Alephys

Our Locations : Hyderabad, Texas, Singapore

December 28, 2025

Transitioning Confluent Platform from ZooKeeper to KRaft

The Apache Kafka ecosystem is undergoing its most significant architectural evolution: the transition from ZooKeeper to KRaft (Kafka Raft Metadata mode). By integrating a native Raft-based consensus system directly into Kafka, the platform eliminates the complexity of external coordination, resulting in a more scalable, resilient, and operationally streamlined architecture. Confluent Platform supports this transition through three primary pathways: Manual Migration, Ansible Automation, and Confluent for Kubernetes (CFK). This guide explores the three-state journey to KRaft and the critical considerations for a successful cutover. Why the Move to KRaft? The shift to KRaft is a fundamental requirement for the future of Kafka. The 3 States of Migration Regardless of the tool you use, the journey follows three distinct operational states. This phased approach ensures data integrity and allows for validation before the final cutover. State Mode Operational Reality State 1 ZooKeeper Mode The Baseline: The cluster operates traditionally. ZooKeeper handles all metadata (leader elections, configs, and ACLs). Brokers are unaware of KRaft. State 2 Dual-Write Mode The Bridge: KRaft Controllers are active. Metadata is synchronized between ZooKeeper and KRaft in real-time. This is the last point where a rollback is possible. State 3 KRaft-Only Mode The Destination: Migration is finalized. ZooKeeper is decommissioned. The cluster is now simpler and faster. Rollback is no longer possible. Choosing Your Migration Path 1. Manual Migration (Classic Approach) Manual migration offers the most granular control. It is best suited for administrators who need to manage every step of the process without relying on external automation frameworks. 2. Automated Migration with Confluent Ansible If you manage Kafka on Virtual Machines or Bare Metal, Confluent Ansible provides a repeatable, “declarative” workflow. 3. Kubernetes-Native Migration with CFK For organizations running on Kubernetes, Confluent for Kubernetes (CFK) provides a fully orchestrated, cloud-native experience. The “One-Way Door”: What You Must Know Migration is a high-stakes operation. Adhering to these rules is non-negotiable. 1. The Point of No Return Once you move from State 2 (Dual-Write) to State 3 (KRaft-Only), you have crossed a “one-way door.” Brokers stop writing to ZooKeeper entirely. You can never roll back to ZooKeeper after finalization. Any failure after this point requires a brand-new cluster build. 2. Never “First Time” in Production Practice the full 3-state transition in a staging or QA environment that mirrors your production security (TLS/SASL) and data volume. 3. Backups are Non-Negotiable Before moving to State 2, take full backups of ZooKeeper data directories, broker configurations, and broker log directories. These are your only safety nets if State 2 fails. 4. Cluster ID Integrity KRaft controllers must be formatted with the exact same Cluster ID used by your current ZooKeeper ensemble. A mismatch will cause brokers to reject the new controllers, leading to a split-brain scenario or total downtime. 5. Don’t Mix Upgrade and Migration First, upgrade your Confluent Platform to a version that supports KRaft migration (7.7.x is recommended). Stabilize the cluster. Then, and only then, initiate the migration to KRaft. Conclusion Migrating to KRaft is more than just a version update; it is a foundational transformation of your data infrastructure. Whether you choose the control of a Manual approach, the scalability of Ansible, or the orchestration of CFK, the goal is a leaner, faster Kafka. Plan carefully, validate thoroughly in the Dual-Write state, and only close the “One-Way Door” when you are 100% confident in your new KRaft quorum. Ready to Seamlessly Migrate to KRaft? If you are planning the critical shift from ZooKeeper to KRaft and want to ensure a zero-downtime transition, Alephys is here to guide your journey. Navigating the “One-Way Door” requires precision. Whether you are validating Dual-Write performance, managing complex Ansible workflows, or orchestrating a Kubernetes-native cutover with CFK, our team of data experts ensures your infrastructure remains resilient. We help you eliminate the risks of split-brain scenarios and data loss so you can unlock the full scalability of a controller-less architecture with confidence. Author: Siva Munaga, Solution Architect at Alephys. Gireesh Krishna Paupuleti, Solution Architect at Alephys. I specialize in building scalable data infrastructure and executing complex Kafka migrations that modernize enterprise platforms. Let’s connect on LinkedIn to discuss your move to KRaft and your long-term infrastructure goals!  

