This is pretty big. Caddy had this forever but not everybody wants to use caddy. It'll probably eat into the user share of software like Traefik.

▲ elashri 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

What I really like about Caddy is their better syntax. I actually use nginx (via nginx proxy manager) and Traefik but recently I did one project with Caddy and found it very nice. I might get the time to change my selfhosted setup to use Caddy in the future but probably will go with something like pangolin [1] because it provides alternative to cloudflare tunnels too.

[1] https://github.com/fosrl/pangolin

▲ kstrauser 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I agree. That, and the sane defaults are almost always nearly perfect for me. Here is the entire configuration for a TLS-enabled HTTP/{1.1,2,3} static server:

  something.example.com {
    root * /var/www/something.example.com
    file_server
  }

That's the whole thing. Here's the setup of a WordPress site with all the above, plus PHP, plus compression:

  php.example.com {
    root * /var/www/wordpress
    encode
    php_fastcgi unix//run/php/php-version-fpm.sock
    file_server
  }

You can tune and tweak all the million other options too, of course, but you don't have to for most common use cases. It Just Works more than any similarly complex server I've ever been responsible for.

▲ pgug 2 days ago | parent [-]

I find the documentation for the syntax to be a bit lacking if you want to do anything that isn't very basic and how they want you to do it. For example, I want to use a wildcard certificate for my internal services to hide service names from certificate transparency logs, and I can't get the syntax working. Chatgpt and gemini also couldn't.

▲ dizhn 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

This here is how it's done, where you have a wildcard dns entry for subdomains of secret.domain.com.

{ acme_dns cloudflare oWN-HR__kxRoDhrixaQbI6M0uwS4bfXub4g4xia2 debug }

*.secret.domain.com {

        @sso host sso.secret.domain.com
        handle @sso {
                reverse_proxy 192.168.200.4:9000
        }

        @adguard host adguard.secret.domain.com
        handle @adguard {
                reverse_proxy 192.168.200.4:9000
        }


        @forge host     forge.secret.domain.com
        handle @forge {
                reverse_proxy http://forgejo:3000
        }

        # respond to whatever doesn't match
        handle {
                respond "Wildcard subdomain does not have a web configuration!"
        }

        handle_errors {
                respond "Error {err.status_code} {err.status_text}"
        }
}

	▲	pgug 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Thank you, I will try that later today.

▲ cpach 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

This integration doesn’t support the dns-01 challenge. So wildcard certs are out of the question at this point.

	▲	cpach 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		PS. Oh, this subthread is about Caddy, not Nginx. Nevermind my comment then!

▲ nadanke 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

For wildcards you need a Caddy build that includes the dns plugin for your specific provider. There's a tool called xcaddy that helps with that. It's still kinda annoying because now you need to manage the binary for yourself but when I tried it with Hetzner it worked fine.

▲ snickerdoodle12 2 days ago | parent [-]

In case it helps someone else, this is what I do:

    FROM caddy:2-builder AS builder

    RUN xcaddy build \
        --with github.com/caddy-dns/cloudflare \
        --with github.com/greenpau/caddy-security

    FROM caddy:2

    COPY --from=builder /usr/bin/caddy /usr/bin/caddy

    COPY Caddyfile /etc/caddy/Caddyfile

Then just build & run it via docker compose

▲ Saris 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Caddy does have some bizarre limitations I've run into, particularly logging with different permissions when it writes the file, so other processes like promtail can read the logs. With Caddy you cannot change them, it always writes with very restrictive permissions.

I find their docs also really hard to deal with, trying to figure out something that would be super simple on Nginx can be really difficult on Caddy, if it's outside the scope of 'normal stuff'

The other thing I really don't like is if you install via a package manager to get automated updates, you don't get any of the plugins. If you want plugins you have to build it yourself or use their build service, and you don't get automatic updates.

