// CLOUD· Specialty
Real tenant isolation, without a cluster per team.
For platform teams whose cluster count is growing faster than their headcount to manage them.
The problem
Why this keeps biting teams
A full Kubernetes cluster per team or environment is the easy default and the expensive one. Every cluster is its own control plane to patch, monitor, and secure, and most of that isolation could come from a lighter-weight boundary.
What we do
[01]
Assess which workloads genuinely need cluster-level isolation versus namespace-level.
[02]
Roll out virtual clusters (vCluster) so teams get their own control plane view without the overhead.
[03]
Set resource quotas and network policy so tenants can't starve or see each other.
[04]
Fold cluster lifecycle into your existing GitOps workflow.
Typical Outcomes
fewer
full-size clusters to patch and monitor
weeks
not months, to onboard a new tenant
Deliverables
[01]
Tenant isolation architecture (vCluster or namespace-based, whichever fits)
[02]
Resource quota and network policy configuration per tenant
[03]
GitOps-managed cluster and virtual-cluster lifecycle
[04]
Cost and operational overhead comparison versus your current model
More in Cloud
View Cloud migration & modernization
[01] Cloud migration & modernization
Cloud migration & modernization
View FinOps & cost governance
[02] FinOps & cost governance
FinOps & cost governance
View Hybrid & bare-metal provisioning
[03] Hybrid & bare-metal provisioning
Hybrid & bare-metal provisioning
View AI/ML infrastructure & GPU cloud
[04] AI/ML infrastructure & GPU cloud
AI/ML infrastructure & GPU cloud
Stop guessing.
Start shipping.
Thirty minutes with a senior engineer. No sales deck, no junior SDRs. Just a technical conversation about what's actually breaking or slowing you down.