RateLimitPolicy API v2

Feature Name: rlp-v2
Start Date: 2023-02-02
RFC PR: Kuadrant/architecture#12
Issue tracking: Kuadrant/architecture#13

Summary

Proposal of new API for the Kuadrant's RateLimitPolicy (RLP) CRD, for improved UX.

Motivation

The RateLimitPolicy API (v1beta1), particularly its RateLimit type used in ratelimitpolicy.spec.rateLimits, designed in part to fit the underlying implementation based on the Envoy Rate limit filter, has been proven to be complex, as well as somewhat limiting for the extension of the API for other platforms and/or for supporting use cases of not contemplated in the original design.

Users of the RateLimitPolicy will immediately recognize elements of Envoy's Rate limit API in the definitions of the RateLimit type, with almost 1:1 correspondence between the Configuration type and its counterpart in the Envoy configuration. Although compatibility between those continue to be desired, leaking such implementation details to the level of the API can be avoided to provide a better abstraction for activators ("matchers") and payload ("descriptors"), stated by users in a seamless way.

Furthermore, the Limit type – used as well in the RLP's RateLimit type – implies presently a logical relationship between its inner concepts – i.e. conditions and variables on one side, and limits themselves on the other – that otherwise could be shaped in a different manner, to provide clearer understanding of the meaning of these concepts by the user and avoid repetition. I.e., one limit definition contains multiple rate limits, and not the other way around.

Goals

Decouple the API from the underlying implementation - i.e. provide a more generic and more user-friendly abstraction
Prepare the API for upcoming changes in the Gateway API Policy Attachment specification
Improve consistency of the API with respect to Kuadrant's AuthPolicy CRD - i.e. same language, similar UX

Current WIP to consider

Policy attachment update (kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api#1565)
No merging of policies (kuadrant/architecture#10)
A single Policy scoped to HTTPRoutes and HTTPRouteRule (kuadrant/architecture#4) - future
Implement skip_if_absent for the RequestHeaders action (kuadrant/wasm-shim#29)

Highlights

spec.rateLimits[] replaced with spec.limits{<limit-name>: <limit-definition>}
spec.rateLimits.limits replaced with spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates
spec.rateLimits.limits.maxValue replaced with spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates.limit
spec.rateLimits.limits.seconds replaced with spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates.duration + spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates.unit
spec.rateLimits.limits.conditions replaced with spec.limits.<limit-name>.when, structured field based on well-known selectors, mainly for expressing conditions not related to the HTTP route (although not exclusively)
spec.rateLimits.limits.variables replaced with spec.limits.<limit-name>.counters, based on well-known selectors
spec.rateLimits.rules replaced with spec.limits.<limit-name>.routeSelectors, for selecting (or "sub-targeting") HTTPRouteRules that trigger the limit
new matcher spec.limits.<limit-name>.routeSelectors.hostnames[]
spec.rateLimits.configurations removed – descriptor actions configuration (previously spec.rateLimits.configurations.actions) generated from spec.limits.<limit-name>.when.selector ∪ spec.limits.<limit-name>.counters and unique identifier of the limit (associated with spec.limits.<limit-name>.routeSelectors)
Limitador conditions composed of "soft" spec.limits.<limit-name>.when conditions + a "hard" condition that binds the limit to its trigger HTTPRouteRules

For detailed differences between current and new RLP API, see Comparison to current RateLimitPolicy.

Guide-level explanation

Examples of RLPs based on the new API

Given the following network resources:

apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2
kind: Gateway
metadata:
  name: istio-ingressgateway
  namespace: istio-system
spec:
  gatewayClassName: istio
  listeners:
  - hostname:
    - "*.acme.com"
---
apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
  name: toystore
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  parentRefs:
  - name: istio-ingressgateway
    namespace: istio-system
  hostnames:
  - "*.toystore.acme.com"
  rules:
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: GET
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: POST
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/assets/"
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
    filters:
    - type: ResponseHeaderModifier
      responseHeaderModifier:
        set:
        - name: Cache-Control
          value: "max-age=31536000, immutable"

The following are examples of RLPs targeting the route and the gateway. Each example is independent from the other.

Example 1. Minimal example - network resource targeted entirely without filtering, unconditional and unqualified rate limiting

In this example, all traffic to *.toystore.acme.com will be limited to 5rps, regardless of any other attribute of the HTTP request (method, path, headers, etc), without any extra "soft" conditions (conditions non-related to the HTTP route), across all consumers of the API (unqualified rate limiting).

