Software architecture is rarely built in isolation; instead, it evolves by learning from successful patterns and proven frameworks. The best architectures draw inspiration from established systems that have demonstrated scalability, resilience, and efficiency.
Kubernetes (K8s) is one such platform—widely adopted and battle-tested in managing modern cloud-native workloads. Given its widespread success, it makes perfect sense to explore Kubernetes' architecture as a reference when designing an Internal Developer Platform (IDP).
Designing for the Right Audience
When designing an Internal Developer Platform (IDP), one of the most critical aspects is understanding who will use it and how they will interact with it. A well-designed user interface is not just about aesthetics—it’s about empowering users with the right level of control, flexibility, and ease of use.
Take Kubernetes as an example. Despite its widespread adoption, Kubernetes has never prioritized a graphical user interface (GUI) as its primary method of interaction. Instead, it provides kubectl, a powerful command-line interface (CLI). Why? Because Kubernetes was built for developers and operators—people who thrive in automation, scripting, and infrastructure-as-code practices. For them, a CLI is not a limitation but an enabler, allowing them to interact programmatically, automate workflows, and integrate seamlessly into CI/CD pipelines.
This serves as a crucial lesson for IDP architects: the user experience should be designed with the platform’s target audience in mind. If your primary users are software engineers who prefer automation and APIs, a CLI-first or API-driven approach might be the best choice.
By aligning the interface design with user expectations and workflows, an IDP can truly become a frictionless and developer-friendly platform rather than just another tool in the stack.
Embracing the Declarative Approach
A truly self-service Internal Developer Platform (IDP) isn’t just about provisioning services—it must also handle updates, deletions, and real-time state tracking. Without a structured way to manage these lifecycle operations, the platform can quickly become chaotic, leading to inconsistent environments and manual firefighting.
Kubernetes provides a perfect blueprint for solving this challenge. Unlike traditional imperative models where users specify step-by-step instructions, Kubernetes follows a declarative approach—users define what they want, and the system ensures that the actual state matches the desired state. Developers don’t issue a series of commands to create a Pod, attach storage, or configure networking. Instead, they provide a YAML manifest describing the desired state, and Kubernetes’ reconciliation loop takes care of the rest.
For an IDP, adopting a declarative input model means:
• Users always have visibility into the current state of their services.
• Changes can be applied consistently without worrying about underlying execution steps.
• Updates and deletions follow the same structured approach as provisioning.
• The platform can reconcile drift and maintain alignment with the intended configuration.
By following a declarative approach, an IDP empowers developers with self-service capabilities while ensuring stability, repeatability, and transparency—transforming service provisioning into an effortless and predictable experience.
Build on Interfaces, Not One-Size-Fits-All Solutions
One of Kubernetes’ greatest strengths isn’t just what it provides—but what it enables. Kubernetes does not attempt to build every possible feature itself; instead, it defines clear interfaces that allow different stakeholders—cloud providers, platform teams, and tool developers—to extend its capabilities. This approach is what makes Kubernetes so flexible and widely adopted.
Consider Container Runtime Interface (CRI), Container Network Interface (CNI), and Container Storage Interface (CSI)—Kubernetes doesn’t dictate which container runtime, networking solution, or storage backend you must use. Instead, it provides standardized APIs that allow different implementations, from Docker and containerd to Calico and Cilium, to seamlessly integrate into the ecosystem. This plug-and-play model ensures that Kubernetes remains adaptable, letting users choose the best tools for their specific needs rather than being locked into a single vendor or technology.
An Internal Developer Platform (IDP) should follow the same philosophy. Instead of tightly coupling specific tools and technologies, an IDP should define interfaces that allow multiple solutions from the same category to integrate effortlessly. For example:
• CI/CD Integration: Instead of enforcing a single tool like Jenkins, the IDP can expose a CI/CD interface, enabling teams to plug in GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, or ArgoCD.
• Observability: The platform should not hardcode monitoring into Prometheus but instead provide an observability interface that supports Datadog, New Relic, or OpenTelemetry.
• Secrets Management: Whether teams use HashiCorp Vault, AWS Secrets Manager, or CyberArk, the IDP should expose a secrets management interface to integrate with various backends.
By designing integration-friendly interfaces, the IDP remains future-proof, extensible, and adaptable to different organizational needs. This ensures that as new tools emerge or requirements evolve, teams can seamlessly swap out components without disrupting the platform.
Configurable by Design
A one-size-fits-all approach rarely works in modern software development. Different teams have different needs, workflows, and tool preferences. An Internal Developer Platform (IDP) should embrace configurability as a core design principle—allowing users to tailor the platform to their specific requirements rather than forcing them into rigid, predefined workflows.
Kubernetes offers a perfect example of this philosophy. It doesn’t impose strict rules on how workloads should be scheduled, how security policies should be enforced, or how deployments should be handled. Instead, it provides configurable components that allow users to define behaviour based on their needs. Consider:
• Admission Controllers – Teams can define custom policies for validating and mutating Kubernetes objects before they are persisted.
• Networking & Security – Kubernetes doesn’t enforce a single networking model; instead, it provides configuration options to integrate different CNI Plugins, firewall rules, and security policies.
This configurability is what makes Kubernetes adaptable across different industries and use cases—whether it's running on-premises, in the cloud, or at the edge.
An IDP should adopt the same principle. Instead of dictating a single way to provision services, enforce policies, or deploy applications, an IDP should be designed with configuration at its core, allowing teams to:
• Define their own security and access policies based on project’s needs.
• Choose different CI/CD pipelines, monitoring solutions, and deployment strategies.
• Customize workflows based on team preferences—whether it’s GitOps, or traditional DevOps models.
By providing a configurable architecture, an IDP ensures that developers aren’t forced into unnecessary constraints but instead given the flexibility to shape the platform around their needs. Just as Kubernetes empowers teams by making its core components configurable, an IDP should offer choice, adaptability, and control—ultimately enhancing the developer experience rather than restricting it.
Built for Extensibility
As engineering teams grow, their needs change—they require new tools, integrations, and workflows. A rigid IDP with only prebuilt features will quickly become a bottleneck. Instead, an IDP should be designed for extensibility, allowing teams to contribute and integrate their own solutions—just like Kubernetes does with Custom Resource Definitions (CRDs).
Kubernetes follows this approach by offering core building blocks (Pods, Services, Deployments) while also allowing teams to define custom resources for their unique use cases. For example:
• Service Mesh: Tools like Istio and Linkerd introduce VirtualService and DestinationRule to manage traffic.
• Security & Policy Enforcement: Open Policy Agent (OPA) defines custom ConstraintTemplates to enforce security policies.
This extensibility ensures innovation without modifying Kubernetes itself—teams can extend functionality while keeping the core lightweight.
An IDP should follow the same principle by enabling:
• Custom Resources – Teams should define their own service types, environments, or policies.
• Workflow Extensions – Support integrations with CI/CD tools, security scanners, and observability platforms.
• APIs for Automation – Allow teams to build scripts, plugins, or custom UIs interacting with the platform.
By making extensibility a core principle, an IDP transforms from a rigid tool into a flexible ecosystem—empowering teams, fostering innovation, and ensuring long-term scalability, just like Kubernetes.
Conclusion
Kubernetes has set the gold standard for scalable, flexible platform architecture. By embracing its principles—declarative management, interface-driven design, configurability, and extensibility—we can build an IDP that truly meets the needs of modern engineering teams.
Instead of reinventing the wheel, let’s take inspiration from Kubernetes and create an Internal Developer Platform that is adaptable, future-proof, and developer-friendly.
Top comments (0)