Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
1–10 of 266 posts
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#2> Traefik is more comparable to HAProxy than to nginx/caddy/apache2
Aren't caddy and traefik fairly comparable? I've only used them both lightly so I may be missing the core point of each, but I thought of them as very similar.
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#3I'm considering moving reverse proxying to Traefik for my self-hosted stuff. Unlike the article's author, I'm running containerized workloads with Docker Compose, and currently using Caddy with the excellent caddy-docker-proxy plugin. What that gets me, currently:
- Reverse proxying, with Docker labels for configuration. New workloads are picked up automatically (but I do need to attach workloads to Caddy's network bridge).
- TLS certificates
- Automatic DNS configuration (using yet another plugin, caddy-dynamicdns), so I don't have to worry too much about losing access to my stuff if my ISP decides to hand me a different IP address (which hasn't happened yet)
There are a few things I'm currently not entirely happy about my setup:
- Any new/restarting workload makes Caddy restart entirely, resulting in loss of access to my stuff (temporarily). Caddy doesn't hand off existing connections to a new instance, unfortunately.
- Using wildcard certs isn't as simple as it could/should be. As I don't want every workload to be advertised to the world through certificate transparency logs, I use wildcard certs, and that means I currently can't use simple Caddy file syntax I otherwise would with a cert per hostname. This is something I know is being worked on in Caddy, but still.
Anyway, I've used Traefik in k8s environments before, and it's been fairly pleasant, so I think I'll give it a go for my personal stuff too!
PS: Don't let this comment discourage you trying Caddy, it's actually really good!
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#4> Traefik is more comparable to HAProxy than to nginx/caddy/apache2 Aren't caddy and traefik fairly comparable? I've only used them both lightly so I may be missing the core point of each, but I thought of them as very similar.
Caddy is primarily a web server like nginx and apache httpd. Traefik and HAproxy are primarily reverse proxies.
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#5> Traefik is more comparable to HAProxy than to nginx/caddy/apache2 Aren't caddy and traefik fairly comparable? I've only used them both lightly so I may be missing the core point of each, but I thought of them as very similar.
The rest of the sentence you quoted explains that nginx, Caddy, and Apache are all webservers (which can also reverse proxy). Traefik and HAproxy are only reverse proxies and not webservers.
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#6> Traefik is more comparable to HAProxy than to nginx/caddy/apache2 Aren't caddy and traefik fairly comparable? I've only used them both lightly so I may be missing the core point of each, but I thought of them as very similar.
Caddy is at the same level as nginx/apache. It is able to do everything a web server is expected to (serving web sites, files and proxying services) plus handling LetsEncrypt automatically. It does not, afaik, do dynamic service discovery like traefik nor load balancing of TCP at the protocol layer, like e.g. haproxy.
https://caddyserver.com/features
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#7I love treafik, we use it with nomad/consul and docker to setup our whole infrastructure. The plugin system is also simple yet powerful and the dynamic configs are great for our customers custom domains, we can quickly see if a domain points to the right IP and put it in to get everything working. And of a domain no longer points to is we get a slack notification and it removes it from traefik so it no longer tries to get SSL certificates for it.
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#8When my company looked at different proxies for k8s, we ended upon traefik cause we had experience from docker swarm and it has a dashboard.
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#9I use Traefik in production (with containers), and my favorite aspect of it is that the configuration is carried via the labels on containers which means I rarely if ever need to make any modifications to the Traefik config itself. I'd say the biggest con is trying to figure out how to pronounce the name - I think it's just regular traffic, but I can't help wanting to call it "trey-feek" or something like that.
Re: Take a look at Traefik, even if you don't use containers
#10I'm considering moving reverse proxying to Traefik for my self-hosted stuff. Unlike the article's author, I'm running containerized workloads with Docker Compose, and currently using Caddy with the excellent caddy-docker-proxy plugin. What that gets me, currently: - Reverse proxying, with Docker labels for configuration. New workloads are picked up automatically (but I do need to attach workloads to Caddy's network b…
I have not used Caddy, I use traefik and it discovers docker properties for configuration and TLS certificates with auto update. Not sure about dynamic DNS - I do not use it from Traefik. Adding and removing containers does not need a restart AFAIR.