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-infra-rl
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    base: # user-defined name of the limit definition - future use for handling hierarchical policy attachment
    - rates: # at least one rate limit required
      - limit: 5
        unit: second

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/assets/*"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-infra-rl/base"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-infra-rl/base == "1"
  max_value: 5
  seconds: 1
  namespace: TDB

Example 2. Targeting specific route rules, with counter qualifiers, multiple rates per limit definition and "soft" conditions

In this example, a distinct limit will be associated ("bound") to each individual HTTPRouteRule of the targeted HTTPRoute, by using the routeSelectors field for selecting (or "sub-targeting") the HTTPRouteRule.

The following limit definitions will be bound to each HTTPRouteRule:

/toys* → 50rpm, enforced per username (counter qualifier) and only in case the user is not an admin ("soft" condition).
/assets/* → 5rpm / 100rp12h

Each set of trigger matches in the RLP will be matched to all HTTPRouteRules whose HTTPRouteMatches is a superset of the set of trigger matches in the RLP. For every HTTPRouteRule matched, the HTTPRouteRule will be bound to the corresponding limit definition that specifies that trigger. In case no HTTPRouteRule is found containing at least one HTTPRouteMatch that is identical to some set of matching rules of a particular limit definition, the limit definition is considered invalid and reported as such in the status of RLP.

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-per-endpoint
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    toys:
      rates:
      - limit: 50
        duration: 1
        unit: minute
      counters:
      - auth.identity.username
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the 1st HTTPRouteRule (i.e. GET or POST to /toys*)
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
      when:
      - selector: auth.identity.group
        operator: neq
        value: admin

    assets:
      rates:
      - limit: 5
        duration: 1
        unit: minute
      - limit: 100
        duration: 12
        unit: hour
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the 2nd HTTPRouteRule (i.e. /assets/*)
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/assets/"

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/toys"
      descriptor_value: "1"
  - metadata:
      descriptor_key: "auth.identity.group"
      metadata_key:
        key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz"
        path:
        - segment:
            key: "identity"
        - segment:
            key: "group"
  - metadata:
      descriptor_key: "auth.identity.username"
      metadata_key:
        key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz"
        path:
        - segment:
            key: "identity"
        - segment:
            key: "username"
- rules:
  - paths: ["/assets/*"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/assets"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/toys == "1"
  - auth.identity.group != "admin"
  variables:
  - auth.identity.username
  max_value: 50
  seconds: 60
  namespace: kuadrant
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/assets == "1"
  max_value: 5
  seconds: 60
  namespace: kuadrant
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/assets == "1"
  max_value: 100
  seconds: 43200 # 12 hours
  namespace: kuadrant

Example 3. Targeting a subset of an HTTPRouteRule - HTTPRouteMatch missing

Consider a 150rps rate limit set on requests to GET /toys/special. Such specific application endpoint is covered by the first HTTPRouteRule in the HTTPRoute (as a subset of GET or POST to any path that starts with /toys). However, to avoid binding limits to HTTPRouteRules that are more permissive than the actual intended scope of the limit, the RateLimitPolicy controller requires trigger matches to find identical matching rules explicitly defined amongst the sets of HTTPRouteMatches of the HTTPRouteRules potentially targeted.

As a consequence, by simply defining a trigger match for GET /toys/special in the RLP, the GET|POST /toys* HTTPRouteRule will NOT be bound to the limit definition. In order to ensure the limit definition is properly bound to a routing rule that strictly covers the GET /toys/special application endpoint, first the user has to modify the spec of the HTTPRoute by adding an explicit HTTPRouteRule for this case:

apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
  name: toystore
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  parentRefs:
  - name: istio-ingressgateway
    namespace: istio-system
  hostnames:
  - "*.toystore.acme.com"
  rules:
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: GET
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: POST
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/assets/"
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
    filters:
    - type: ResponseHeaderModifier
      responseHeaderModifier:
        set:
        - name: Cache-Control
          value: "max-age=31536000, immutable"
  - matches: # new (more specific) HTTPRouteRule added
    - path:
        type: Exact
        value: "/toys/special"
      method: GET
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80

After that, the RLP can target the new HTTPRouteRule strictly:

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-special-toys
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    specialToys:
      rates:
      - limit: 150
        unit: second
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the new HTTPRouteRule (i.e. GET /toys/special)
        - path:
            type: Exact
            value: "/toys/special"
          method: GET

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys/special"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-special-toys/specialToys"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-special-toys/specialToys == "1"
  max_value: 150
  seconds: 1
  namespace: kuadrant

Example 4. Targeting a subset of an HTTPRouteRule - HTTPRouteMatch found

This example is similar to Example 3. Consider the use case of setting a 150rpm rate limit on requests to GET /toys*.

The targeted application endpoint is covered by the first HTTPRouteRule in the HTTPRoute (as a subset of GET or POST to any path that starts with /toys). However, unlike in the previous example where, at first, no HTTPRouteRule included an explicit HTTPRouteMatch for GET /toys/special, in this example the HTTPRouteMatch for the targeted application endpoint GET /toys* does exist explicitly in one of the HTTPRouteRules, thus the RateLimitPolicy controller would find no problem to bind the limit definition to the HTTPRouteRule. That would nonetheless cause a unexpected behavior of the limit triggered not strictly for GET /toys*, but also for POST /toys*.

