Allow to override Alertmanager receivers firewall settings on a per-tenant basis #4143
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…enant basis Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
Signed-off-by: Marco Pracucci <marco@pracucci.com>
stevesg
approved these changes
Apr 29, 2021
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM.
My only comment: I was considering if we could re-use FirewallConfig in Limits, but I see then you would only be able to override the whole config, not individual elements of the config, without some extra merging logic. Maybe as the Limits grows, we can find a nice pattern for doing this.
pracucci
deleted the
allow-to-configure-alertmanager-firewall-on-a-per-tenant-basis
branch
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What this PR does:
In this PR #4085 I've added an experimental support to configure a simple built-in firewall in Alertmanger for outbound connections made by HTTP-based receiver integrations.
To extend it, in this PR I'm proposing to allow to configure it on a per-tenant basis.
Code changes have been designed to limit conflicts with #4135.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
N/A
Checklist
CHANGELOG.mdupdated - the order of entries should be[CHANGE],[FEATURE],[ENHANCEMENT],[BUGFIX]