Gateway API Implementer's Guide¶
Everything you wanted to know about building a Gateway API implementation but were too afraid to ask.
This document is a place to collect tips and tricks for writing a Gateway API implementation that have no straightforward place within the godoc fields of the underlying types.
It's also intended to be a place to write down some guidelines to help implementers of this API to skip making common mistakes.
It may not be very relevant if you are intending to use this API as an end user as opposed to building something that uses it.
This is a living document, if you see something missing, PRs welcomed!
Important things to remember about Gateway API¶
Hopefully most of these are not surprising, but they sometimes have non-obvious implications that we'll try and lay out here.
Gateway API is a
Gateway API uses the
gateway.networking.k8s.io API group. This means that,
like APIs delivered in the core Kubernetes binaries, each time a release happens,
the APIs have been reviewed by upstream Kubernetes reviewers, just like the APIs
delivered in the core binaries.
Gateway API is delivered using CRDs¶
Gateway API is supplied as a set of CRDs, version controlled using our versioning policy.
The most important part of that versioning policy is that what appears to be
the same object (that is, it has the same
kind) may have
a slightly different schema. We make changes in ways that are compatible, so
things should generally "just work", but there are some actions implementations
need to take to make "just work"ing more reliable; these are detailed below.
The CRD-based delivery also means that if an implementation tries to use (that is get, list, watch, etc) Gateway API objects when the CRDs have not been installed, then it's likely that your Kubernetes client code will return serious errors. Tips to deal with this are also detailed below.
The CRD definitions for Gateway API objects all contain two specific annotations:
The concepts of "bundle version" and "channel" (short for "release channel") are explained in our versioning documentation.
Implementations may use these to determine what schema versions are installed in the cluster, if any.
Changes to the Gateway API CRDs are backwards compatible¶
Part of the contract for Gateway API CRDs is that changes within an API version must be compatible.
"Within an API Version" means changes to a CRD that occur while the same API version
v1 for example) is in use, and "compatible" means that any new
fields, values, or validation will be added to ensure that previous
objects will still be valid objects after the change.
This means that once Gateway API objects move to the
v1 API version, then all
changes must be compatible.
This contract also means that an implementation will not fail with a higher version of the API than the version it was written with, because the newer schema being stored by Kubernetes will definitely be able to be serialized into the older version used in code by the implementation.
Similarly, if an implementation was written with a higher version, the newer values that it understands will simply never be used, as they are not present in the older version.
Implementation Rules and Guidelines¶
For a Gateway API implementation to work, the Gateway API CRDs must be installed in the Kubernetes cluster the implementation is watching.
Implementations have two possible options: installing CRDs themselves (implementation controlled) or requiring installation by some other mechanism before working (externally controlled). Both have tradeoffs, but implementation controlled has significantly more, and so we DO NOT recommend using implementation controlled methods at this time.
Regardless, either way has certain things that SHOULD be true, however:
Whatever method is used, infra and cluster admins SHOULD attempt to ensure that the Bundle version of the CRDs is not downgraded. Although we ensure that API changes are backwards compatible, changing CRD definitions can change the storage version of the resource, which could have unforeseen effects. Most of the time, things will probably work, but if it doesn't work, it will most likely break in weird ways.
Additionally, older versions of the API may be missing fields or features, which could be very disruptive for users.
Try your best to ensure that the bundle version doesn't roll backwards. It's safer.
Implementations SHOULD also handle the Gateway API CRDs not being present in the cluster without crashing or panicking. Exiting with a clear fatal error is acceptable in this case, as is disabling Gateway API support even if enabled in configuration.
Practically, for implementations using tools like
similar tooling, they may need to check for the presence of the CRDs by
getting the list of installed CRDs before attempting to watch those resources.
(Note that this will require the implementation to have
read access to those
Implementation-controlled CRD installation¶
Implementation-controlled CRD installation also includes automatic installation mechanisms such as Helm, if the CRDs are included in a Helm chart with the implementation's installation.
Because of significant caveats we DO NOT recommend doing implementation-controlled CRD management at this time.
However, if you really must, CRD definitions MAY be installed by implementations, but if they do, they MUST have a way to ensure:
- there are no other Gateway API CRDs installed in the cluster before starting, or
- that the CRD definitions are only installed if they are a higher bundle version than any existing Gateway API CRDs. Note that even this may not be safe if there are breaking changes in the experimental channel resources, so implementations should be very careful with doing this.
This avoids problems if another implementation is also installed in the cluster and expects a higher version of the CRDs to be installed.
The worst outcome here would be two implementations trying to do automatic install of different CRD versions, resulting in the CRD versions flapping between versions or channels. This would not produce good outcomes.
The safer method for an automatic installation would require the implementation to:
- Check if there are any Gateway API CRDs installed in the cluster.
- If not, install its most compatible version of the CRDs.
- If so, only install its version of the CRDs if the bundle version is higher than the existing one, and the mechanism will also need to check if there are incompatible changes included in any versions as well.
This is going to be very difficult to pull off in practice.
It should also be noted that many infra and cluster admins manage CRDs using externally controlled methods that will not be visible to a Gateway implementation, so if you still proceed with automatic installation, it MUST be able to be disabled by the installation owner (whether that is the infra or cluster admin).
Because of all these caveats, we DO NOT recommend doing automatic CRD management at this time.
Externally controlled CRD installation¶
Because of all of the complexities mentioned in the "Implementation controlled" section of this document, we recommend that implementations supply documentation on how to check if CRDs are installed and upgrade versions if required.
