Update networking.md

"Kubernetes appears 12 times in main text of this doc, except links, 9 in capital,3 in lower case. 
It's better to be same.
This commit is contained in:
AdamDang 2018-03-22 17:27:22 +08:00 committed by GitHub
parent 278d52d244
commit 70b554a5cb
No known key found for this signature in database
GPG Key ID: 4AEE18F83AFDEB23
1 changed files with 3 additions and 3 deletions

View File

@ -2,9 +2,9 @@
Kubernetes Operations (kops) currently supports 4 networking modes: Kubernetes Operations (kops) currently supports 4 networking modes:
* `kubenet` kubernetes native networking via a CNI plugin. This is the default. * `kubenet` Kubernetes native networking via a CNI plugin. This is the default.
* `cni` Container Network Interface(CNI) style networking, often installed via a Daemonset. * `cni` Container Network Interface(CNI) style networking, often installed via a Daemonset.
* `classic` kubernetes native networking, done in-process. * `classic` Kubernetes native networking, done in-process.
* `external` networking is done via a Daemonset. This is used in some custom implementations. * `external` networking is done via a Daemonset. This is used in some custom implementations.
### kops Default Networking ### kops Default Networking
@ -17,7 +17,7 @@ One important limitation when using `kubenet` networking is that an AWS routing
50 entries, which sets a limit of 50 nodes per cluster. AWS support will sometimes raise the limit to 100, 50 entries, which sets a limit of 50 nodes per cluster. AWS support will sometimes raise the limit to 100,
but their documentation notes that routing tables over 50 may take a performance hit. but their documentation notes that routing tables over 50 may take a performance hit.
Because k8s modifies the AWS routing table, this means that realistically kubernetes needs to own the Because k8s modifies the AWS routing table, this means that realistically Kubernetes needs to own the
routing table, and thus it requires its own subnet. It is theoretically possible to share a routing table routing table, and thus it requires its own subnet. It is theoretically possible to share a routing table
with other infrastructure (but not a second cluster!), but this is not really recommended. Certain with other infrastructure (but not a second cluster!), but this is not really recommended. Certain
`cni` networking solutions claim to address these problems. `cni` networking solutions claim to address these problems.