calico
v3.33.0 open-sourceThe section your link pointed to isn't on calico's page any more, so we've brought you to the top.
Open-source container networking and network security solution for Kubernetes supporting eBPFeBPFA Linux technology for running verified programs inside the kernel without changing its source. Tools use it to observe processes, enforce rules and process network traffic., BGPBGPA routing protocol that lets autonomous systems on the internet exchange reachability information, determining how traffic flows between networks. Cyber tools use it to monitor route hijacks or inject sinkholes., VXLANVXLANA network encapsulation protocol that wraps Layer 2 Ethernet frames inside UDP packets, extending virtual LANs across Layer 3 networks. Cyber tools use it to simulate or inspect traffic across large-scale virtualized and cloud environments., and WireGuardWireGuardA modern VPN protocol and Linux kernel module, maintained as an open-source project, that establishes encrypted tunnels using minimal code and fast cryptography, giving cyber tools a lightweight, high-performance transport layer. encryption.
calicoctl convert -f policy-v2.yaml > policy-v3.yaml calicoctl apply --namespace=production -f netpol.yaml env SKIP_CNI_BINARIES='veth,lame-duck' calico/node cat <<EOF | kubectl apply -f - apiVersion: projectcalico.org/v3 kind: BGPPeer metadata: name: node-bgp-peer spec: nodeSelector: all() peerIP: 192.168.1.100 EOF cat calico-resources.yaml | calicoctl apply -f -
Summary
Calico is an open-source networking and security tool for Kubernetes clusters, distributed under the Apache licence, and run as a CNI plugin installed cluster-wide via the Tigera Operator rather than as a standalone CLI. It's built for platform and cluster-security teams who need to enforce network policy and zero-trust segmentation between workloads, supporting eBPF, standard Linux, Windows, and VPP data planes across clouds, bare metal, and VMs. It implements the upstream Kubernetes ClusterNetworkPolicy resource, giving admins cluster-scoped rules that namespace owners can't override, composed with its own tiered NetworkPolicyNetworkPolicyA Kubernetes API object that defines which pods may send or receive traffic, enforced by the cluster's CNI plugin to give cyber tools namespace-level network segmentation without host firewall rules. and GlobalNetworkPolicy model, and it bundles Istio in ambient mode as a tech preview for sidecarless mesh encryption. First committed in 2013, it remains active with 818 contributors and a release 34 days ago.
Open-source container networking and network security solution for Kubernetes supporting eBPF, BGP, VXLAN, and WireGuard encryption.
How calico helps
Which pod is actually blocking this connection, and why?
traces the network path hop by hop down to the specific policy rule allowing or denying it, and suggests a fix instead of leaving you to read raw packet dumps
Can I tell whether this deployment will violate policy before it goes live?
runs the same connectivity and policy-review workflow offline against a saved diagnostics bundle, so a failure can be triaged after the fact or a change checked before it reaches a live cluster
Which namespace-level policies are quietly overriding the guardrails I set for the whole cluster?
separates cluster-scoped accept/deny/pass rules into admin and baseline tiers that sit above ordinary namespace policy, so an owner's rule can no longer contradict the cluster-wide rule
Which routes is this cluster actually advertising or accepting over BGP?
applies filters at the peering level to control what gets advertised or accepted, so route leakage between peers is a configuration you can inspect rather than an assumption
Will migrating off the aggregated API server break workload connectivity?
copies existing resources to native CRDs in place through a controller that locks the datastore only briefly, keeping workload connectivity up through the migration window
Languages
Command line
No command matches.
| option | found in | since | description |
|---|
Values are placeholders taken from each option’s declared default. Nothing is executed here — the output shown is a recording of a run that already happened.
