Cloudron makes it easy to run web apps like WordPress, Nextcloud, GitLab on your server. Find out more or install now.


Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Bookmarks
  • Search
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse
Brand Logo

Cloudron Forum

Apps | Demo | Docs | Install
  1. Cloudron Forum
  2. App Wishlist
  3. Docker registry

Docker registry

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Solved App Wishlist
65 Posts 9 Posters 26.4k Views 12 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • marioM mario

    @robi GitLab does that for me 😛 Maybe a separate app? 🙂

    robiR Offline
    robiR Offline
    robi
    wrote on last edited by
    #40

    @mario that's great, but the standalone private registry app that's coming may need it and as @girish pointed out a simple UI.

    Also not everyone is interested in the ruby laden GitLab and all it's complexity. 🙂

    Conscious tech

    1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • girishG girish

      @mario Just looking into this now.

      Wondering, what is the best way forward. The app has no UI, but can have a login screen (via proxyAuth). So, when they login, they see a blank screen. Not ideal. Does it make sense to bundle any of the docker uis like https://github.com/Joxit/docker-registry-ui/ ? Seems quite easy to do. I can look into it.

      marioM Offline
      marioM Offline
      mario
      App Dev
      wrote on last edited by
      #41

      @girish depends on what the community needs. I'm more than happy to have a separate registry + other things as separate apps for those who need it.

      If I needed to pick the best registry solution with UI and everything else that's well maintained and suitable for Cloudron, I'd probably look at Quay which supports LDAP auth.

      https://github.com/quay/quay

      1 Reply Last reply
      2
      • mehdiM Offline
        mehdiM Offline
        mehdi
        App Dev
        wrote on last edited by
        #42

        I am 100% in favor of bundling a simple UI together with the registry. Even if one does not need it and wants to use the gitlab UI, there's basically nothing to lose besides a few kB of storage ^^

        1 Reply Last reply
        2
        • jimcavoliJ Offline
          jimcavoliJ Offline
          jimcavoli
          App Dev
          wrote on last edited by
          #43

          Yeah, Quay and Harbor are definitely the big players in this space. Very similar products - harbor is CNCF graduated and Quay is upstream for the corresponding Red Hat product. Either (or both) would be good UI adds.

          marioM 1 Reply Last reply
          1
          • girishG Offline
            girishG Offline
            girish
            Staff
            wrote on last edited by
            #44

            Last I checked harbor was impractical to package (as in way too much effort, it's really geared for the k8s crowd). Quay is a good option, but let me get this basic docker registry out first, I am almost there.

            1 Reply Last reply
            3
            • jimcavoliJ jimcavoli

              Yeah, Quay and Harbor are definitely the big players in this space. Very similar products - harbor is CNCF graduated and Quay is upstream for the corresponding Red Hat product. Either (or both) would be good UI adds.

              marioM Offline
              marioM Offline
              mario
              App Dev
              wrote on last edited by
              #45

              @jimcavoli Quay afaik implements the protocol as well, so no need for registry separately.

              1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • girishG Offline
                girishG Offline
                girish
                Staff
                wrote on last edited by
                #46

                So strange, I am getting a "invalid checksum digest format" whenever I push now to this registry. Has anyone seen such an error before?

                The push refers to repository [xxx.xxx.xxx/cloudron/base]
                fcdfeda3e242: Layer already exists 
                0ea3bde29271: Layer already exists 
                d75ccb14b8b6: Layer already exists 
                74b4389a43ab: Layer already exists 
                5f38ae1e1a63: Layer already exists 
                3479c151673d: Layer already exists 
                7a307b866f25: Layer already exists 
                ce3a66c20e17: Layer already exists 
                7197b970ebb9: Layer already exists 
                16542a8fc3be: Layer already exists 
                6597da2e2e52: Layer already exists 
                977183d4e999: Layer already exists 
                c8be1b8f4d60: Layer already exists 
                invalid checksum digest format
                
                marioM 1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • girishG girish

                  So strange, I am getting a "invalid checksum digest format" whenever I push now to this registry. Has anyone seen such an error before?

