Hacker News Reader

Comment by boulos | Hacker News Reader

Disclosure: I work on Google Cloud.

I think the headline confuses the issue. The community wanted more input and ability to control the release and testing process for Kubernetes. It was a fair question to say "Why can only Google cut a release?". We're still happy to fund it, but to make Kubernetes more fully owned by the community and not Google, this was an important step.

Edit: Fwiw, I think William's blog post (https://cloud.google.com/blog/products/gcp/google-cloud-gran...) is more informative, since the TechCrunch article just quotes from it.

View on HN

The headline is definitely confusing. I thought it was implying that Google was no longer going to use Kubernetes at all. The first couple of sentences of the article cleared that up, but the title should've been something like "Google hands off Kubernetes development to open source community."

Even that's not quite right :).

"Google opens up the management of Kubernetes testing and releases with the community" (or something).

I think this becomes very evident if you pay attention to the multitude of public Community Meeting (and various other SIG meeting videos). The community has wanted equal standing from the very beginning, and even if Google was stepping down funding, I think it would be an important step in making Kubernetes a fairer community, with no particular company seeming to have more input.

In these instances, can the URL of this post be changed to the primary source rather than reporting on it?

When will Google Cloud get IPv6 support to the VM? I went to a Kubernetes talk here in Seattle at Google's Fremont office, and I was shocked when I found out that IPv6 support was limited to the proprietary load balancers Google offers.

This kind of missing functionality makes Google Cloud dead on arrival for anyone needing low latency connectivity to customers on T-Mobile, Verizon and any other cellular network that only provides direct connectivity via IPv6. Natted IPv4 gets much shorter state table entries, and worse yet you get a latency penalty as legacy IPv4 traffic gets encapsulated in IPv6 on most LTE networks.

So you use the load-balancing service. That's what it's for.

That can be a bandaid but leaves you pretty far from being able to do traditional Internet style networking with global addressing.

I can't do that for SIP or WebRTC :c

Reply on news.ycombinator.com