Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[jaeger-v2] Document changes to admin port / services #750

Open
yurishkuro opened this issue Sep 28, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

[jaeger-v2] Document changes to admin port / services #750

yurishkuro opened this issue Sep 28, 2024 · 2 comments
Assignees

Comments

@yurishkuro
Copy link
Member

yurishkuro commented Sep 28, 2024

  • metrics are on a different port address: 0.0.0.0:8888 (address: 0.0.0.0:8889 for ingester)
  • expvar is also on a different port via expvar extension: port: 27777
  • Healthchecks are on a different port via healthcheckv2 extension: endpoint: "0.0.0.0:13133"
@jkowall
Copy link
Collaborator

jkowall commented Oct 2, 2024

I did some updates to the docs per : #751

The following seem to still be in the v1 docs and I believe should be somewhere in v2 docs, let me know what you think:

At default settings **jaeger-collector** exposes the following ports:

| Port  | Protocol | Endpoint | Function
| ----- | -------  | -------- | ----
| 4317  | gRPC     | n/a      | Accepts traces in [OpenTelemetry OTLP format][otlp] (Protobuf).
| 4318  | HTTP     | `/v1/traces` | Accepts traces in [OpenTelemetry OTLP format][otlp] (Protobuf and JSON).
| 14268 | HTTP     | `/api/sampling` | Serves sampling policies (see [Remote Sampling](../sampling/#remote-sampling)).
|       |          | `/api/traces` | Accepts spans in [jaeger.thrift][jaeger-thrift] format with `binary` thrift protocol (`POST`).
| 9411  | HTTP     | `/api/v1/spans` and `/api/v2/spans` | Accepts Zipkin spans in Thrift, JSON and Proto (disabled by default).
| 14250 | gRPC     | n/a      | Used by **jaeger-agent** to send spans in [model.proto][] Protobuf format.

@yurishkuro
Copy link
Member Author

yes, those ports would still be relevant (sometimes the ports might be different)

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
Status: Todo
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants