Skip to content

Conversation

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor

@sadasu sadasu commented Aug 5, 2025

Add Ingress LB IPs to Infra CR and set DNS unmanaged when ClusterHostedDNS is enabled on Azure platform.

This functionality was previously added to GCP via #1016 and AWS via #1167.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from Miciah and grzpiotrowski August 5, 2025 18:29
@sadasu sadasu changed the title Azure: Add Ingress LB IPs to Infra CR when in-cluster DNS is enabled CORS-4174: Azure: Add Ingress LB IPs to Infra CR when in-cluster DNS is enabled Aug 5, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Aug 5, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Aug 5, 2025

@sadasu: This pull request references CORS-4174 which is a valid jira issue.

Details

In response to this:

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Aug 5, 2025

@sadasu: This pull request references CORS-4174 which is a valid jira issue.

Details

In response to this:

Add Ingress LB IPs to Infra CR and set DNS unmanaged when ClusterHostedDNS is enabled on Azure platform.

This functionality was previously added to GCP via #1016 and AWS via #1167.

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Aug 11, 2025

/retest-required

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Aug 13, 2025

/assign

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Aug 13, 2025

/retest-required

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Aug 15, 2025

Based on the resolution of #1269, this PR might need to be updated.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Aug 19, 2025

Based on the resolution of #1269, this PR might need to be updated.

#1269 is not absolutely necessary, so this work can be reviewed in its current state.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Aug 19, 2025

/retest-required

1 similar comment
@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Aug 20, 2025

/retest-required

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 23, 2025
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Sep 23, 2025
@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Sep 24, 2025

/retest-required

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Sep 24, 2025

@Miciah could you PTAL? This follows the same approach taken for GCP and AWS. Please let me know if you have concerns about this.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Oct 15, 2025

/retest-required

@patrickdillon
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 11, 2025
@jinyunma
Copy link

pre-merge tested with this PR + cluster-ingress-operator#1256 + machine-config-operator#5401

Installations with below configs are all successful.
publish: External + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled
publish: Internal + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled
publish: Mixed + apiserver: External + ingress: Internal + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled
publish: Mixed + apiserver: Internal + ingress: External + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled

Fields "apiIntLoadBalancerIPs", "apiLoadBalancerIPs" and "ingressLoadBalancerIPs" in Infrastructure status have correct values in each scenario.

/verified by jima

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Nov 12, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@jinyunma: This PR has been marked as verified by jima.

Details

In response to this:

pre-merge tested with this PR + cluster-ingress-operator#1256 + machine-config-operator#5401

Installations with below configs are all successful.
publish: External + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled
publish: Internal + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled
publish: Mixed + apiserver: External + ingress: Internal + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled
publish: Mixed + apiserver: Internal + ingress: External + userProvisionedDNS: Enabled

Fields "apiIntLoadBalancerIPs", "apiLoadBalancerIPs" and "ingressLoadBalancerIPs" in Infrastructure status have correct values in each scenario.

/verified by jima

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Nov 13, 2025

@Miciah , could you PTAL? Thanks!

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Nov 17, 2025

/retest

@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Nov 18, 2025

/test e2e-aws-ovn-serial

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 21, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 5fed704 and 0 for PR HEAD 6f8188f in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/hold

Revision 6f8188f was retested 3 times: holding

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 21, 2025
@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Nov 21, 2025

/hold cancel

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 21, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD b1f851e and 2 for PR HEAD 6f8188f in total

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot removed the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Nov 21, 2025
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 21, 2025
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 21, 2025
When Cluster Hosted DNS is enabled, update AzurePlatformStatus with
Ingress Load Balancer IPs.
Also, set DNSManagementPolicy to Unmanaged.
Add tests for the Azure Platform where the Ingress LB's IP are
available but the Infra CR needs to be updated with its IP.

Add tests that verify the EndpointPublishingStrategy for Azure

Add tests to verify value of EndpointPublishingStrategy on Azure
platform when Cluster Hosted DNS is enabled.
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Nov 21, 2025
@sadasu
Copy link
Contributor Author

sadasu commented Nov 21, 2025

/verified by jima

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria label Nov 21, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@sadasu: This PR has been marked as verified by jima.

Details

In response to this:

/verified by jima

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 openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

@alebedev87
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 21, 2025
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD b1f851e and 2 for PR HEAD 10842ab in total

@rikatz
Copy link
Member

rikatz commented Nov 22, 2025

/retest-required

@rikatz
Copy link
Member

rikatz commented Nov 22, 2025

The test failing on e2e-hypershift seems to be a well known flake:
https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-63717

I will wait for ovn-serial-1of2 pass, and in case it passes I am considering overriding the error

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 22, 2025

@sadasu: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-serial 6f8188f link true /test e2e-aws-ovn-serial
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-single-node 6f8188f link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-single-node

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@rikatz
Copy link
Member

rikatz commented Nov 22, 2025

/override ci/prow/e2e-hypershift

This test is flaky on a part that doesn't seem related with this job. The bug https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-63717 shows this is also present on other jobs.

https://search.dptools.openshift.org/?search=.*EnsureGlobalPullSecret.*&maxAge=6h&context=1&type=bug%2Bissue%2Bjunit&name=.*hypershift.*&excludeName=&maxMatches=5&maxBytes=20971520&groupBy=job shows this same failure is happening on other repos and orgs.

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Nov 22, 2025

@rikatz: Overrode contexts on behalf of rikatz: ci/prow/e2e-hypershift

Details

In response to this:

/override ci/prow/e2e-hypershift

This test is flaky on a part that doesn't seem related with this job. The bug https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OCPBUGS-63717 shows this is also present on other jobs.

https://search.dptools.openshift.org/?search=.*EnsureGlobalPullSecret.*&maxAge=6h&context=1&type=bug%2Bissue%2Bjunit&name=.*hypershift.*&excludeName=&maxMatches=5&maxBytes=20971520&groupBy=job shows this same failure is happening on other repos and orgs.

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.

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit c90c02d into openshift:master Nov 22, 2025
17 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. verified Signifies that the PR passed pre-merge verification criteria

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants