🌱 api: relax validation for Machine .status.addresses to maximum of 256 instead of 128 items

[MadJlzz]

…
What this PR does / why we need it:

This PR relaxes even more the validation which was added in v1.11 to allow more entries in the Machine's .status.addresses slice.

• Before: maximum of 128 items
• After: maximum of 256 items

I've encountered this validation error while trying to upgrade a cluster from 1.32 to 1.34. I did upgrade capi providers which introduced this initial validation in v1.11

I am using Azure's CNI as per my network provider with a networkInterfaces.privateIPConfigs of 180 and a max-pods of 180 in the kubeletExtraArgs opts.

In fact, the following error:

E0302 13:39:37.204234       1 controller.go:353] "Reconciler error" err="failed to patch Machine k991azc/k991azc-control-plane-btxqm: Machine.cluster.x-k8s.io \"k991azc-control-plane-btxqm\" is invalid: status.addresses: Too many: 181: must have at most 128 items" controller="machine" controllerGroup="cluster.x-k8s.io" controllerKind="Machine" Machine="k991azc/k991azc-control-plane-btxqm" namespace="k991azc" name="k991azc-control-plane-btxqm" reconcileID="cdaadd25-7728-44f1-9fa3-e09854d41ff6"

was blocking any kind of other patches ~ in my case, the nodeRef value allowing capi to understand a node has successfully rolled out. (with a side effect of never beeing able fully upgrade a cluster)

I am still not sure why they're putting all pods IPs inside the machine's status.addresses though...

This PR is a follow up of #13060

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

/area api

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @MadJlzz!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @MadJlzz. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work.

Tip

We noticed you've done this a few times! Consider joining the org to skip this step and gain /lgtm and other bot rights. We recommend asking approvers on your previous PRs to sponsor you.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Details

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.

[sbueringer]

/hold

Let's try to get an answer why all Pod IPs are added as Node IPs, that sounds just wrong to me

[sbueringer]

Okay let's go ahead with this. But to be clear. I think it should be investigated if this pattern of setting Pod IPs as Machine IPs is really correct.

In general I'm -1 on keep increasing the number of supported Machine IPs if someone wants to run more Pods on Nodes and CAPZ keeps adding Pod IPs as Machine IPs (except if we have a clear story why this makes sense and is semantically correct)

/ok-to-test
/lgtm
/approve
/hold cancel

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Details

Git tree hash: ccf0aa3312b262f1e85fd78bbfc5f6034ffa0379

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sbueringer

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [sbueringer]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[sbueringer]

/cherry-pick release-1.12

[sbueringer]

/cherry-pick release-1.11

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@sbueringer: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.12 in a new PR and assign it to you.

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.12

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.

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@sbueringer: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.11 in a new PR and assign it to you.

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.11

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.

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@sbueringer: new pull request created: #13399

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.12

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.

[k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot]

@sbueringer: new pull request created: #13400

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.11

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.