▲

francislavoie 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Actually, you can set the permissions for log files now. See https://caddyserver.com/docs/caddyfile/directives/log#file

▲

Saris 2 days ago | parent [-]

Oh good to know!

Do you know if Caddy can self update or if is there some other easy method? Manually doing it to get the cloudflare plugin is a pain.

▲

francislavoie 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

No, you have to build Caddy with plugins. We provide xcaddy to make it easy. Sign up for notifications on github for releases, and just write yourself a tiny bash script to build the binary with xcaddy, and restart the service. You could potentially do a thing where you hook into apt to trigger your script after Caddy's deb package version changes, idk. But it's up to you to handle.

▲

dizhn 2 days ago | parent [-]

I am wondering why you said "no" to the self update thing.

https://caddyserver.com/docs/command-line#caddy-upgrade

	▲	francislavoie 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Because that's not automated, it's a manual command and uses caddyserver.com resources (relatively low powered cloud VMs) with no uptime guarantees. It _should not_ be used in automation scenarios, only for quick manual personal use scenarios.

▲

2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[deleted]

▲

nodesocket 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I use Caddy as my main reverse proxy into containers with CloudFlare based DNS let’s encrypt. The syntax is intuitive and just works. I’ve used Traefik in the past with Kubernetes and while powerful the setup and grok ability has quite a bit steeper learning curve.

▲

dizhn 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You can have the binary self update with currently included plugins. I think the command line help says it's beta but has always worked fine for me.

	▲	Saris 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		I'll give that a try!

▲ karmakaze 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Not only that but Nginx how the configuration is split up into all the separate modules is a lot of extra complexity that Caddy avoids by having a single coherent way of configuring its features.

▲ dizhn 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I checked out pangolin too recently but then I realized that I already have Authentik and using its embedded (go based) proxy I don't really need pangolin.

▲ tgv 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

I switched over to caddy recently. Nginx' non-information about the http 1 desync problem drove me over. I'm not going to wait for something stupid to happen or an auditor ask me questions nginx doesn't answer.

Caddy is really easier than nginx. For starters, I now have templates that cover the main services and their test services, and the special service that runs for an education institution. Logging is better. Certificate handling is perfect (for my case, at least). And it has better metrics.

Now I have to figure out plugins though, because caddy doesn't have rate limiting and some stupid bug in powerbi makes a single user hit certain images 300.000 times per day. That's a bit of a downside.

▲

dekobon 2 days ago | parent [-]

I did a google search for the desync problem and found this page: https://my.f5.com/manage/s/article/K30341203

This type of thing is out of my realm of expertise. What information would you want to see about the problem? What would be helpful?

	▲	tgv 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		A simple statement by the maintainers of nginx stating how to configure so that a desync attack fails. That would have been helpful. Especially since the people behind the desync attack claim nginx is not invulnerable. I've got no idea who F5 is. They seem legit, but that page didn't show up in my DDG search. But it's too late now. Water under the bridge.

▲ thrown-0825 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Definitely. I use traefik for some stuff at home and will likely swap it out now.

▲

grim_io 2 days ago | parent [-]

I configure traefik by defining a few docker labels on the services themselves. No way I'm going back to using the horrible huge nginx config.

	▲	dizhn 20 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		https://gist.github.com/omltcat/241ef622070ca0580f2876a7cfa7... Some guy retrofitted caddy to use docker labels. It looks way too complicated for me but i don't know how easy/hard it is with traefik either.
	▲	thrown-0825 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Traefik is slower AND uses more resources.

▲ dwedge 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

It's also been in Apache since 2018

	▲	dizhn a day ago \| parent [-]
		That is pretty early. I had no idea Apache had this. I guess not many people are talking about apache anymore.

▲ fastball 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

I felt the same but switched to Caddy for my reverse proxy last year and have had a great experience.

Admittedly this was on the back of trying to use nginx-unit, which was an overall bad experience, but ¯\_(ツ)_/¯