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


    Cloudron Forum

    • Register
    • Login
    • Search
    • Categories
    • Recent
    • Tags
    • Popular

    Docker registry

    App Wishlist
    9
    65
    4906
    Loading More Posts
    • 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.
    • mario
      mario App Dev @girish last edited by

      @girish doesn't seem like it'll need package changes, documentation will be enough.

      mario 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
      • mario
        mario App Dev @mario last edited by mario

        I take that back, I did add some package changes. Had no time to test, but things seem to be working ok from the initial glimpse at it:

        https://git.cloudron.io/cloudron/docker-registry-app/-/merge_requests/1

        Please test and report back @girish and others 🙂

        1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
        • robi
          robi last edited by

          Might be useful to add auto deletion of old images:
          https://github.com/jeffstephens/retention-manager

          Life of Gratitude.
          Life of Advanced Technology

          mario 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
          • mario
            mario App Dev @robi last edited by

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

            girish robi 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 0
            • girish
              girish Staff @mario last edited by

              @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.

              mario 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
              • robi
                robi @mario last edited by

                @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. 🙂

                Life of Gratitude.
                Life of Advanced Technology

                1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                • mario
                  mario App Dev @girish last edited by

                  @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 Reply Quote 1
                  • mehdi
                    mehdi App Dev last edited by

                    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 Reply Quote 1
                    • jimcavoli
                      jimcavoli App Dev last edited by

                      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.

                      mario 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 1
                      • girish
                        girish Staff last edited by

                        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 Reply Quote 3
                        • mario
                          mario App Dev @jimcavoli last edited by

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

                          1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                          • girish
                            girish Staff last edited by

                            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
                            
                            mario 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                            • mario
                              mario App Dev @girish last edited by

                              @girish local filesystem?

                              girish 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                              • girish
                                girish Staff @mario last edited by 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.

                                mehdi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                • mehdi
                                  mehdi App Dev @girish last edited by

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

                                  girish 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                  • girish
                                    girish Staff @mehdi last edited by

                                    @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 !

                                    mehdi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                    • mehdi
                                      mehdi App Dev @girish last edited by

                                      @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 Reply Quote 0
                                      • girish
                                        girish Staff last edited by

                                        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 Reply Quote 0
                                        • girish
                                          girish Staff last edited by

                                          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.

                                          mario mehdi 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                          • mario
                                            mario App Dev @girish last edited by

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

                                            girish 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                            • mehdi
                                              mehdi App Dev @girish last edited by

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

                                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                              • girish
                                                girish Staff @mario last edited by 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.

                                                fbartels mehdi 2 Replies Last reply Reply Quote 4
                                                • fbartels
                                                  fbartels App Dev @girish last edited by

                                                  @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?

                                                  girish 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                  • mehdi
                                                    mehdi App Dev @girish last edited by

                                                    @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 🤷

                                                    girish 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                    • girish
                                                      girish Staff @fbartels last edited by

                                                      @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 Reply Quote 0
                                                      • girish
                                                        girish Staff @mehdi last edited by

                                                        @mehdi Right, I considered UA string hack but I think dropping users in a blank page is a bit rough. So, my first step was to do the UA testing with nginx in the app itself. But, that brought the dreaded browser auth modal dialog which I really dislike. It's the main reason I ended up making proxyAuth in the first place 😉 So.. I ended up making a node server.

                                                        mehdi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                        • mehdi
                                                          mehdi App Dev @girish last edited by

                                                          @girish No, I mean, after testing you could keep the proxyAuth, but do a test on the proxyAuth that could show the page for browsers, and send the expected 401 for docker client. Then we could have the best of both worlds : integration with platform LDAP, a simple registry UI, and working CLI.

                                                          girish 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 2
                                                          • girish
                                                            girish Staff @mehdi last edited by

                                                            @mehdi Ah, understood you better now. I am actually ok to add this hack in proxy auth code. We will still need some nginx/apache in the app code though to serve the registry UI (which is just static html).

                                                            Suddenly, I am tempted to abandon my node server because I am struggling to make this proxy middleware work. It seems to have some bug with PATCH requests which docker registry uses.

                                                            1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                            • girish
                                                              girish Staff last edited by

                                                              I have published this app as unstable now. It also has an integrated UI. I have only very mildly tested it, so do not use it in production. I have created an app category for this, please report any issues there.

                                                              1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 4
                                                              • L
                                                                LoudLemur @robi last edited by

                                                                @robi Thanks,

                                                                Quay is a Free alternative to DockerHub. Hopefully, Cloudron makes good use of it... ?

                                                                robi 1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                                • robi
                                                                  robi @LoudLemur last edited by

                                                                  @LoudLemur You can already use it by pointing your Cloudron to it.

                                                                  Life of Gratitude.
                                                                  Life of Advanced Technology

                                                                  1 Reply Last reply Reply Quote 0
                                                                  • First post
                                                                    Last post
                                                                  Powered by NodeBB