Additions to this document to add suggested commands here are welcomed.
Conformance and Version compatibility¶
A conformant Gateway API implementation is one that passes the conformance tests that are included in each Gateway API bundle version release.
An implementation MUST pass the conformance suite with no skipped tests to be conformant. Tests may be skipped during development, but a version you want to be conformant MUST have no skipped tests.
Extended features may, as per the contract for Extended status, be disabled.
Gateway API conformance is version-specific. An implementation that passes conformance for version N may not pass conformance for version N+1 without changes.
Implementations SHOULD submit a report from the conformance testing suite back to the Gateway API Github repo containing details of their testing.
The conformance suite output includes the Gateway API version supported.
Once v1.0 is released, for implementations supporting Gateway and GatewayClass,
they MUST set a new Condition,
status: true meaning
that the installed CRD version is supported, and
status: false meaning that it
Standard Status fields and Conditions¶
Gateway API has many resources, but when designing this, we've worked to keep
the status experience as consistent as possible across objects, using the
Condition type and the
Most resources have a
status.conditions field, but some also have a namespaced
field that contains a
For the latter, Gateway's
status.listeners and the Route
fields are examples where each item in the slice identifies the Conditions
associated with some subset of configuration.
For the Gateway case, it's to allow Conditions per Listener, and in the Route case, it's to allow Conditions per implementation (since Route objects can be used in multiple Gateways, and those Gateways can be reconciled by different implementations).
In all of these cases, there are some relatively-common Condition types that have similar meanings:
Accepted- the resource or part thereof contains acceptable config that will produce some configuration in the underlying data plane that the implementation controls. This does not mean that the whole configuration is valid, just that enough is valid to produce some effect.
Programmed- this represents a later phase of operation, after
Accepted, when the resource or part thereof has been Accepted and programmed into the underlying dataplane. Users should expect the configuration to be ready for traffic to flow at some point in the near future. This Condition does not say that the dataplane is ready when it's set, just that everything is valid and it will become ready soon. "Soon" may have different meanings depending on the implementation.
ResolvedRefs- this Condition indicates that all references in the resource or part thereof were valid and pointed to an object that both exists and allows that reference. If this Condition is set to
status: false, then at least one reference in the resource or part thereof is invalid for some reason, and the
messagefield should indicate which one are invalid.
Implementers should check the godoc for each type to see the exact details of these Conditions on each resource or part thereof.
Additionally, the upstream
Conditions struct contains an optional
observedGeneration field - implementations MUST use this field and set it to
metadata.generation field of the object at the time the status is generated.
This allows users of the API to determine if the status is relevant to the current
version of the object.
For each currently available conformance profile, there are a set of resources that implementations are expected to reconcile.
The following section goes through each Gateway API object and indicates expected behaviors.
GatewayClass has one main
spec field -
controllerName. Each implementation
is expected to claim a domain-prefixed string value (like
example.com/example-ingress) as its
Implementations MUST watch all GatewayClasses, and reconcile GatewayClasses
that have a matching
controllerName. The implementation must choose at least
one compatible GatewayClass out of the set of GatewayClasses that have a matching
controllerName, and indicate that it accepts processing of that GatewayClass
by setting an
Accepted Condition to
status: true in each. Any GatewayClasses
that have a matching
controllerName but are not Accepted must have the
Accepted Condition sett to
Implementations MAY choose only one GatewayClass out of the pool of otherwise acceptable GatewayClasses if they can only reconcile one, or, if they are capable of reconciling multiple GatewayClasses, they may also choose as many as they like.
If something in the GatewayClass renders it incompatibie (at the time of writing,
the only possible reason for this is that there is a pointer to a
object that is not supported by the implementation), then the implementation
SHOULD mark the incompatible GatewayClass as not
Gateway objects MUST refer in the
spec.gatewayClassName field to a GatewayClass
that exists and is
Accepted by an implementation for that implementation to
Gateway objects that fall out of scope (for example, because the GatewayClass they reference was deleted) for reconciliation MAY have their status removed by the implementation as part of the delete process, but this is not required.
General Route information¶
All Route objects share some properties:
- They MUST be attached to an in-scope parent for the implementation to consider them reconcilable.
- The implementation MUST update the status for each in-scope Route with the
relevant Conditions, using the namespaced
parentsfield. See the specific Route types for details, but this usually includes
- Routes that fall out of scope SHOULD NOT have status updated, since it's possible
that these updates may overwrite any new owners. The
observedGenerationfield will indicate that any remaining status is out of date.
HTTPRoutes route HTTP traffic that is unencrypted and available for inspection. This includes HTTPS traffic that's terminated at the Gateway (since that is then decrypted), and allows the HTTPRoute to use HTTP properties, like path, method, or headers in its routing directives.
TLSRoutes route encrypted TLS traffic using the SNI header, without decrypting the traffic stream, to the relevant backends.
TCPRoutes route a TCP stream that arrives at a Listener to one of the given backends.
UDPRoutes route UDP packets that arrive at a Listener to one of the given backends.
ReferenceGrant is a special resource that is used by resource owners in one namespace to selectively allow references from Gateway API objects in other namespaces.
A ReferenceGrant is created in the same namespace as the thing it's granting reference access to, and allows access from other namespaces, from other Kinds, or both.
Implementations that support cross-namespace references MUST watch ReferenceGrant and reconcile any ReferenceGrant that points to an object that's referred to by an in-scope Gateway API object.