> Yes, but we caution users to evaluate if you really need kubernetes. Chances are you don't and you will experience severe performance and security problems if you choose to run under k8s. If you still find you must here are instructions for running Nanos under k8s.
Pretty interesting FAQ! I hope to see more HN discussion about this page!
I'm here wondering, what security problems could this have? https://docs.ops.city/ops/k8s doesn't elaborate and just says
> Security Warning
> Running unikernels under kubernetes diminishes some of their security benefits.
That's not the case when you are running in k8s and the last container breakout was just announced ~1 month ago: https://github.com/opencontainers/runc/security/advisories/G... .
At the end of the day it is simply not a security boundary. It can solve other problems but not security ones.
That's an odd, perhaps presumptuous, claim to make considering this isn't even in the same orchestration/scheduling space as Kubernetes. Especially without mentioning alternatives.
From later in the FAQ:
> The complexity that comes with kubernetes is that it requires you to re-invent all the layers of a cloud platform that already exists. If you run a vanilla linux instance on AWS you get out of the box: networking, storage, security, routing, etc all for free.
They might not like the abstractions, but to say you have to "re-invent" all those layers is reaching.
It’s currently being implemented as an abstraction on top of existing systems, because cloud providers have to leverage what they have and because its API still lacks all the functionality. But gradually it became a managed service that can provision databases, etc, and in another 5-10 years most cloud interactions will happen through it