![]() |
VOOZH | about |
We’re so glad you’re here. You can expect all the best TNS content to arrive Monday through Friday to keep you on top of the news and at the top of your game.
Check your inbox for a confirmation email where you can adjust your preferences and even join additional groups.
Follow TNS on your favorite social media networks.
Become a TNS follower on LinkedIn.
Check out the latest featured and trending stories while you wait for your first TNS newsletter.
Containers are a popular choice for cloud native development and deployment, thanks to their light weight, portability and scalability. There are several popular container and container management technologies for cloud computing, but for the next few minutes, let’s concentrate on what’s out there for Kubernetes.
An open source container orchestration tool, Kubernetes automates the deployment, scaling and management of containerized applications. This simplifies application management across different environments, both on-premises and in the cloud.
While it’s possible for an enterprise to manage and deploy its own Kubernetes infrastructure, it’s a challenging task. Most companies turn to cloud providers for a few common benefits — scalability, secure platforms, varying degrees of automation and high availability — but the offerings are not identical between providers. So how can you evaluate the Kubernetes cloud providers on the market to ensure a good fit?
There are some key needs common to any organization. You’ll want to evaluate vendors based on three tiers of importance:
Knowing what you’re looking for as far as solutions to those needs is critical before signing up with any vendor. This discussion over the next few sections about how to determine what you need is not exhaustive, but it can move you in the right direction.
As you evaluate Kubernetes cloud providers, your team should follow a standard decision-making process, just as you might with any other procurement:
Settling on the best technical solution involves a lot more than simply evaluating the technical prowess of the tool. You’ve got work to do to understand your business operations too.
Who are the stakeholders in your company?
Technical stakeholders — This group is perhaps rather obvious, but what’s obvious can get neglected. So be sure to ask, who’s using Kubernetes? Who’s maintaining it? What do they need a cloud provider to help them achieve?
Purchasing stakeholders — While it’s true that the product must perform its function adequately for the developers and administrators, you can’t afford to forget the stakeholders who make budget decisions. What new financial commitments can your company handle and when? Does your organization already have business relationships with one or more cloud providers that could be leveraged for new services, features or tools?
What functionality does your container orchestration system currently need?
When a company faces any significant financial investment, you can’t neglect thinking about the future. Yes, you have problems that need to be solved now, but what about next quarter? Next year? When you’re looking at your company’s horizon, consider:
Remember the stakeholders you identified when you gathered requirements? Bring them all to the table to achieve consensus on your proposed solution. Only this time, you’re not asking what they need — they must make a case for and prioritize their needs with everyone else’s.
Relevant parties across operations, development, security and risk must compromise and find a consensus they can all support.
Note that achieving consensus rarely allows any department to obtain all of its requirements. No cloud provider will be best across all these considerations for any enterprise. However, true consensus means that all parties are heard. When every party is heard, you can understand conflicting objectives and achieve a clearer picture of the overall enterprise objective.
That understanding will inform which Kubernetes cloud providers your organization should trial.
The proof of concept is key to narrowing down your pool of vendors.
Of course, a technical evaluation is part of this POC and tests the vendors’ assertions about the Kubernetes orchestration ability. But that’s just the start. Your trial should also be designed to consider the needs of your administrators, developers and security teams.
Also, while you may not be able to test in production, you can and should deploy a small-scale Kubernetes cluster to test performance, scalability and key features.
With a roadmap in place for how to evaluate a cloud provider, let’s take a quick glance at some of the most popular solutions on the market today. If you’re not already heavily integrated with one of these vendors, this is a good place to start shopping.
AWS’s fully managed Amazon Elastic Kubernetes Service (EKS) is a heavy hitter in the lineup due in no small part to AWS’s massive ecosystem. If you’re already neck-deep in AWS, it makes sense to stick with their Kubernetes cloud provider. However, it’s a lot more manual than others in this list and setup takes some time, which is good if you’re looking for control, not so much if a high need is reducing staff workload.
Google built Kubernetes back in 2015, so naturally, it has a fully managed Kubernetes service. The Google Cloud Platform offers Google Kubernetes Engine with arguably the most frills of any of the top providers. However, a lot of configurations are preset, so setup can be fairly quick and painless, and its automation features take on more of the grunt work of scaling than, say, EKS allows for.
Microsoft Azure has Azure Kubernetes Service (AKS), which along with DigitalOcean Kubernetes (DOKS) is one of the more cost-effective solutions, although calculating Kubernetes cost is hardly straightforward. Unsurprisingly, Azure is a default choice for a lot of larger enterprises. If the organization is already hosting on the Microsoft Azure cloud, then AKS is a natural integration. Additionally, many organizations prefer to continue managing authentication services through Azure Active Directory.
DigitalOcean Kubernetes (DOKS) may lack the bells and whistles of the larger players, particularly EKS and GKE, but that may be what you’re looking for. Decidedly more developer-friendly (and cheaper), DOKS isn’t necessarily trying to impress you with a plethora of features you may not even want. It also tends to update to the latest Kubernetes version quickly, which may or may not excite you.
DigitalOcean is known for tight integration with open source tools and maintains that rich repository even in its managed Kubernetes offering.
If your developers and administrators are adept at managing containers, by far your most flexible cloud option is bare metal. If you’re searching for better control and performance, bare metal configurations generally allow for higher performance and lower latency than virtualized services. You’re not sharing resources with other users, you have more control over things like security and visualization, and your costs are usually straightforward, even if your system is prone to change.
Rather than a managed Kubernetes service, Equinix Metal provides global access to bare metal infrastructure. With full control over the underlying cloud information system, you can choose the operating system, the network settings and the security. You can automate your fundamental infrastructure according to what works perfectly for you while still enjoying Equinix’s relationships with top Kubernetes solutions.
Choosing your Kubernetes orchestration tool starts with knowing your organization’s pain points. Look across your company, who is lobbying for a Kubernetes cloud provider, and what are they trying to solve? What’s the cost-benefit of layering on another cloud tool? Questions like that can be overwhelming if they come at you all at once. Instead, break it down and take it step by step:
If you take the time to follow a structured evaluation process, you’ll end up with a Kubernetes cloud solution that can fit smoothly into your established system.