                  The push refers to repository [xxx.xxx.xxx/cloudron/base]
                  fcdfeda3e242: Layer already exists 
                  0ea3bde29271: Layer already exists 
                  d75ccb14b8b6: Layer already exists 
                  74b4389a43ab: Layer already exists 
                  5f38ae1e1a63: Layer already exists 
                  3479c151673d: Layer already exists 
                  7a307b866f25: Layer already exists 
                  ce3a66c20e17: Layer already exists 
                  7197b970ebb9: Layer already exists 
                  16542a8fc3be: Layer already exists 
                  6597da2e2e52: Layer already exists 
                  977183d4e999: Layer already exists 
                  c8be1b8f4d60: Layer already exists 
                  invalid checksum digest format
                  
                  marioM Offline
                  marioM Offline
                  mario
                  App Dev
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #47

                  @girish local filesystem?

                  girishG 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • marioM mario

                    @girish local filesystem?

                    girishG Offline
                    girishG Offline
                    girish
                    Staff
                    wrote on last edited by girish
                    #48

                    @mario Yes, with the local storage. I wonder if it's something to do with the proxy auth. I am trying it without auth now.

                    edit: indeed, something to do with the proxy auth. It works fine without proxy auth. Debugging.

                    mehdiM 1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • girishG girish

                      @mario Yes, with the local storage. I wonder if it's something to do with the proxy auth. I am trying it without auth now.

                      edit: indeed, something to do with the proxy auth. It works fine without proxy auth. Debugging.

                      mehdiM Offline
                      mehdiM Offline
                      mehdi
                      App Dev
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #49

                      @girish Are you on 6.1 ? Maybe your 2FA implementation broke something with the basic auth ?

                      girishG 1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      • mehdiM mehdi

                        @girish Are you on 6.1 ? Maybe your 2FA implementation broke something with the basic auth ?

                        girishG Offline
                        girishG Offline
                        girish
                        Staff
                        wrote on last edited by
                        #50

                        @mehdi yeah, i had that in mind and tried with 6.0 as well. fails the same. I am pretty sure this worked when I tested it back then, so I must have broke something !

                        mehdiM 1 Reply Last reply
                        0
                        • girishG girish

                          @mehdi yeah, i had that in mind and tried with 6.0 as well. fails the same. I am pretty sure this worked when I tested it back then, so I must have broke something !

                          mehdiM Offline
                          mehdiM Offline
                          mehdi
                          App Dev
                          wrote on last edited by
                          #51

                          @girish You can try with an app-password, or try another Basic Auth ProxyAuth app, like Transmission (with an android app or a browser extension)

                          1 Reply Last reply
                          0
                          • girishG Offline
                            girishG Offline
                            girish
                            Staff
                            wrote on last edited by
                            #52

                            What I am seeing is that docker doesn't send any authorization header at all. The issue is very similar to https://stackoverflow.com/questions/55516317/docker-login-not-passing-basic-authentication-headers-to-nginx . I can curl just fine.

                            1 Reply Last reply
                            0
                            • girishG Offline
                              girishG Offline
                              girish
                              Staff
                              wrote on last edited by
                              #53

                              It seems that v2 registry auth does not use the basic bearer based authentication at all. https://docs.docker.com/registry/recipes/nginx/ is possibly obsolete, but I am trying to setup a registry from scratch now to double check.

                              marioM mehdiM 2 Replies Last reply
                              2
                              • girishG girish

                                It seems that v2 registry auth does not use the basic bearer based authentication at all. https://docs.docker.com/registry/recipes/nginx/ is possibly obsolete, but I am trying to setup a registry from scratch now to double check.

                                marioM Offline
                                marioM Offline
                                mario
                                App Dev
                                wrote on last edited by
                                #54

                                @girish it definitely can, that's how GitLab etc integration works.

                                girishG 1 Reply Last reply
                                0
                                • girishG girish

                                  It seems that v2 registry auth does not use the basic bearer based authentication at all. https://docs.docker.com/registry/recipes/nginx/ is possibly obsolete, but I am trying to setup a registry from scratch now to double check.

                                  mehdiM Offline
                                  mehdiM Offline
                                  mehdi
                                  App Dev
                                  wrote on last edited by
                                  #55

                                  @girish Their doc indeed appears to be outdated. Different pages seem to indicate different things ...

                                  1 Reply Last reply
                                  0
                                  • marioM mario

                                    @girish it definitely can, that's how GitLab etc integration works.

