From tfa:
> Customers can use Service Directory to register different types of services and resolve them securely over HTTP and gRPC. For DNS clients, customers can leverage Service Directory’s private DNS zones, a feature that automatically updates DNS records as services change.
So it's a db with dns, http and grpc interface. But why? Are there any grpc or rest clients that do not speak dns? Wouldn't it be simpler to just use dns?
Ed: missed the resolve them securely part. AFAIK there's isn't really any viable secure dns (for the same value of secure that https/http2 provides). So seems dns is more of a fallback (and maybe bootstrap) thing?
Yup, and it’s free so seems like a pretty good deal. Only downside I can see is the potential lock-in into the Google Cloud it has, but that’s with most cloud services anyway.
EDIT: It’s only free during beta. Would feel better if they gave a price point indication of what this may cost, but sounds like you’ll want to be conservative with the amount of requests you send.
It’s a mistake to assume anything free on hyperscalers like GCP. Even ones with free tag. A future price tag needs to be baked into your current designs.
We had to write something running on Google AppEngine and backed by Google Datastore to do exactly that. We canned Global Service Registry or GSR. Could have used this if it was available 3 years ago!
So it's a db with dns, http and grpc interface. But why? Are there any grpc or rest clients that do not speak dns? Wouldn't it be simpler to just use dns?
Ed: missed the resolve them securely part. AFAIK there's isn't really any viable secure dns (for the same value of secure that https/http2 provides). So seems dns is more of a fallback (and maybe bootstrap) thing?