Skip to content
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

Service: Remove default values for controller.service.nodePorts & controller.service.internal.nodePorts. #461

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Apr 19, 2023

Conversation

Gacko
Copy link
Member

@Gacko Gacko commented Apr 18, 2023

Tests on workload clusters (not always required)

For changes in the chart, chart templates, and ingress controller container images, I executed the following tests
to verify them working in live enviromnents:

Test / Provider AWS Azure KVM
Upgrade from previous version
Existing Ingress resources are reconciled correctly
Fresh install
Fresh Ingress resources are reconciled correctly

Testing was done using hello-world-app.

Hint for KVM:

kubectl port-forward -n kube-system svc/nginx-ingress-controller-app 8080:80
ingress_domain=host.configured.in.ingress; curl --connect-to "$ingress_domain:80:127.0.0.1:8080" "http://$ingress_domain" -v

@Gacko
Copy link
Member Author

Gacko commented Apr 18, 2023

@glitchcrab I could need some review from a KVM / legacy product expert. Basically we'd like to align the $setNodePorts part here to how upstream is doing it.

To not break existing LoadBalancer services in cloud environments, we need to reset the default values for controller.service.nodePorts & controller.service.internal.nodePorts to "". Otherwise cloud LoadBalancer services would get configured to using those node ports. Aside from probable conflicts with other services, this means a service outage. Both bad.

Anyway: Do you think we could ask customers to either set those ports on their own or simply discontinue KVM / legacy support with the upcoming major release?

Another option would be setting those values in the chart values already provided by cluster-operator, but this means releasing a new version of the latter.

@Gacko Gacko requested a review from glitchcrab April 18, 2023 14:24
@Gacko Gacko marked this pull request as ready for review April 18, 2023 14:28
@Gacko Gacko requested a review from a team as a code owner April 18, 2023 14:28
@Gacko Gacko force-pushed the feature/service/node-ports branch from dd7e5b9 to 9f7eb0e Compare April 18, 2023 15:07
@@ -771,10 +771,10 @@
"type": "object",
"properties": {
"http": {
"type": "integer"
"type": ["string", "integer"]
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

👍

@Gacko Gacko merged commit bc9b04b into main Apr 19, 2023
@Gacko Gacko deleted the feature/service/node-ports branch April 19, 2023 08:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants