Router publish strategy related changes for IBM Cloud platform #6199
Conversation
openshift-merge-robot
added
the
needs-rebase
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
area/control-plane-operator
|
[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 |
openshift-ci
bot
added
the
needs-ok-to-test
|
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
libesz
force-pushed
the
ibmcloud-router-main
branch
from
be62c17 to
77eeb74
Compare
openshift-merge-robot
removed
the
needs-rebase
|
/ok-to-test |
openshift-ci
bot
added
ok-to-test
Test Resultse2e-aws
e2e-aks
|
|
/retest |
|
@libesz: all tests passed! Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. 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. I understand the commands that are listed here. |
| @@ -1275,7 +1275,7 @@ func (r *HostedControlPlaneReconciler) reconcileOAuthServerService(ctx context.C | |||
| p := oauth.NewOAuthServiceParams(hcp) | |||
| oauthServerService := manifests.OauthServerService(hcp.Namespace) | |||
| if _, err := createOrUpdate(ctx, r.Client, oauthServerService, func() error { | |||
| return oauth.ReconcileService(oauthServerService, p.OwnerRef, serviceStrategy) | |||
| return oauth.ReconcileService(oauthServerService, p.OwnerRef, serviceStrategy, hcp.Spec.Platform.Type) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should add unit testing if possible.
|
Please open a Jira and update this PR accordingly. |
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:
What this PR does / why we need it:
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