To avoid extending the scope of the limit beyond desired, with no extra "soft" conditions, again the user must modify the spec of the HTTPRoute, so an exclusive HTTPRouteRule exists for the GET /toys* application endpoint:

apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
  name: toystore
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  parentRefs:
  - name: istio-ingressgateway
    namespace: istio-system
  hostnames:
  - "*.toystore.acme.com"
  rules:
  - matches: # first HTTPRouteRule split into two – one for GET /toys*, other for POST /toys*
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: GET
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: POST
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/assets/"
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
    filters:
    - type: ResponseHeaderModifier
      responseHeaderModifier:
        set:
        - name: Cache-Control
          value: "max-age=31536000, immutable"

The RLP can then target the new HTTPRouteRule strictly:

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toy-readers
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    toyReaders:
      rates:
      - limit: 150
        unit: second
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the new more specific HTTPRouteRule (i.e. GET /toys*)
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: GET

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toy-readers/toyReaders"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toy-readers/toyReaders == "1"
  max_value: 150
  seconds: 1
  namespace: kuadrant

Example 5. One limit triggered by multiple HTTPRouteRules

In this example, both HTTPRouteRules, i.e. GET|POST /toys* and /assets/*, are targeted by the same limit of 50rpm per username.

Because the HTTPRoute has no other rule, this is technically equivalent to targeting the entire HTTPRoute and therefore similar to Example 1. However, if the HTTPRoute had other rules or got other rules added afterwards, this would ensure the limit applies only to the two original route rules.

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-per-user
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    toysOrAssetsPerUsername:
      rates:
      - limit: 50
        duration: 1
        unit: minute
      counters:
      - auth.identity.username
      routeSelectors:
      - matches:
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: GET
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: POST
      - matches:
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/assets/"

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/assets/*"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-user/toysOrAssetsPerUsername"
      descriptor_value: "1"
  - metadata:
      descriptor_key: "auth.identity.username"
      metadata_key:
        key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz"
        path:
        - segment:
            key: "identity"
        - segment:
            key: "username"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-per-user/toysOrAssetsPerUsername == "1"
  variables:
  - auth.identity.username
  max_value: 50
  seconds: 60
  namespace: kuadrant

Example 6. Multiple limit definitions targeting the same HTTPRouteRule

In case multiple limit definitions target a same HTTPRouteRule, all those limit definitions will be bound to the HTTPRouteRule. No limit "shadowing" will be be enforced by the RLP controller. Due to how things work as of today in Limitador nonetheless (i.e. the rule of the most restrictive limit wins), in some cases, across multiple limits triggered, one limit ends up "shadowing" others, depending on further qualification of the counters and the actual RL values.

E.g., the following RLP intends to set 50rps per username on GET /toys*, and 100rps on POST /toys* or /assets/*:

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-per-endpoint
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    readToys:
      rates:
      - limit: 50
        unit: second
      counters:
      - auth.identity.username
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the 1st HTTPRouteRule (i.e. GET or POST to /toys*)
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: GET

    postToysOrAssets:
      rates:
      - limit: 100
        unit: second
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the 1st HTTPRouteRule (i.e. GET or POST to /toys*)
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: POST
      - matches: # matches the 2nd HTTPRouteRule (i.e. /assets/*)
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/assets/"

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/readToys"
      descriptor_value: "1"
  - metadata:
      descriptor_key: "auth.identity.username"
      metadata_key:
        key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz"
        path:
        - segment:
            key: "identity"
        - segment:
            key: "username"
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/assets/*"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/readToys"
      descriptor_value: "1"
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/postToysOrAssets"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions: # actually applies to GET|POST /toys*
  - toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/readToys == "1"
  variables:
  - auth.identity.username
  max_value: 50
  seconds: 1
  namespace: kuadrant
- conditions: # actually applies to GET|POST /toys* and /assets/*
  - toystore/toystore-per-endpoint/postToysOrAssets == "1"
  max_value: 100
  seconds: 1
  namespace: kuadrant

This example was only written in this way to highlight that it is possible that multiple limit definitions select a same HTTPRouteRule. To avoid over-limiting between GET|POST /toys* and thus ensure the originally intended limit definitions for each of these routes apply, the HTTPRouteRule should be split into two, like done in Example 4.

Example 7. Limits triggered for specific hostnames

In the previous examples, the limit definitions and therefore the counters were set indistinctly for all hostnames – i.e. no matter if the request is sent to games.toystore.acme.com or dolls.toystore.acme.com, the same counters are expected to be affected. In this example on the other hand, a 1000rpd rate limit is set for requests to /assets/* only when the hostname matches games.toystore.acme.com.

