<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?><rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Iptables on Samuel Matildes - Knowledge Base</title><link>https://matildes.dev/tags/iptables/</link><description>Recent content in Iptables on Samuel Matildes - Knowledge Base</description><generator>Hugo</generator><language>en</language><lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2026 12:27:57 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://matildes.dev/tags/iptables/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/><item><title>Retiring kube-proxy IPVS on MicroK8s: An Upgrade Readiness Runbook</title><link>https://matildes.dev/kubernetes/microk8s-kube-proxy-ipvs-migration/</link><pubDate>Mon, 26 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate><guid>https://matildes.dev/kubernetes/microk8s-kube-proxy-ipvs-migration/</guid><description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;i class="fas fa-route" aria-hidden="true"&gt;&lt;/i&gt; A focused runbook for checking whether a MicroK8s cluster needs an IPVS migration before its next Kubernetes minor upgrade.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;h2 id="scope-and-outcome"&gt;Scope and outcome&lt;a class="td-heading-self-link" href="#scope-and-outcome" aria-label="Heading self-link"&gt;&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/h2&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This is not a general CNI replacement guide and it does not change Traefik, IngressRoutes, or application manifests. It covers one question: &lt;strong&gt;does this cluster run kube-proxy in &lt;code&gt;ipvs&lt;/code&gt; mode, and if so, can it move safely to &lt;code&gt;iptables&lt;/code&gt; before the next MicroK8s minor upgrade?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description></item></channel></rss>