Why limit the port to 80 and 443?

[cawirawa]

Issue

At present, Caddy Ingress is restricted to handling TCP connections exclusively on ports 80 and 443. While this suits typical HTTP/HTTPS scenarios, there are use cases where users need to manage TCP connections on other ports, such as those used for gRPC services.

Requested Feature

I propose expanding the capabilities of Caddy Ingress to allow users to define TCP connections on arbitrary ports. This enhancement would make Caddy Ingress a more versatile tool, particularly in environments where non-HTTP protocols like gRPC are utilized.

Use Cases

• Support for gRPC services running on non-standard ports.

Rationale

The ability to define TCP connections on arbitrary ports provides greater flexibility and aligns with diverse deployment scenarios. Enabling Caddy Ingress to manage non-HTTP protocols allows users to consolidate their configuration and benefit from Caddy's features in a broader range of use cases.

Proposed Implementation

Introduce a configuration option to specify the ports for TCP connections, allowing users to define arbitrary ports for non-HTTP services. This could be achieved through additions to the Caddy Ingress configuration file or via annotations on Kubernetes services.

[cruizba]

+1. I will go all-in with caddy in kubernetes if such functionality someday exists