First, the user needs to edit the HTTPRoute to make the targeted hostname games.toystore.acme.com explicit:

apiVersion: gateway.networking.k8s.io/v1alpha2
kind: HTTPRoute
metadata:
  name: toystore
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  parentRefs:
  - name: istio-ingressgateway
    namespace: istio-system
  hostnames:
  - "*.toystore.acme.com"
  - games.toystore.acme.com # new (more specific) hostname added
  rules:
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: GET
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/toys"
      method: POST
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
  - matches:
    - path:
        type: PathPrefix
        value: "/assets/"
    backendRefs:
    - name: toystore
      port: 80
    filters:
    - type: ResponseHeaderModifier
      responseHeaderModifier:
        set:
        - name: Cache-Control
          value: "max-age=31536000, immutable"

After that, the RLP can target specifically the newly added hostname:

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-per-hostname
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    games:
      rates:
      - limit: 1000
        unit: day
      routeSelectors:
      - matches:
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/assets/"
        hostnames:
        - games.toystore.acme.com

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/assets/*"]
    hosts: ["games.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-per-hostname/games"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-per-hostname/games == "1"
  max_value: 1000
  seconds: 86400 # 1 day
  namespace: kuadrant

Example 8. Targeting the Gateway

Note: Additional meaning and context may be given to this use case in the future, when discussing defaults and overrides.

Targeting a Gateway is a shortcut to targeting all individual HTTPRoutes referencing the gateway as parent. This differs from Example 1 nonetheless because, by targeting the gateway rather than an individual HTTPRoute, the RLP applies automatically to all HTTPRoutes pointing to the gateway, including routes created before and after the creation of the RLP. Moreover, all those routes will share the same limit counters specified in the RLP.

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: gw-rl
  namespace: istio-ingressgateway
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: Gateway
    name: istio-ingressgateway
  limits:
    base:
    - rates:
      - limit: 5
        unit: second

_{How is this RLP implemented under the hood?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/assets/*"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "istio-system/gw-rl/base"
      descriptor_value: "1"

limits:
- conditions:
  - istio-system/gw-rl/base == "1"
  max_value: 5
  seconds: 1
  namespace: TDB

Comparison to current RateLimitPolicy

Current	New	Reason
1:1 relation between Limit (the object) and the actual Rate limit (the value) (`spec.rateLimits.limits`)	Rate limit becomes a detail of Limit where each limit may define one or more rates (1:N) (`spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates`)	It allows to reuse `when` conditions and `counters` for groups of rate limits
Parsed `spec.rateLimits.limits.conditions` field, directly exposing the Limitador's API	Structured `spec.limits.<limit-name>.when` condition field composed of 3 well-defined properties: `selector`, `operator` and `value`	Feels more K8s-native Consistent with github.com/kuadrant/authorino/api/v1beta1#JSONPatternExpression No need for a parser (only if implemented by Limitador)
`spec.rateLimits.configurations` as a list of "variables assignments" and direct exposure of Envoy's RL descriptor actions API	Descriptor actions composed from selectors used in the limit definitions (`spec.limits.<limit-name>.when.selector` and `spec.limits.<limit-name>.counters`) plus a fixed identifier of the route rules (`spec.limits.<limit-name>.routeSelectors`)	Abstract the Envoy-specific concepts of "actions" and "descriptors" No risk of mismatching descriptors keys between "actions" and actual usage in the limits No user-defined generic descriptors (e.g. "limited = 1") Source value of the selectors defined from an implicit "context" data structure
Key-value descriptors	Structured descriptors referring to a contextual well-known data structure	Consistent with Authorino's Authorization JSON (#context)
Limitador conditions independent from the route rules	Artificial Limitador condition injected to bind routes and corresponding limits	Ensure the limit is enforced only for corresponding selected HTTPRouteRules
`translate(spec.rateLimits.rules) ⊂ httproute.spec.rules`	`spec.limits.<limit-name>.routeSelectors.matches ⊆ httproute.spec.rules.matches`	HTTPRouteRule selector (via HTTPRouteMatch subset) Gateway API language Preparation for inherited policies and defaults & overrides
`spec.rateLimits.limits.seconds`	`spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates.duration` and `spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates.unit`	Support for more units beyond seconds `duration: 1` by default
`spec.rateLimits.limits.variables`	`spec.limits.<limit-name>.counters`	Improved (more specific) naming
`spec.rateLimits.limits.maxValue`	`spec.limits.<limit-name>.rates.limit`	Improved (more generic) naming

Reference-level explanation

By completely dropping out the configurations field from the RLP, composing the RL descriptor actions is now done based essentially on the selectors listed in the when conditions and the counters, plus an artificial condition used to bind the HTTPRouteRules to the corresponding limits to trigger in Limitador.

