acme-companion

Pros of nginx-proxy

• Simpler setup for basic reverse proxy needs
• Lighter weight, as it doesn't include SSL/TLS certificate management
• More flexible for custom configurations without SSL/TLS concerns

Cons of nginx-proxy

• Lacks built-in SSL/TLS certificate management
• Requires manual configuration for HTTPS support
• May need additional tools or services for complete SSL/TLS automation

Code Comparison

nginx-proxy:

FROM nginx:alpine
COPY nginx.tmpl /etc/docker-gen/templates/
COPY docker-entrypoint.sh /app/docker-entrypoint.sh
ENTRYPOINT ["/app/docker-entrypoint.sh"]
CMD ["forego", "start", "-r"]

acme-companion:

FROM alpine:3.14
RUN apk add --no-cache bash curl openssl
COPY app/ /app/
ENTRYPOINT ["/app/entrypoint.sh"]

Key Differences

1. Purpose: nginx-proxy focuses on reverse proxy functionality, while acme-companion specializes in SSL/TLS certificate management.
2. Integration: acme-companion is designed to work alongside nginx-proxy, providing automated HTTPS support.
3. Complexity: nginx-proxy is simpler for basic setups, while acme-companion adds complexity but offers automated SSL/TLS management.
4. Use cases: nginx-proxy is suitable for environments where SSL/TLS is not required or managed separately, while acme-companion is ideal for automating HTTPS in Docker environments.

Pros of Traefik

• Built-in service discovery and automatic configuration
• Supports multiple providers (Docker, Kubernetes, etc.) out of the box
• More feature-rich with advanced routing capabilities

Cons of Traefik

• Steeper learning curve, especially for complex configurations
• Can be resource-intensive for smaller deployments
• Configuration syntax may be less intuitive for those familiar with Nginx

Code Comparison

ACME Companion (Nginx configuration):

server {
    listen 80;
    server_name example.com;
    location / {
        return 301 https://$host$request_uri;
    }
}

Traefik (YAML configuration):

http:
  routers:
    my-router:
      rule: "Host(`example.com`)"
      entrypoints:
        - web
      middlewares:
        - redirect-to-https

Both projects aim to simplify SSL/TLS certificate management and reverse proxy configuration. ACME Companion focuses on Nginx and Let's Encrypt integration, while Traefik offers a more comprehensive solution with built-in service discovery and support for multiple providers. Traefik's configuration is typically more concise and dynamic, but it may require more time to master. ACME Companion, being Nginx-based, might be more familiar to those already using Nginx in their infrastructure.

Pros of Caddy

• Automatic HTTPS out of the box, simplifying SSL/TLS setup
• More versatile as a standalone web server, not just a proxy
• Simpler configuration with a human-readable format

Cons of Caddy

• Potentially higher resource usage compared to Nginx
• Less mature ecosystem and community support
• May require more manual configuration for complex setups

Code Comparison

Caddy configuration example:

example.com {
  reverse_proxy localhost:8080
}

acme-companion (used with nginx-proxy) configuration:

version: '3'
services:
  nginx-proxy:
    image: nginxproxy/nginx-proxy
    ports:
      - "80:80"
      - "443:443"
  acme-companion:
    image: nginxproxy/acme-companion
    volumes_from:
      - nginx-proxy

Caddy offers a more straightforward configuration for basic setups, while acme-companion requires additional Docker services but integrates well with existing Nginx setups. Caddy's built-in HTTPS automation simplifies SSL/TLS management, whereas acme-companion handles this separately for Nginx. The choice between the two depends on specific project requirements, existing infrastructure, and desired level of control over the web server configuration.

Pros of nginx-proxy-manager

• User-friendly web interface for managing proxies and SSL certificates
• Built-in support for Let's Encrypt certificate generation and renewal
• Easy setup with Docker Compose, suitable for less technical users

Cons of nginx-proxy-manager

• Less flexible for advanced configurations compared to acme-companion
• May consume more resources due to additional components (e.g., web UI)
• Not as tightly integrated with the Docker ecosystem as acme-companion

Code Comparison

acme-companion:

version: '2'
services:
  nginx-proxy:
    image: nginxproxy/nginx-proxy
    ports:
      - "80:80"
      - "443:443"
  acme-companion:
    image: nginxproxy/acme-companion
    volumes_from:
      - nginx-proxy
    volumes:
      - /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock:ro
      - acme:/etc/acme.sh
volumes:
  acme:

nginx-proxy-manager:

version: '3'
services:
  app:
    image: 'jc21/nginx-proxy-manager:latest'
    ports:
      - '80:80'
      - '81:81'
      - '443:443'
    volumes:
      - ./data:/data
      - ./letsencrypt:/etc/letsencrypt

The code comparison shows that nginx-proxy-manager has a simpler configuration, while acme-companion requires more setup but offers tighter integration with the nginx-proxy container.

Pros of Certbot

• Widely adopted and well-established solution for SSL/TLS certificate management
• Supports a broader range of web servers and platforms beyond Nginx
• Offers more flexibility in certificate issuance and renewal processes

Cons of Certbot

• Requires manual configuration and setup for each domain
• May need additional scripting for automated renewals in complex environments
• Less seamless integration with Nginx proxy setups compared to ACME Companion

Code Comparison

ACME Companion (Docker Compose):

services:
  nginx-proxy:
    image: nginxproxy/nginx-proxy
  acme-companion:
    image: nginxproxy/acme-companion
    volumes_from:
      - nginx-proxy
    volumes:
      - /var/run/docker.sock:/var/run/docker.sock:ro
      - acme:/etc/acme.sh

Certbot (Shell):

certbot certonly --webroot -w /var/www/example -d example.com -d www.example.com

ACME Companion is designed for seamless integration with Nginx Proxy Manager in Docker environments, offering automatic certificate management for containerized applications. Certbot, on the other hand, provides a more versatile solution for various web server setups but may require more manual configuration. ACME Companion simplifies the process in Docker ecosystems, while Certbot offers greater flexibility across different platforms and server configurations.