                                    girishG Offline
                                    girishG Offline
                                    girish
                                    Staff
                                    wrote on last edited by girish
                                    #56

                                    @mario thanks! i needed such a confident statement to help me keep looking further 🙂

                                    I managed to get it to work. The issue is that proxyAuth on an auth fail redirects to the login page. But the docker registry wants it to return a 401 with a www-authenticate header. The header also causes issues with browsers since it starts popping up the login dialog.

                                    In essence, even though the basic auth works, proxyAuth is not compatible. I thought about adding an flag to the manifest to have a different behavior but then again I don't like the current approach where we just install this registry and land on an empty page (any page even some static html with instructions would be better).

                                    I ended up packaging it together the docker registry UI and a small LDAP server (from https://git.cloudron.io/cloudron/cloudron-serve). I haven't pushed the changes since they are not working entirely. But it's what I am working on in parallel with getting 6.1 out.

                                    fbartelsF mehdiM 2 Replies Last reply
                                    4
                                    • girishG girish

                                      @mario thanks! i needed such a confident statement to help me keep looking further 🙂

                                      I managed to get it to work. The issue is that proxyAuth on an auth fail redirects to the login page. But the docker registry wants it to return a 401 with a www-authenticate header. The header also causes issues with browsers since it starts popping up the login dialog.

                                      In essence, even though the basic auth works, proxyAuth is not compatible. I thought about adding an flag to the manifest to have a different behavior but then again I don't like the current approach where we just install this registry and land on an empty page (any page even some static html with instructions would be better).

                                      I ended up packaging it together the docker registry UI and a small LDAP server (from https://git.cloudron.io/cloudron/cloudron-serve). I haven't pushed the changes since they are not working entirely. But it's what I am working on in parallel with getting 6.1 out.

                                      fbartelsF Offline
                                      fbartelsF Offline
                                      fbartels
                                      App Dev
                                      wrote on last edited by
                                      #57

                                      @girish said in Docker registry:

                                      I ended up packaging it together the docker registry UI and a small LDAP server

                                      That sounds intriguing. What role does the ldap server serve? Just for auth against the registry ui?

                                      girishG 1 Reply Last reply
                                      0
                                      • girishG girish

                                        @mario thanks! i needed such a confident statement to help me keep looking further 🙂

                                        I managed to get it to work. The issue is that proxyAuth on an auth fail redirects to the login page. But the docker registry wants it to return a 401 with a www-authenticate header. The header also causes issues with browsers since it starts popping up the login dialog.

                                        In essence, even though the basic auth works, proxyAuth is not compatible. I thought about adding an flag to the manifest to have a different behavior but then again I don't like the current approach where we just install this registry and land on an empty page (any page even some static html with instructions would be better).

                                        I ended up packaging it together the docker registry UI and a small LDAP server (from https://git.cloudron.io/cloudron/cloudron-serve). I haven't pushed the changes since they are not working entirely. But it's what I am working on in parallel with getting 6.1 out.

                                        mehdiM Offline
                                        mehdiM Offline
                                        mehdi
                                        App Dev
                                        wrote on last edited by
                                        #58

                                        @girish I think the best approach would be to do a bit of user-agent parsing magic... Yeah, it would be quite specific for this use-case, but 🤷

                                        girishG 1 Reply Last reply
                                        0
                                        • fbartelsF fbartels

                                          @girish said in Docker registry:

                                          I ended up packaging it together the docker registry UI and a small LDAP server

                                          That sounds intriguing. What role does the ldap server serve? Just for auth against the registry ui?

                                          girishG Offline
                                          girishG Offline
                                          girish
                                          Staff
                                          wrote on last edited by
                                          #59

                                          @fbartels said in Docker registry:

                                          That sounds intriguing. What role does the ldap server serve? Just for auth against the registry ui?

                                          Yes, pretty much. It's just a proxy that redirects to login page and auths against LDAP. The code itself is very small, just ~100 lines or so.

                                          1 Reply Last reply
                                          0
                                          Reply
                                          • Reply as topic
                                          Log in to reply
                                          • Oldest to Newest
                                          • Newest to Oldest
                                          • Most Votes


                                          • Login

                                          • Don't have an account? Register

                                          • Login or register to search.
                                          • First post
                                            Last post
                                          0
                                          • Categories
                                          • Recent
                                          • Tags
                                          • Popular
                                          • Bookmarks
                                          • Search