The descriptor actions composed from the selectors in the "soft" when conditions and counter qualifiers originate from the direct references these selectors make to paths within a well-known data structure that stores information about the context (HTTP request and ext-authz filter). These selectors in "soft" when conditions and counter qualifiers are thereby called well-known selectors.

Other descriptor actions might be composed by the RLP controller to define additional RL conditions to bind HTTPRouteRules and corresponding limits.

Well-known selectors

Each selector used in a when condition or counter qualifier is a direct reference to a path within a well-known data structure that stores information about the context (L4 and L7 data of the original request handled by the proxy), as well as auth data (dynamic metadata occasionally exported by the external authorization filter and injected by the proxy into the rate-limit filter).

The well-known data structure for building RL descriptor actions resembles Authorino's "Authorization JSON", whose context component consists of Envoy's AttributeContext type of the external authorization API (marshalled as JSON). Compared to the more generic RateLimitRequest struct, the AttributeContext provides a more structured and arguibly more intuitive relation between the data sources for the RL descriptors actions and their corresponding key names through which the values are referred within the RLP, in a context of predominantly serving for HTTP applications.

To keep compatibility with the Envoy Rate Limit API, the well-known data structure can optionally be extended with the RateLimitRequest, thus resulting in the following final structure.

context: # Envoy's Ext-Authz `CheckRequest.AttributeContext` type
  source:
    address: …
    service: …
    …
  destination:
    address: …
    service: …
    …
  request:
    http:
      host: …
      path: …
      method: …
      headers: {…}

auth: # Dynamic metadata exported by the external authorization service

ratelimit: # Envoy's Rate Limit `RateLimitRequest` type
  domain: … # generated by the Kuadrant controller
  descriptors: {…} # descriptors configured by the user directly in the proxy (not generated by the Kuadrant controller, if allowed)
  hitsAddend: … # only in case we want to allow users to refer to this value in a policy

Mechanics of generating RL descriptor actions

From the perspective of a user who writes a RLP, the selectors used in then when and counters fields are paths to the well-known data structure (see Well-known selectors). While desiging a policy, the user intuitively pictures the well-known data structure and states each limit definition having in mind the possible values assumed by each of those paths in the data plane. For example,

The user story:

Each distinct user (auth.identity.username) can send no more than 1rps to the same HTTP path (context.request.http.path).

...materializes as the following RLP:

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    dolls:
      rates:
      - limit: 1
        unit: second
      counters:
      - auth.identity.username
      - context.request.http.path

The following selectors are to be interpreted by the RLP controller:

auth.identity.username
context.request.http.path

The RLP controller uses a map to translate each selector into its corresponding descriptor action. (Roughly described:)

context.source.address    → source_cluster(...) # TBC
context.source.service    → source_cluster(...) # TBC
context.destination...    → destination_cluster(...)
context.destination...    → destination_cluster(...)
context.request.http.<X>  → request_headers(header_name: ":<X>")
context.request...        → ...
auth.<X>                  → metadata(key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz", path: <X>)
ratelimit.domain          → <hostname>

...to yield effectively:

rate_limits:
- actions:
  - metadata:
      descriptor_key: "auth.identity.username"
      metadata_key:
        key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz"
        path:
        - segment:
            key: "identity"
        - segment:
            key: "username"
  - request_headers:
      descriptor_key: "context.request.http.path"
      header_name: ":path"

Artificial Limitador condition for `routeSelectors`

For each limit definition that explicitly or implicitly defines a routeSelectors field, the RLP controller will generate an artificial Limitador condition that ensures that the limit applies only when the filterred rules are honoured when serving the request. This can be implemented with a 2-step procedure:

generate an unique identifier of the limit - i.e. <policy-namespace>/<policy-name>/<limit-name>
associate a generic_key type descriptor action with each HTTPRouteRule targeted by the limit – i.e. { descriptor_key: <unique identifier of the limit>, descriptor_value: "1" }.

For example, given the following RLP:

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-non-admin-users
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    toys:
      routeSelectors:
      - matches:
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: GET
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: POST
      rates:
      - limit: 50
        duration: 1
        unit: minute
      when:
      - selector: auth.identity.group
        operator: neq
        value: admin

    assets:
      routeSelectors:
      - matches:
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/assets/"
      rates:
      - limit: 5
        duration: 1
        unit: minute
      when:
      - selector: auth.identity.group
        operator: neq
        value: admin

Apart from the following descriptor action associated with both routes:

- metadata:
    descriptor_key: "auth.identity.group"
    metadata_key:
      key: "envoy.filters.http.ext_authz"
      path:
      - segment:
          key: "identity"
      - segment:
          key: "group"

...and its corresponding Limitador condition:

auth.identity.group != "admin"

The following additional artificial descriptor actions will be generated:

# associated with route rule GET|POST /toys*
- generic_key:
    descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-non-admin-users/toys"
    descriptor_value: "1"

# associated with route rule /assets/*
- generic_key:
    descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-non-admin-users/assets"
    descriptor_value: "1"

...and their corresponding Limitador conditions.

