Cisco Jasper vs. K3s Lightweight Kubernetes

Using Cisco Jasper is suitable for managing large numbers of cellular subscribers where manual management is impossible. If you are a prototype project with dozens of subscribers, it may not be convenient for you to deal with Cisco Jasper and opt for manual management. The use of Cisco Jasper is justified in a production and project monetization environment.

Incentivized

K3s Lightweight Kubernetes is well suited for local development. K3s Lightweight Kubernetes is not well suited when you need backward support. In the case that you want to test an application that is still using deprecated APIs or CRDs which are supported on popular managed Cloud Kubernetes Distributions, because K3s Lightweight Kubernetes is trying to be a lightweight application and dropping early support for APIs/CRDs marked for deprication K3s Lightweight Kubernetes will not be a good solution. If you are trying to test Kubernetes etc, functionality, K3s Lightweight Kubernetes is not a good case since it's using Dqlite or SQLite.

Incentivized

• Device integration
• Connectivity management
• Enterprise-grade solution

Incentivized

• Virtual clusters
• IoT devices
• Local development
• Raspberry Pi

Incentivized

• Occasionally, it takes a long time for things to load, but that is just a feature.
• There are a few minor glitches, but nothing that affects usage.
• It was assuring security as a vendor-based solution.

• Option to deploy a self managed k3s in the cloud
• Support to deploy it with kubeadm
• Integration with prometheus & grafana

Incentivized

In our country, the subscriber management platform is not eligible since each cell phone operator opts for a particular brand, that is, we have not had an option, although we have no complaints about the platform, we feel comfortable using it. I know of other management platforms used by other operators and they are really all very well designed, but we all know about CISCO's track record in the market, which adds additional value.

Incentivized

We have mostly used kind, minikube, and Docker Desktop Kubernetes for local development. Only kind has lower resource requirements, but K3s Lightweight Kubernetes seems to be even lighter. It is a big benefit to be able to deploy a K3s Lightweight Kubernetes cluster in seconds locally in our workstation, there is no cost, and it makes it easy to redeploy from scratch no matter how many times we want. The removal of deprecated APIs or CRDs also makes it more secure since it reduces unnecessarily exposed attack vectors.

Incentivized

• We saved an average of 14% on device connectivity costs
• We have an almost 99% uptime thanks to CJ.

Incentivized

• Engineers have been able to run more microservices locally with K3s Lightweight Kubernetes instead of Minikube, which is more resources hungry

Incentivized