KEP-3705: update CloudDualStackNodeIPs to beta#3975
KEP-3705: update CloudDualStackNodeIPs to beta#3975k8s-ci-robot merged 1 commit intokubernetes:masterfrom
Conversation
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
cncf-cla: yes
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
kind/kep
k8s-ci-robot
added
sig/network
wojtek-t
left a comment
wojtek-t
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Couple small comments from me - but overall this looks great
|
|
||
| So assuming no bugs, the only visible change after (just) enabling the | ||
| feature is the duplicate annotation. | ||
| No |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Isn't https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/3898/files effectively a change in default behavior?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Ok - I guess you're dropping the proposal from that PR, right?
Assuming I'm right here, I actually like it especially given backward compatibility here...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure which part of that PR you're referring to, but it was never proposing a change in default behavior.
The original KEP-3705 said that we would
- add dual-stack
--node-ipsfor external clouds - add
--node-ip IPv4and--node-ip IPv6etc - rename the node IP annotation
#3898 just dropped parts 2 and 3 from alpha, and now this PR drops them from beta and GA too.
There was some discussion in #3898 about stuff we might do in the future, but even then, the assumption was that we'd do it in a backward-compatible way (eg, leave --node-ip with its current bad semantics and add --node-ips with new-and-improved semantics.)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
OK - I guess I was too much biased by the "late-breaking change" header. I've read it more carefully now and it all makes sense now.
| it to do if it can't interpret the `--node-ip` value correctly. | ||
|
|
||
| Therefore, we do not _need_ a new annotation for the new `--node-ip` | ||
| Therefore, we do not need a new annotation for the new `--node-ip` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
You removed the part about the fact that annotation name is alpha.kubernetes.io/provided-node-ip - what we're going to do with it?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
As you may have noticed later, that text is still in the "Alternatives" section.
I'm not planning to do anything about the annotation as part of this KEP. I suspect I'm going to end up doing a new KEP with all of the leftover parts of this and #1665.
| are missing a bunch of machinery and tooling and can't do that now. | ||
| --> | ||
| No. The behavior during upgrade and rollback is not especially | ||
| different from the ordinary runtime behavior. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I agree with this statement, but still, given that IPs are propagated to cloud-provider via the annotation (so technically we have some persistent state related to this feature), I think we should test it.
Manual test is good enough here (and can be done after feature freeze and updated with the description of the test then - https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/3658/files is a great example).
Does that make sense to you? If so, can you please switch to a TODO for running it and updating this question before promoting the feature to beta?
danwinship
force-pushed
the
kep-3705-to-beta
branch
3 times, most recently
from
0e6ee92 to
37fa611
Compare
wojtek-t
left a comment
wojtek-t
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is great - just one small minor comment and this LGTM.
danwinship
force-pushed
the
kep-3705-to-beta
branch
from
37fa611 to
fef6fc9
Compare
|
/lgtm thanks! |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
/lgtm |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: danwinship, thockin, wojtek-t The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
5 participants
One-line PR description: update KEP-3705
CloudDualStackNodeIPsto beta, dropping the parts that were not implemented in alphaIssue link: Cloud Dual-Stack --node-ip Handling #3705
Other comments:
This drops the parts of the KEP that weren't implemented for alpha (
--node-ip IPv4/--node-ip IPv6, and renaming thealpha.kubernetes.io/provided-node-ipannotation), and moves some of the old text to the "Alternatives" section explaining what we didn't do and why./assign @thockin