-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 374
Ibmcloud router #6152
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
base: release-4.18
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Ibmcloud router #6152
Conversation
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: libesz The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Hi @libesz. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a openshift member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes-sigs/prow repository. |
When HCP contains router publish strategy for the master services, IBM Cloud platform implementation will take care of the proper exposure of the services, without using the actual cluster Router (similar implementation to Azure). That is, CPO should not create any LoadBalancer or actual router deployment as part of reconciling the HCP. The current change also makes the migration from NodePort services backward compatible, for existing clusters. That is, the NodePort services will remain as is (they are not converted to regular ClusterIP services, resulting in permanently losing the reserved nodeports) allowing existing external clients (e.g. kubelet, master proxy) to work as before, until they are also upgraded. The expected behavior is to: * Do not manage any ingress component (LB Svc, Router) * Keep NodePort master services (if they are already existing) * (Re)configure node agents (e.g. connectivity) to use 443 as server port
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Please open this PR on the main branch.
There it is: #6199 |
What this PR does / why we need it:
When HCP contains router publish strategy for the
master services, IBM Cloud platform implementation
will take care of the proper exposure of the
services, without using the actual cluster Router
(similar implementation to Azure). That is, CPO should
not create any LoadBalancer or actual router deployment
as part of reconciling the HCP.
The current change also makes the migration from NodePort
services backward compatible, for existing clusters.
That is, the NodePort services will remain as is
(they are not converted to regular ClusterIP services,
resulting in permanently losing the reserved nodeports)
allowing existing external clients (e.g. kubelet,
master proxy) to work as before, until they are also
upgraded.
The expected behavior is to:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, use
fixes #<issue_number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...)
format, where issue_number might be a GitHub issue, or a Jira story:Fixes #
Checklist