In the end, the following Limitador configuration is yielded:

- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-non-admin-users/toys == "1"
  - auth.identity.group != "admin"
  max_value: 50
  seconds: 60
  namespace: kuadrant

- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-non-admin-users/assets == "1"
  - auth.identity.group != "admin"
  max_value: 5
  seconds: 60
  namespace: kuadrant

Support in wasm shim and Envoy RL API

This proposal tries to keep compatibility with the Envoy API for rate limit and does not introduce any new requirement that otherwise would require the use of wasm shim to be implemented.

In the case of implementation of this proposal in the wasm shim, all types of matchers supported by the HTTPRouteMatch type of Gateway API must be also supported in the rate_limit_policies.gateway_actions.rules field of the wasm plugin configuration. These include matchers based on path (prefix, exact), headers, query string parameters and method.

Drawbacks

HTTPRoute editing occasionally required
Need to duplicate rules that don't explicitly include a matcher wanted for the policy, so that matcher can be added as a special case for each of those rules.

Risk of over-targeting
Some HTTPRouteRules might need to be split into more specific ones so a limit definition is not bound to beyond intended (e.g. target method: GET when the route matches method: POST|GET).

Prone to consistency issues
Typos and updates to the HTTPRoute can easily cause a mismatch and invalidate a RLP.

Two types of conditions – routeSelectors and when conditions
Although with different meanings (evaluates in the gateway vs. evaluated in Limitador) and meant for expressing different types of rules (HTTPRouteRule selectors vs. "soft" conditions based on attributes not related to the HTTP request), users might still perceive these as two ways of expressing conditions and find difficult to understand at first that "soft" conditions do not accept expressions related to attributes of the HTTP request.

Rationale and alternatives

Targeting full HTTPRouteRules

Requiring users to specify full HTTPRouteRule matches in the RLP (as opposed to any subset of HTTPRoureMatches of targeted HTTPRouteRules – current proposal) contains some of the same drawbacks of this proposal, such as HTTPRoute editing occasionally required and prone to consistency issues. If, on one hand, it eliminates the risk of over-targeting, on the other hand, it does it at the cost of requiring excessively verbose policies written by the users, to the point of sometimes expecting user to have to specify trigger matching rules that are significantly more than what's originally and strictly intended.

E.g.:

On a HTTPRoute that contains the following HTTPRouteRules (simplified representation):

{ header: x-canary=true } → backend-canary
{ * } → backend-rest

Where the user wants to define a RLP that targets { method: POST }. First, the user needs to edit the HTTPRoute and duplicate the HTTPRouteRules:

{ header: x-canary=true, method: POST } → backend-canary
{ header: x-canary=true } → backend-canary
{ method: POST } → backend-rest
{ * } → backend-rest

Then, user needs to include the following trigger in the RLP so only full HTTPRouteRules are specified:

{ header: x-canary=true, method: POST }
{ method: POST }

The first matching rule of the trigger (i.e. { header: x-canary=true, method: POST }) is beoynd the original user intent of targeting simply { method: POST }.

This issue can be even more concerning in the case of targeting gateways with multiple child HTTPRoutes. All the HTTPRoutes would have to be fixed and the HTTPRouteRules that cover for all the cases in all HTTPRoutes listed in the policy targeting the gateway.

All limit definitions apply vs. Limit "shadowing"

The proposed binding between limit definition and HTTPRouteRules that trigger the limits was thought so multiple limit definitions can be bound to a same HTTPRouteRule that triggers those limits in Limitador. That means that no limit definition will "shadow" another at the level of the RLP controller, i.e. the RLP controller will honour the intended binding according to the selectors specified in the policy.

Due to how things work as of today in Limitador nonetheless, i.e., the rule of the most restrictive limit wins, and because all limit definitions triggered by a given shared HTTPRouteRule, it might be the case that, across multiple limits triggered, one limit ends up "shadowing" other limits. However, that is by implementation of Limitador and therefore beyond the scope of the API.

An alternative to the approach of allowing all limit definitions to be bound to a same selected HTTPRouteRules would be enforcing that, amongst multiple limit definitions targeting a same HTTPRouteRule, only the first of those limits definitions is bound to the HTTPRouteRule. This alternative approach effectively would cause the first limit to "shadow" any other on that particular HTTPRouteRule, as by implementation of the RLP controller (i.e., at API level).

