [ ] [cozystack/cozyhr](https://github.com/cozystack/cozyhr) - follow-up: <!-- This is an auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai --> ## Summary by CodeRabbit * **New Features** * Added layer-4 TLS passthrough listeners (`tlsPassthroughListeners`) with native port + SNI hostname, rendered as passthrough listeners and limited to TLSRoute attachment. * **Bug Fixes** * Added stricter admission-time and controller validation (reserved ports 80/443, distinct listener ports, tenant-apex hostname rules, and collision prevention with passthrough services). * Improved listener rendering safety: prevents exceeding the Gateway listener cap and ensures AllowedRoutes are isolated per listener. * **Documentation** * Updated gateway docs with listener-cap considerations and layer-4 passthrough usage details. * **Tests** * Added CRD/CEL and reconciliation coverage for valid/invalid configurations and rendering behavior. <!-- end of auto-generated comment: release notes by coderabbit.ai -->
Cozystack
Cozystack is a free platform and framework for building clouds.
Cozystack is a CNCF Sandbox Level Project that was originally built and sponsored by Ænix.
With Cozystack, you can transform a bunch of servers into an intelligent system with a simple REST API for spawning Kubernetes clusters, Database-as-a-Service, virtual machines, load balancers, HTTP caching services, and other services with ease.
Use Cozystack to build your own cloud or provide a cost-effective development environment.
Use-Cases
-
Using Cozystack to build a public cloud
You can use Cozystack as a backend for a public cloud -
Using Cozystack to build a private cloud
You can use Cozystack as a platform to build a private cloud powered by Infrastructure-as-Code approach -
Using Cozystack as a Kubernetes distribution
You can use Cozystack as a Kubernetes distribution for Bare Metal
Documentation
The documentation is located on the cozystack.io website.
Read the Getting Started section for a quick start.
If you encounter any difficulties, start with the troubleshooting guide and work your way through the process that we've outlined.
Versioning
Versioning adheres to the Semantic Versioning principles.
A full list of the available releases is available in the GitHub repository's Release section.
Contributions
Contributions are highly appreciated and very welcomed!
In case of bugs, please check if the issue has already been opened by checking the GitHub Issues section. If it isn't, you can open a new one. A detailed report will help us replicate it, assess it, and work on a fix.
You can express your intention to on the fix on your own. Commits are used to generate the changelog, and their author will be referenced in it.
If you have a concrete feature request, open an issue. For a cross-cutting or architectural change, open a design proposal in the community repo. For questions or early ideas, use GitHub Discussions. See CONTRIBUTING.md for the full routing.
Community
You are welcome to join our Telegram group and come to our weekly community meetings. Add them to your Google Calendar or iCal for convenience.
License
Cozystack is licensed under Apache 2.0.
The code is provided as-is with no warranties.
Commercial Support
A list of companies providing commercial support for this project can be found on official site.