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 the region to be explicitly specified instead of using the Region metadata API #511

Closed
xmudrii opened this issue Aug 30, 2022 · 5 comments
Assignees

Comments

@xmudrii
Copy link
Contributor

xmudrii commented Aug 30, 2022

This is a feature request to allow the region to be explicitly specified instead of using the Region metadata API. The reason for this is to allow setups where the CCM is not running on a DigitalOcean Droplet. For example, the CCM might be running in some management cluster (which might not be a cluster running on DigitalOcean), along with the other control plane compoenents, while the worker nodes are running on DigitalOcean.

The function used the determine the region supports overriding the region with the FAKE_REGION environment variable. However, it's explicitly mentioned that it is only for testing, so I doesn't feel safe to use it in production.

As a resolution, it would be nice if FAKE_REGION could be renamed to something that's not only for testing, e.g. that it feels safer to use it in production. Alternatively, this might be a CLI flag.

@shatoboar
Copy link
Contributor

Hey, i would like to work on this :)
/assign

@timoreimann
Copy link
Collaborator

Marko and I talked about this one on the Kubernetes Slack some time ago. This request does seem legitimate to me, especially given that we have had a similar need with our CSI driver and implemented it accordingly.

My suggestion would be to rename FAKE_REGION to REGION and let it take precedence if specified. The docs should be updated accordingly.

Our CCM is still at 0.x, so we shouldn't need to worry about backwards compatibility for a development-only feature.

@timoreimann
Copy link
Collaborator

Thanks for taking over this one @shatoboar.

@almereyda
Copy link

Now that #513 is merged, can this be closed?

@timoreimann
Copy link
Collaborator

Release is yet to be done; but yeah, we can close the issue out already.

Thanks for reminding me @almereyda.

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

No branches or pull requests

4 participants