While the first approach causes an artificial Limitador condition of the form <policy-ns>/<policy-name>/<limit-name> == "1", the alternative approach ("limit shadowing") could be implemented by generating a descriptor of the following form instead: ratelimit.binding == "<policy-ns>/<policy-name>/<limit-name>".

The downside of allowing multiple bindings to the same HTTPRouteRule is that all limits apply in Limitador, thus making status report frequently harder. The most restritive rate limit strategy implemented by Limitador might not be obvious to users who set multiple limit definitions and will require additional information reported back to the user about the actual status of the limit definitions stated in a RLP. On the other hand, it allows enables use cases of different limit definitions that vary on the counter qualifiers, additional "soft" conditions, or actual rate limit values to be triggered by a same HTTPRouteRule.

Writing "soft" `when` conditions based on attributes of the HTTP request

As a first step, users will not be able to write "soft" when conditions to selective apply rate limit definitions based on attributes of the HTTP request that otherwise could be specified using the routeSelectors field of the RLP instead.

On one hand, using when conditions for route filtering would make it easy to define limits when the HTTPRoute cannot be modified to include the special rule. On the other hand, users would miss information in the status. An HTTPRouteRule for GET|POST /toys*, for example, that is targeted with an additional "soft" when condition that specifies that the method must be equal to GET and the path exactly equal to /toys/special (see Example 3) would be reported as rate limited with extra details that this is in fact only for GET /toys/special. For small deployments, this might be considered acceptable; however it would easily explode to unmanageable number of cases for deployments with only a few limit definitions and HTTPRouteRules.

Moreover, by not specifying a more strict HTTPRouteRule for GET /toys/special, the RLP controller would bind the limit definition to other rules that would cause the rate limit filter to invoke the rate limit service (Limitador) for cases other than strictly GET /toys/special. Even if the rate limits would still be ensured to apply in Limitador only for GET /toys/special (due to the presence of a hypothetical "soft" when condition), an extra no-op hop to the rate limit service would happen. This is avoided with the current imposed limitation.

Example of "soft" when conditions for rate limit based on attributes of the HTTP request (NOT SUPPORTED):

apiVersion: kuadrant.io/v2beta1
kind: RateLimitPolicy
metadata:
  name: toystore-special-toys
  namespace: toystore
spec:
  targetRef:
    group: gateway.networking.k8s.io
    kind: HTTPRoute
    name: toystore
  limits:
    specialToys:
      rates:
      - limit: 150
        unit: second
      routeSelectors:
      - matches: # matches the original HTTPRouteRule GET|POST /toys*
        - path:
            type: PathPrefix
            value: "/toys"
          method: GET
      when:
      - selector: context.request.http.method # cannot omit this selector or POST /toys/special would also be rate limited
        operator: eq
        value: GET
      - selector: context.request.http.path
        operator: eq
        value: /toys/special

_{How is this RLP would be implemented under the hood if supported?}

gateway_actions:
- rules:
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["GET"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  - paths: ["/toys*"]
    methods: ["POST"]
    hosts: ["*.toystore.acme.com"]
  configurations:
  - generic_key:
      descriptor_key: "toystore/toystore-special-toys/specialToys"
      descriptor_value: "1"
  - request_headers:
      descriptor_key: "context.request.http.method"
      header_name: ":method"
  - request_headers:
      descriptor_key: "context.request.http.path"
      header_name: ":path"

limits:
- conditions:
  - toystore/toystore-special-toys/specialToys == "1"
  - context.request.http.method == "GET"
  - context.request.http.path == "/toys/special"
  max_value: 150
  seconds: 1
  namespace: kuadrant

Possible variations for the selectors (conditions and counter qualifiers)

The main drivers behind the proposed design for the selectors (conditions and counter qualifiers), based on (i) structured condition expressions composed of fields selector, operator, and value, and (ii) when conditions and counters separated in two distinct fields (variation "C" below), are:

consistency with the Authorino AuthConfig API, which also specifies when conditions expressed in selector, operator, and value fields;
explicit user intent, without subtle distinction of meaning based on presence of optional fields.

Nonetheless here are a few alternative variations to consider:

Structured condition expressions

Parsed condition expressions

Single field

A

selectors:
  - selector: context.request.http.method
    operator: eq
    value: GET
  - selector: auth.identity.username

B

selectors:
  - context.request.http.method == "GET"
  - auth.identity.username

Distinct fields

C ^⭐️

when:
  - selector: context.request.http.method
    operator: eq
    value: GET
counters:
  - auth.identity.username

D

when:
  - context.request.http.method == "GET"
counters:
  - auth.identity.username

^{⭐️ Variation adopted for the examples and (so far) final design proposal.}

Prior art

Most implementations currently orbiting around Gateway API (e.g. Istio, Envoy Gateway, etc) for added RL functionality seem to have been leaning more to the direct route extension pattern instead of Policy Attachment. That might be an option particularly suitable for gateway implementations (gateway providers) and for those aiming to avoid dealing with defaults and overrides.

