Skip to content

Add a blog post about the Routing POC#259

Merged
tombentley merged 4 commits into
kroxylicious:mainfrom
tombentley:routing-poc-blog
May 21, 2026
Merged

Add a blog post about the Routing POC#259
tombentley merged 4 commits into
kroxylicious:mainfrom
tombentley:routing-poc-blog

Conversation

@tombentley
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

No description provided.

Signed-off-by: Tom Bentley <tbentley@redhat.com>
Signed-off-by: Tom Bentley <tbentley@redhat.com>
Comment thread _posts/2026-05-21-topic-routing.md Outdated
We think this is pretty cool, and we wanted to let people know that we're actively working on this. And being open source, we wanted to remind people that they can [join us](https://kroxylicious.io/join-us/) and get involved in any of the following ways:

* Tell us how you'd use the Router API: We have some ideas for other routers we want to build, but maybe you have an idea that only makes sense in your company. That's OK — not every router needs to be general-purpose. Kroxylicious is built for exactly that kind of bespoke use case.
* Tell us how you'd use a topic router. What Kafka features does it need to support? What functionality does it need for operators?
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is it really a topic router? I get the need for a pithy short hand just struggling a bit with this particular one.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Topic router" has an ambiguity — it reads as "router for topics" (as if the topics are moving) rather than "router that routes based on topic membership." Two alternatives worth considering:

  • Topic dispatcher — names the mechanism honestly. Dispatcher implies "sends to the right place" without overpromising.
  • Topic federation — names the user capability. Federation is well understood in distributed systems (DNS, LDAP, identity) and implies unified access to distributed resources.

I'm genuinely unsure which is better. Thoughts?

(Aside: federation does open up the option of naming the route selection components after Star Trek captains — Kirk, Picard, Janeway...)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I think Topic Router is perfectly understandable and is the right language for this blog post. You say the word "Router" in the messaging domain and I think many Engineers will think to https://www.enterpriseintegrationpatterns.com/patterns/messaging/MessageRouter.html. (or maybe I'm showing my age). Topic Routing we are describing is an example of the MessageRouting pattern.

Topic Dispatcher would puzzle me.
Federation is correct, but I think that word is usually employed when talking at a higher level. Message Routing is one way to achieve a federated message architecture, but it is not the only way (Mesh for instance).

@k-wall
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

k-wall commented May 21, 2026

@tombentley I think you pitched this just right.

tombentley and others added 2 commits May 22, 2026 08:55
Signed-off-by: Tom Bentley <tbentley@redhat.com>
@tombentley tombentley marked this pull request as ready for review May 21, 2026 20:55
@tombentley tombentley requested a review from a team as a code owner May 21, 2026 20:55
@tombentley tombentley enabled auto-merge (squash) May 21, 2026 20:56
@tombentley tombentley merged commit 563d7da into kroxylicious:main May 21, 2026
2 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants