Sandbox API work

[mxpv]

This is an umbrella issue to track sandbox API work / remaining work items for 1.7.

Proposal:

• Proposal: Sandbox API #4131
• [Proposal] Shim service #5742

GRPC API:

• Sandbox API #6703

Runtime:

• Cleanup v2 shim #5813
• Rename runtime/v2/task to api/runtime #6827
• Runtime cleanup (Shim manager and task service) #7280

CRI work (pod sandbox controller):

• Fork CRI server for Sandbox API integration work #7164
• Initial sandbox API CRI integration (implement Controller.Start) #7228
• Rework sandbox monitoring, we should rely on Controller.Wait instead of CRIService.StartSandboxExitMonitor

  containerd/pkg/cri/sbserver/podsandbox/controller.go

  Line 39 in f4a9051

  StartSandboxExitMonitor(ctx context.Context, id string, pid uint32, exitCh <-chan containerd.ExitStatus) <-chan struct{}

• Implement Controller.Stop
• Implement Controller.Delete (CRI: implement Controller.Delete for SandboxAPI #7457)
• Implement Controller.Status (Sandbox API: implement Controller.Status for SandboxAPI #7470)
• Figure out how to remove shared CRIService.EnsureImageExists
• Support port forwarding feat add sandbox controler port forward #7509
• Figure out how to switch between controller implementations (Sandbox API: Add a new mode config for sandbox controller impls #7590)
• Cleanup interfaces Cleanup sandbox interfaces #7576
• Enable ENABLE_CRI_SANDBOXES on Windows CI.

[abel-von]

I have some idea about the design of Sandbox API, it follows the basic idea of the design currently, but it decouples the notion of sandbox and shim or container in a better way, Could you please take a look at it?

abel-von@3866050

I wrote a doc about it.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/17_URs9UV3s_7xbaXCLYrCJf-0LhKLOD-NPKCsVdFpGM/edit?usp=sharing

[lengrongfu]

@mxpv I can implement Controller.Status, is anyone else doing it?

[mxpv]

@wllenyj are you doing any work for statuses? ^^^

[lengrongfu]

@mxpv Hi, about support port forwarding，current having sandbox_portforward_linux.go Implemented port forwarding, the PortForward logic implemented by podSandbox.Controller should be the same, right?

[abel-von]

I merged the codes to the recent main branch and summit a PR, it is still a demo codes so the CI checking is still not passed, but you can download the codes and play it if anyone is interested.

#7502

[mxpv]

Hi, about support port forwarding，current having sandbox_portforward_linux.go Implemented port forwarding, the PortForward logic implemented by podSandbox.Controller should be the same, right?

@lengrongfu Right, the logic is same, just need to be moved to podsandbox package as an optional interface implementation (see example above)