Skip to content
Browse files

implementation proposal for zone aware routing

  • Loading branch information...
ElvinEfendi committed Aug 16, 2019
1 parent f0383c6 commit a8a68dd3f51a04e5c625d52e8c186f567742a36e
Showing with 55 additions and 5 deletions.
  1. +55 −5 docs/enhancements/
@@ -8,8 +8,8 @@ approvers:
- "@aledbf"
editor: TBD
creation-date: 2019-08-15
last-updated: 2019-08-15
status: provisional
last-updated: 2019-08-16
status: implementable

# Availability zone aware routing
@@ -21,6 +21,9 @@ status: provisional
- [Motivation](#motivation)
- [Goals](#goals)
- [Non-Goals](#non-goals)
- [Proposal](#proposal)
- [Implementation History](#implementation-history)
- [Drawbacks [optional]](#drawbacks-optional)
<!-- /toc -->

## Summary
@@ -29,14 +32,14 @@ Teach ingress-nginx about availability zones where endpoints are running in. Thi

## Motivation

When users run their services across multiple availability zones they usually pay for egress traffic between zones. Providers such as GCP, AWS charges money for that.
When users run their services across multiple availability zones they usually pay for egress traffic between zones. Providers such as GCP, Amazon EC charges money for that.
ingress-nginx when picking an endpoint to route request to does not consider whether the endpoint is in different zone or the same one. That means it's at least equally likely
that it will pick an endpoint from another zone and proxy the request to it. In this situation response from the endpoint to ingress-nginx pod is considered as
inter zone traffic and costs money.

At the time of this writing GCP charges $0.01 per GB of inter zone egress traffic according to
According to AWS also charges the same amount of money sa GCP for cross zone, egress traffic.
According to Amazon also charges the same amount of money sa GCP for cross zone, egress traffic.

This can be a lot of money depending on once's traffic. By teaching ingress-nginx about zones we can eliminate or at least decrease this cost.

@@ -45,7 +48,54 @@ Arguably inter-zone network latency should also be better than cross zone.
### Goals

* Given a regional cluster running ingress-nginx, ingress-nginx should do best effort to pick zone-local endpoint when proxying
* This should not impact canary feature
* ingress-nginx should be able to operate successfully if there's no zonal endpoints

### Non-Goals

* -
* This feature inherently assumes that endpoints are distributed across zones in a way that they can handle all the traffic from ingress-nginx pod(s) in that zone
* This feature will be relying on, it is not this KEP's goal to support other cases

## Proposal

The idea here is to have controller part of ingress-nginx to (1) detect what zone its current pod is running in and (2) detect the zone for every endpoints it knows about.
After that it will post that data as part of endpoints to Lua land. Then Lua balancer when picking an endpoint will try to pick zone-local endpoint first and
if there is no zone-local endpoint then it will fallback to current behaviour.

This feature at least in the beginning should be optional since it is going to make it harder to reason about the load balancing and not everyone might want that.

**How does controller know what zone it runs in?**
We can have the pod spec do pass node name using downward API as an environment variable.
Then on start controller can get node details from the API based on node name. Once the node details is obtained
we can extract the zone from `` annotation. Then we can pass that value to Lua land through Nginx configuration
when loading `lua_ingress.lua` module in `init_by_lua` phase.

**How do we extract zones for endpoints?**
We can have the controller watch create and update events on nodes in the entire cluster and based on that keep the map of nodes to zones in the memory.
And when we generate endpoints list, we can access node name using `.subsets.addresses[i].nodeName`
and based on that fetch zone from the map in memory and store it as a field on the endpoint.
__This solution assumes ``__ annotation does not change until the end of node's life. Otherwise we have to
watch update events as well on the nodes and that'll add even more overhead.

Alternatively, we can get the list of nodes only when there's no node in the memory for given node name. This is probably a better solution
because then we would avoid watching for API changes on node resources. We can eagrly fetch all the nodes and build node name to zone mapping on start.
And from thereon sync it during endpoints building in the main event loop iff there's no entry exist for the node of an endpoint.
This means an extra API call in case cluster has expanded.

**How do we make sure we do our best to choose zone-local endpoint?**
This will be done on Lua side. For every backend we will initialize two balancer instances: (1) with all endpoints
(2) with all endpoints corresponding to current zone for the backend. Then given the request once we choose what backend
needs to serve the request, we will first try to use zonal balancer for that backend. If zonal balancer does not exist (i.e there's no zonal endpoint)
then we will use general balancer. In case of zonal outages we assume that readiness probe will fail and controller will
see no endpoints for the backend and therefore we will use general balancer.

We can enable the feature using a configmap setting. Doing it this way makes it easier to rollback in case of a problem.

## Implementation History

- initial version of KEP is shipped
- proposal and implementation details is done

## Drawbacks [optional]

More load on the Kubernetes API server.

0 comments on commit a8a68dd

Please sign in to comment.
You can’t perform that action at this time.