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

Allow nodes to dynamically join a running cluster #6087

Closed
mbforbes opened this issue Mar 27, 2015 · 12 comments
Closed

Allow nodes to dynamically join a running cluster #6087

mbforbes opened this issue Mar 27, 2015 · 12 comments
Assignees
Labels
priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle.
Milestone

Comments

@mbforbes
Copy link
Contributor

We want to allow nodes to dynamically join a kubernetes cluster after the cluster has been created. For version 1.0, we will implement "Static Clustering" as defined in clustering.md.

For reference, in #3168 (securing node → master communication), @roberthbailey proposes an implementation plan, step 2 of which entails this.

@mbforbes mbforbes added priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle. labels Mar 27, 2015
@mbforbes mbforbes added this to the v1.0 milestone Mar 27, 2015
@roberthbailey roberthbailey changed the title Dynamic clustering Allow nodes to dynamically join a running cluster Mar 27, 2015
@fgrzadkowski
Copy link
Contributor

cc-ing @jszczepkowski who is working on autoscaling

@jszczepkowski
Copy link
Contributor

I'm currently working on updating external load balancers (target pools) for external services when cloud nodes are changed. I'm just adding an extra call in NodeController.SyncCloudNodes method to reconcile external services. I think this is a part of this issue.

@mbforbes mbforbes mentioned this issue Apr 1, 2015
10 tasks
@jszczepkowski
Copy link
Contributor

@mbforbes @roberthbailey @tkulczynski
Issue #5246 (Node Pod's IP ranges configured by nodecontroller) also seems to be a part of this issue.

@mbforbes
Copy link
Contributor Author

mbforbes commented Apr 2, 2015

Yes, definitely, thanks for linking here. #5246 is hopefully the last issue needed to make this possible; afterwards, @roberthbailey will be making it explicit and secure.

@mbforbes
Copy link
Contributor Author

mbforbes commented May 7, 2015

This is theoretically complete and upgrades are unblocked, though this needs to be verified.

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

I just created a GCE cluster, resized my MIG to add 2 new nodes, and then watched the nodes go from Unknown to Ready and verified that I could schedule work on the new nodes.

@benmccann
Copy link

Yay, that's awesome. The other thing to do here would be to document this procedure. Should we leave this open or file a new bug to track that?

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

Well, right now this only really works on GCE. Maybe we should leave it open until #6949 goes in (which is a more general solution).

@roberthbailey roberthbailey reopened this May 7, 2015
@bcbroussard
Copy link
Contributor

+1 for both documentation and leaving this open until #6949 is ready. Awesome work on this, very excited to try it out.

@timothysc
Copy link
Member

seconded.
+1 to leave open + docs.

@roberthbailey
Copy link
Contributor

#6949 is now merged (and the rollback of the rollback is also merged) so I think all that remains here is to add the appropriate documentation.

@alex-mohr
Copy link
Contributor

I think now that PR #8982 is merged (thanks @erictune !) we now have the doc fixes -- closing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. sig/cluster-lifecycle Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Cluster Lifecycle.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

9 participants