Unresolved questions

In case a limit definition lists route selectors such that some can be bound to HTTPRouteRules and some cannot (see Example 6), do we bind the valid route selectors and ignore the invalid ones or the limit definition is invalid altogether and bound to no HTTPRouteRule at all?
A: By allowing multiple limit definitions to target a same HTTPRouteRule, the issue here stated will become less often. For the other cases where a limit definition still fails to select an HTTPRouteRule (e.g. due to mismatching trigger matches), the limit definition is not considered invalid. Possibly the limit definitions is considered "stale" (or "orphan"), i.e., not bound to any HTTPRouteRule.
What should we fill domain/namespace with, if no longer with the hostname? This can be useful for multi-tenancy.
A: For now, the domain/namespace field of the RL configuration (Envoy and Limitador ends) will be filled with a fixed (configurable) string (e.g. "kuadrant"). This can change in future to better support multi-tenancy and/or other use cases where a total sharding of the limit definitions within a same instance of Kuadrant is desired.
How do we support lists of hostnames in Limitador conditions (single counter)? Should we open an issue for a new in operator?
A: Not needed. The hostnames must exist in the targeted object explicitly, just like any other routing rules intended to be targeted by a limit definition. By setting the explicit hostname in the targeted network object (Gateway or HTTPRoute), the also becomes a route rules available for "hard" trigger configuration.
What "soft" condition operators do we need to support (e.g. eq, neq, exists, nexists, matches)?
Do we need special field to define shared counters across clusters/Limitador instances or that's to be solved at another layer (Limitador, Kuadrant CRDs, MCTC)?

Future possibilities

Port routeSelectors and the semantics around it to the AuthPolicy API (aka "KAP v2").
Defaults and overrides, either along the lines of architecture#4 or architecture#10.

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

0001-rlp-v2.md

0001-rlp-v2.md

RateLimitPolicy API v2

Summary

Motivation

Goals

Current WIP to consider

Highlights

Guide-level explanation

Examples of RLPs based on the new API

Example 1. Minimal example - network resource targeted entirely without filtering, unconditional and unqualified rate limiting

Example 2. Targeting specific route rules, with counter qualifiers, multiple rates per limit definition and "soft" conditions

Example 3. Targeting a subset of an HTTPRouteRule - HTTPRouteMatch missing

Example 4. Targeting a subset of an HTTPRouteRule - HTTPRouteMatch found

Example 5. One limit triggered by multiple HTTPRouteRules

Example 6. Multiple limit definitions targeting the same HTTPRouteRule

Example 7. Limits triggered for specific hostnames

Example 8. Targeting the Gateway

Comparison to current RateLimitPolicy

Reference-level explanation

Well-known selectors

Mechanics of generating RL descriptor actions

Artificial Limitador condition for `routeSelectors`

Support in wasm shim and Envoy RL API

Drawbacks

Rationale and alternatives

Targeting full HTTPRouteRules

All limit definitions apply vs. Limit "shadowing"

Writing "soft" `when` conditions based on attributes of the HTTP request

Possible variations for the selectors (conditions and counter qualifiers)

Prior art

Unresolved questions

Future possibilities

Files

0001-rlp-v2.md

Latest commit

History

0001-rlp-v2.md

File metadata and controls

RateLimitPolicy API v2

Summary

Motivation

Goals

Current WIP to consider

Highlights

Guide-level explanation

Examples of RLPs based on the new API

Example 1. Minimal example - network resource targeted entirely without filtering, unconditional and unqualified rate limiting

Example 2. Targeting specific route rules, with counter qualifiers, multiple rates per limit definition and "soft" conditions

Example 3. Targeting a subset of an HTTPRouteRule - HTTPRouteMatch missing

Example 4. Targeting a subset of an HTTPRouteRule - HTTPRouteMatch found

Example 5. One limit triggered by multiple HTTPRouteRules

Example 6. Multiple limit definitions targeting the same HTTPRouteRule

Example 7. Limits triggered for specific hostnames

Example 8. Targeting the Gateway

Comparison to current RateLimitPolicy

Reference-level explanation

Well-known selectors

Mechanics of generating RL descriptor actions

Artificial Limitador condition for routeSelectors

Support in wasm shim and Envoy RL API

Drawbacks

Rationale and alternatives

Targeting full HTTPRouteRules

All limit definitions apply vs. Limit "shadowing"

Writing "soft" when conditions based on attributes of the HTTP request

Possible variations for the selectors (conditions and counter qualifiers)

Prior art

Unresolved questions

Future possibilities

Artificial Limitador condition for `routeSelectors`

Writing "soft" `when` conditions based on attributes of the HTTP request