Screenshots
From the release notes, newest first. Click one to see it full size.Score card
-
Shipping velocity releases a month, last 12 months
-
Documentation quality release-notes rubric, 0–100
-
Breaking-change discipline how rarely a release breaks users, and notice given
-
Maintenance risk quiet time against its own cadence, maintainers
-
Innovation & surface new capabilities, API and MCP surface
- Community health
-
Contributor trend distinct committers, this year against last
-
Maintainer concentration bus factor now against a year ago
-
Issue backlog trend issues closed per issue opened, 12 months
-
Responsiveness median time to a maintainer’s first reply
Nine scores for calico, each built from the releases, notes and API history this site tracks — and, on Researcher and Business, where it stands among every measured tool in its category and how that has moved.
Score cards are part of every paid plan.
See plans → Already subscribed? Sign in →Trajectory
Blank means never measured; nothing here is a filled-in zero.
Peer standings are included with Researcher and Business. See how this tool ranks against its competitors, using data we don't publish anywhere else.
See plans →Each score is 0–100 on a published rubric, derived from data this site already shows. A dimension we cannot measure says so — it is never scored 0 and never enters a rank.
How this is scored
- Shipping velocity — releases a month over the last 12 months, on a log scale where 16 a month scores 100. Needs 3 releases in the window.
- Documentation quality — the release-notes rubric published on the analytics page, unchanged.
- Breaking-change discipline — the share of releases carrying a breaking change (none scores 100, half or more scores 0). Only projects that label breaking changes are measured: a clean record cannot be told from an unlabelled one.
- Maintenance risk — quiet time measured against the tool's own release cadence (quiet longer than 90 days and three typical gaps scores 0), plus the number of active maintainers and whether contributors are growing, where known. Higher is lower risk.
- Innovation & surface — new capabilities in the feature ledger this year, API and MCP operations added, and the share of commits that are features: the mean of whichever we hold.
- Community health (open-source tools only) — each is a direction, not a size: contributors this year against last, the bus factor now against a year ago, and issues closed per issue opened, where steady scores 50, doubled 100 and halved 0; plus the median time to a maintainer's first reply (an hour scores about 100, a month or more 0). A commercial card has no repository and carries none of the four.
- Documented delivery (commercial tools) — when a vendor's documented new capabilities have slowed against its own baseline, that counts against the overall standing as heavily as two low dimensions. Steady delivery, or too little history to judge, leaves the standing alone; it is never a sixth score.
- Open-source tools are scored on repository signals; commercial tools on their published changelog. Ranks compare tools within one category and one profile and need at least five measured peers; the overall standing needs three ranked dimensions. Best-in-breed or consolidator is a shape, not a quality, and is never scored.
Release-note detail over time
See how much detail calico puts in its release notes, quarter by quarter, and compare it with tracked tools in the same category. This history uses up to ten retained, reviewed notes per tool; sparse or blank older quarters may reflect that limit.
Checking release-note history…
Releases
9 entries
No entries match these filters.
- October 20261
- September 20262
- January 20221
- April 20182
- December 20171
- September 20171
- July 20171
Project health
Issue, contributor and maintainer activity in projectcalico/calico, 2023-10 – 2026-09, as of 2026-09-25. Twelve-month figures first; the trend lines run the whole window.
- Contributors 111 +10 vs prior 12 months
- Maintainers 16 +7 joined · −6 left, last 12 months
- Bus factor 5 committers behind half the commits
- Community-filed 94% of issues opened, last 12 months
- Median time to close 53 days first maintainer reply 5.1 days
- Open backlog 93 of 3,667 issues ever filed
- Issues opened / month 7 · 0 communitymaintainers
- Open backlog 93
- Contributors / month 31
- Commits / month 273
- Stars 7,357
- bugs 24%
- features 17%
- questions 17%
- docs 0%
- other 42%
Counts from the project's public repository and git history; no individuals are identified. Maintainers are the committers covering 80% of the last year's commits. how we measure this
Libraries its release ships
What its latest release locks, checked against known advisories.None of its release's images build from a lockfile we can read.
Add the badge to your README
Maintain this project? The badge links readers straight to this page, so they can follow every release here.