Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Make mancenter service type to default to ClusterIP #146

Closed
xrow opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed

Make mancenter service type to default to ClusterIP #146

xrow opened this issue Aug 5, 2020 · 3 comments

Comments

@xrow
Copy link
Contributor

xrow commented Aug 5, 2020

This is a minor security and configuration improvement. When setting the the Service type for the mancenter to Loadbalancer it open per default a Nodeport in the firewall. This could be consired a security risk even though you can change it to ClusterIP. The request is to set the mancenter default to type ClusterIP because it is also the kubernetes default.

https://github.com/hazelcast/charts/blob/master/stable/hazelcast-enterprise/values.yaml#L336

@hasancelik
Copy link
Collaborator

Hi @xrow,

Thanks for pointed out. We preferred LoadBalancer for Management Center service because it provides ease of use when user tries to connect Management Center dashboard after chart deployment. As you said, it is configurable as well so if user wants to deploy the chart to production env or has security concerns, user can use another service type.

On the other side, using ClusterIP as a default service type with some kubectl port-forward instructions at README can also be good approach, for example:

kubectl port-forward svc/<deployment-name>-hazelcast-mancenter 8080:8080

WDYT @leszko ?

@leszko
Copy link

leszko commented Aug 6, 2020

I'm in line with what Hasan wrote. Meaning that we try to make the default configuration as simple as possible to the new users. So, I'd keep LoadBalancer.

@xrow
Copy link
Contributor Author

xrow commented Aug 6, 2020

Ok this is up to you. Please close.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants