Top Related Projects
Production-Grade Container Scheduling and Management
eBPF-based Networking, Security, and Observability
Connect, secure, control, and observe services.
Ultralight, security-first service mesh for Kubernetes. Main repo for Linkerd 2.x.
Cloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxy
The Cloud Native Application Proxy
Quick Overview
Calico is an open-source networking and security solution for containers, virtual machines, and native host-based workloads. It provides a pure Layer 3 approach to networking, offering high performance, scalability, and interoperability with existing infrastructure. Calico also includes a flexible policy engine to enforce network security rules.
Pros
- Highly scalable and performant networking solution
- Supports multiple platforms (Kubernetes, OpenStack, bare metal)
- Robust network policy enforcement for enhanced security
- Active community and regular updates
Cons
- Steeper learning curve compared to some alternatives
- Complex troubleshooting in large-scale deployments
- Limited support for certain advanced networking features (e.g., multicast)
- May require additional configuration for specific use cases
Getting Started
To get started with Calico on Kubernetes, follow these steps:
- Install Calico on your Kubernetes cluster:
kubectl apply -f https://docs.projectcalico.org/manifests/calico.yaml
- Verify the installation:
kubectl get pods -n kube-system
- Create a simple network policy:
apiVersion: networking.k8s.io/v1
kind: NetworkPolicy
metadata:
name: default-deny-ingress
spec:
podSelector: {}
policyTypes:
- Ingress
Apply the policy:
kubectl apply -f default-deny-ingress.yaml
- For more advanced configuration and usage, refer to the official Calico documentation.
Competitor Comparisons
Production-Grade Container Scheduling and Management
Pros of Kubernetes
- Comprehensive container orchestration platform with broader functionality
- Larger community and ecosystem, leading to more resources and third-party integrations
- Native support for various deployment strategies and scaling options
Cons of Kubernetes
- Steeper learning curve and more complex setup compared to Calico
- Higher resource overhead, especially for smaller deployments
- Less specialized in network policy management and security features
Code Comparison
Kubernetes (Pod definition):
apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
name: nginx
spec:
containers:
- name: nginx
image: nginx:1.14.2
ports:
- containerPort: 80
Calico (Network policy):
apiVersion: projectcalico.org/v3
kind: NetworkPolicy
metadata:
name: allow-tcp-6379
spec:
selector: app == 'database'
ingress:
- action: Allow
protocol: TCP
destination:
ports:
- 6379
Kubernetes focuses on overall container orchestration, while Calico specializes in network policies and security. Kubernetes provides a more comprehensive platform for managing containerized applications, but Calico offers more granular control over network policies and security. The code examples demonstrate the difference in focus, with Kubernetes defining a pod and Calico defining a network policy.
eBPF-based Networking, Security, and Observability
Pros of Cilium
- Advanced networking features like eBPF-based load balancing and traffic management
- Built-in observability with Hubble for detailed network visibility
- Strong focus on security with identity-based policies and encryption
Cons of Cilium
- Steeper learning curve due to eBPF complexity
- Requires newer kernel versions for full feature set
- Less widespread adoption compared to Calico
Code Comparison
Cilium (eBPF-based policy):
__section("ingress")
int ingress(struct __sk_buff *skb)
{
if (skb->protocol == bpf_htons(ETH_P_IP))
return process_ipv4(skb);
return TC_ACT_OK;
}
Calico (iptables-based policy):
-A KUBE-FORWARD -m comment --comment "kubernetes forwarding rules" -j MARK --set-xmark 0x4000/0x4000
-A KUBE-FORWARD -m mark --mark 0x4000/0x4000 -j ACCEPT
-A KUBE-FORWARD -s 10.244.0.0/16 -m comment --comment "kubernetes forwarding conntrack pod source rule" -m conntrack --ctstate RELATED,ESTABLISHED -j ACCEPT
Both Cilium and Calico are popular Kubernetes networking solutions, but they differ in their approach. Cilium leverages eBPF for advanced networking and security features, while Calico relies on more traditional Linux networking components. The code comparison shows Cilium's use of eBPF programs versus Calico's iptables rules for implementing network policies.
Connect, secure, control, and observe services.
Pros of Istio
- Comprehensive service mesh with advanced traffic management, security, and observability features
- Supports multiple platforms and environments beyond Kubernetes
- Robust API gateway functionality for managing ingress traffic
Cons of Istio
- More complex setup and configuration compared to Calico
- Higher resource overhead due to its extensive feature set
- Steeper learning curve for teams new to service mesh concepts
Code Comparison
Calico (NetworkPolicy example):
apiVersion: projectcalico.org/v3
kind: NetworkPolicy
metadata:
name: allow-tcp-6379
spec:
selector: app == 'database'
ingress:
- action: Allow
protocol: TCP
destination:
ports:
- 6379
Istio (VirtualService example):
apiVersion: networking.istio.io/v1alpha3
kind: VirtualService
metadata:
name: reviews-route
spec:
hosts:
- reviews.prod.svc.cluster.local
http:
- route:
- destination:
host: reviews.prod.svc.cluster.local
subset: v2
weight: 25
- destination:
host: reviews.prod.svc.cluster.local
subset: v1
weight: 75
Ultralight, security-first service mesh for Kubernetes. Main repo for Linkerd 2.x.
Pros of Linkerd2
- Lightweight and easy to install, with minimal configuration required
- Provides automatic mTLS encryption and strong security features out-of-the-box
- Offers powerful observability tools, including real-time metrics and distributed tracing
Cons of Linkerd2
- Limited to Layer 7 (application layer) traffic management
- Smaller ecosystem and community compared to Calico
- Less flexible for complex networking scenarios outside of service mesh use cases
Code Comparison
Linkerd2 (Rust):
pub fn new_from_config(
config: &Config,
tls: tls::Conditional<identity::Local>,
) -> Result<(Self, drain::Watch)> {
let (metrics, _) = Metrics::new(config.metrics.retain_idle);
let (drain_tx, drain_rx) = drain::channel();
Calico (Go):
func (c *Client) EnsureInitialized() error {
if err := c.ensureClusterInformation(); err != nil {
return err
}
if err := c.ensureNodeResources(); err != nil {
return err
}
return nil
}
Both projects use different programming languages and have distinct architectures. Linkerd2 focuses on service mesh functionality, while Calico provides broader network policy and security features for Kubernetes environments.
Cloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxy
Pros of Envoy
- More versatile as a general-purpose proxy, supporting various protocols and use cases beyond networking
- Offers advanced load balancing and traffic management features
- Provides extensive observability and monitoring capabilities
Cons of Envoy
- Steeper learning curve due to its broader feature set
- May introduce more complexity in simple networking scenarios
- Requires more resources to run compared to lightweight networking solutions
Code Comparison
Calico (network policy example):
apiVersion: projectcalico.org/v3
kind: NetworkPolicy
metadata:
name: allow-tcp-6379
spec:
selector: app == 'database'
ingress:
- action: Allow
protocol: TCP
destination:
ports:
- 6379
Envoy (basic configuration example):
static_resources:
listeners:
- address:
socket_address:
address: 0.0.0.0
port_value: 8080
clusters:
- name: service_backend
connect_timeout: 0.25s
type: STRICT_DNS
lb_policy: ROUND_ROBIN
hosts:
- socket_address:
address: service.local
port_value: 8080
While Calico focuses on network policies and security, Envoy's configuration demonstrates its flexibility as a proxy for various services and protocols.
The Cloud Native Application Proxy
Pros of Traefik
- Easy to configure and use, with automatic service discovery
- Supports multiple protocols and load balancing out of the box
- Provides real-time configuration updates without restarts
Cons of Traefik
- Limited network policy management capabilities
- Less suitable for complex network security requirements
- Primarily focused on ingress and reverse proxy functionality
Code Comparison
Traefik configuration example:
http:
routers:
my-router:
rule: "Host(`example.com`)"
service: my-service
services:
my-service:
loadBalancer:
servers:
- url: "http://localhost:8080"
Calico network policy example:
apiVersion: projectcalico.org/v3
kind: NetworkPolicy
metadata:
name: allow-tcp-6379
spec:
selector: role == 'database'
ingress:
- action: Allow
protocol: TCP
destination:
ports:
- 6379
Traefik focuses on routing and load balancing, while Calico specializes in network policies and security. Traefik's configuration is centered around HTTP routing rules, whereas Calico's policies define network-level access controls. Traefik is better suited for application-level traffic management, while Calico excels in securing container-to-container communication within a cluster.
Convert designs to code with AI
Introducing Visual Copilot: A new AI model to turn Figma designs to high quality code using your components.
Try Visual CopilotREADME
Calico
Quickstart | Docs | Contribute | Slack | Releases
ð¾ Welcome to Project Calico!
Project Calico, created and maintained by Tigera, is an open-source project with an active development and user community. Calico Open Source has grown to be the most widely adopted solution for container networking and security, powering 8M+ nodes daily across 166 countries.
ð Why use Calico?
- Data Plane Choice: eBPF, standard Linux, Windows, and VPP â versatility in network solutions.
- Interoperability: Works across multiple distros, multiple clouds, bare metal, and VMs.
- Optimized Performance: Engineered for high speed and low CPU usage, maximizing your cluster investments.
- Scalable Architecture: Grows seamlessly with your Kubernetes clusters without sacrificing performance.
- Advanced Security: Get granular access controls and WireGuard encryption.
- Kubernetes Networking Policy Support: Continually defining excellence in Kubernetes network policy standards and support.
- Vibrant Contributor Community: Over 200 contributors from a wide array of global companies.
- Flexible networking: An array of networking tools at your disposal, including BGP, VXLAN, service advertisement, and more.
ð¤ Join the Calico Community
- Calico Big Cats: Become an ambassador and share your journey
- Community Meetings: Engage and contribute
- Contribute on GitHub: Start with 'good first issues'
- Connect on Slack: Join the conversation with fellow contributors and our developers
ð¡ Contributing to Project Calico
- Get Started with Project Calico
- Repositories
- Contribute to our docs
- Documentation: Dive into our training and resources
- Make Calico better
ð ï¸ Projects We Maintain
ð¢ Stay Connected
- Subscribe: Join our newsletter
- YouTube channel for updates & tutorials
- Technical Blog
- Careers: Passionate about open source? Join our team.
Top Related Projects
Production-Grade Container Scheduling and Management
eBPF-based Networking, Security, and Observability
Connect, secure, control, and observe services.
Ultralight, security-first service mesh for Kubernetes. Main repo for Linkerd 2.x.
Cloud-native high-performance edge/middle/service proxy
The Cloud Native Application Proxy
Convert designs to code with AI
Introducing Visual Copilot: A new AI model to turn Figma designs to high quality code using your components.
Try Visual Copilot