Transitioning Confluent Platform from ZooKeeper to KRaft Read More »

Orchestrating Traffic: The Distinct Roles of Load Balancers, IPTables, and Nginx

In modern distributed architectures, designing a routing layer for high-throughput services—such as Apache Kafka clusters, RESTful microservices, or gRPC endpoints—requires a sophisticated understanding of traffic flow. It is standard practice to deploy Load Balancers (L4), IPTables (Netfilter), and Nginx (L7) in tandem. While these components may superficially appear to overlap, they operate at distinct layers of the OSI model and solve specific infrastructure challenges. This guide deconstructs these components to clarify their interoperability and specific roles within a production-grade traffic plane. 1. The Cloud Load Balancer: The High-Availability Ingress Operational Scope: Layer 4 (Transport Layer – TCP/UDP)The Cloud Load Balancer (e.g., AWS Network Load Balancer, Azure LB) serves as the ingress gateway for your infrastructure. It is responsible for the initial acceptance and distribution of raw TCP/UDP streams. Architecture Diagram Core Responsibilities The L4 Load Balancer acts as a pass-through mechanism that distributes connections based on the 5-tuple (Source IP, Source Port, Destination IP, Destination Port, Protocol). Architectural Limitations As a Layer 4 device, the Load Balancer is content-agnostic. It cannot inspect the data stream. Consequently, it is unaware of: 2. IPTables: Kernel-Level Packet Mangling Operational Scope: Layer 3/4 (Network/Transport Layer) IPTables is the user-space utility for configuring Netfilter, the packet filtering framework inside the Linux kernel. It governs how packets are processed immediately upon entering the network stack of a host VM. Architecture Diagram Core Responsibilities IPTables excels at Network Address Translation (NAT) and strictly defined access control lists (ACLs). It operates efficiently in kernel space before traffic reaches any application processes. Example: DNAT Rule for Port Forwarding iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp –dport 30000 -j REDIRECT –to-port 31000 Architectural Limitations IPTables is a stateless or simple stateful packet filter. It lacks application awareness: 3. Nginx: The Application Delivery Controller Operational Scope: Layer 7 (Application Layer)Nginx functions as a high-performance Reverse Proxy and Load Balancer. Unlike the previous components, Nginx terminates the TCP connection, inspects the payload, and makes intelligent routing decisions based on the content. Architecture Diagram Core Responsibilities Nginx serves as the “intelligence layer” of the routing stack. The Routing Workflow 4. Comparative Analysis: Netfilter vs. Reverse Proxy While both tools manage traffic flow, their scope of operation differs fundamentally. Feature IPTables (Netfilter) Nginx (Reverse Proxy) OSI Layer Layer 3/4 (Network/Transport) Layer 7 (Application) Routing Logic IP and Port-based Content, Hostname, & SNI-based TLS/SNI Awareness No (Encrypted traffic is opaque) Yes (Can terminate or inspect) Health Monitoring None (Blind forwarding) Active (Retries & Circuit Breaking) Observability Packet counters Granular Access & Error Logs 5. Strategic Advantages of Layer 7 Routing For complex distributed systems like Apache Kafka or multi-tenant microservices, relying solely on L3/L4 routing is insufficient. Here is why an Application Layer proxy (Nginx) is critical: 1. Granular Multi-Tenancy (SNI Routing) Modern architectures often expose multiple services via a single public endpoint. 2. Intelligent Failover & Self-Healing Reliability is non-negotiable. 3. Deep Observability Debugging network “black holes” is difficult with packet filters. Nginx provides rich telemetry: Summary: The Defense-in-Depth Architecture A robust production environment utilizes these components in a synergistic chain: By orchestrating these layers correctly, you ensure your architecture is not just connected, but resilient, observable, and secure. Ready to Architect a Resilient Routing Layer? If you’re aiming to deploy a zero-downtime routing strategy or need to optimize the traffic flow between your Cloud Load Balancers and Nginx, Alephys can help you engineer a network layer built for scale. Whether you’re troubleshooting complex SNI routing issues, automating intelligent failover logic, or hardening your host security with precision IPTables rules, our team of infrastructure engineers handles the architectural heavy lifting. We ensure your critical services achieve high availability and robust security, allowing you to scale confidently without traffic bottlenecks. Author: Gireesh Krishna Pasupuleti, Solution Architect at Alephys. Siva Munaga, Solution Architect at Alephys. We are specialize in designing high-throughput network architectures and securing distributed systems for modern enterprises. Let’s connect on LinkedIn to discuss your routing challenges and cloud infrastructure roadmap!

Orchestrating Traffic: The Distinct Roles of Load Balancers, IPTables, and Nginx Read More »