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

[ws-proxy] Remove proxy of ws-manager #5400

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Sep 13, 2021
Merged

[ws-proxy] Remove proxy of ws-manager #5400

merged 1 commit into from
Sep 13, 2021

Conversation

aledbf
Copy link
Member

@aledbf aledbf commented Aug 26, 2021

This is a proposal to remove the proxy of ws-manager through ws-proxy.

Reasons:

  • The indirection only works if we terminate TLS in ws-proxy. Using TLS termination in the load balancer breaks this feature.
  • We are hiding ws-manager behind ws-proxy and is really hard to troubleshoot/debug.
  • This feature is used only in workspace clusters.
  • We are mixing traffic from users (workspaces) and meta control plane.

If we need to expose ws-manager in workspace clusters we should use a service type=LoadBalancer

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Aug 26, 2021

/assign @csweichel

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Aug 26, 2021

/hold

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 26, 2021

Codecov Report

Merging #5400 (5204706) into main (498cd69) will increase coverage by 66.30%.
The diff coverage is n/a.

Impacted file tree graph

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##           main    #5400       +/-   ##
=========================================
+ Coverage      0   66.30%   +66.30%     
=========================================
  Files         0        8        +8     
  Lines         0     1285     +1285     
=========================================
+ Hits          0      852      +852     
- Misses        0      374      +374     
- Partials      0       59       +59     
Flag Coverage Δ
components-ws-proxy-app 66.30% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files Coverage Δ
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/auth.go 100.00% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/infoprovider.go 47.52% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/workspacerouter.go 81.73% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/routes.go 83.64% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/proxy.go 30.35% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/config.go 0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/pass.go 74.40% <0.00%> (ø)
components/ws-proxy/pkg/proxy/cookies.go 78.57% <0.00%> (ø)

Continue to review full report at Codecov.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 498cd69...5204706. Read the comment docs.

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Sep 9, 2021

@csweichel @meysholdt can we merge this change?

After merging the change, the access to cluster through gpctl needs to update the URL (because of the new load balancer)

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Sep 9, 2021

/assign @meysholdt

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Sep 9, 2021

/hold cancel

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor

@csweichel @meysholdt can we merge this change?

After merging the change, the access to cluster through gpctl needs to update the URL (because of the new load balancer)

is there a corresponding -com PR?

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Sep 13, 2021

is there a corresponding -com PR?

There is no need? The change of the type to LoadBalancer will create the required Cloud load balancer.

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor

is there a corresponding -com PR?

There is no need? The change of the type to LoadBalancer will create the required Cloud load balancer.

Makes sense - I just don't see where that change happens.

@aledbf
Copy link
Member Author

aledbf commented Sep 13, 2021

is there a corresponding -com PR?

There is no need? The change of the type to LoadBalancer will create the required Cloud load balancer.

Makes sense - I just don't see where that change happens.

Sorry. You are right. Here https://github.com/gitpod-io/ops/pull/20

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor

is there a corresponding -com PR?

There is no need? The change of the type to LoadBalancer will create the required Cloud load balancer.

Makes sense - I just don't see where that change happens.

Sorry. You are right. Here gitpod-io/ops#20

merged

/lgtm

@roboquat roboquat added the lgtm label Sep 13, 2021
@roboquat
Copy link
Contributor

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: bda27cac802dfbf2ef74267c931236dc72532ca2

@csweichel
Copy link
Contributor

/approve no-issue

@roboquat
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: csweichel

Associated issue requirement bypassed by: csweichel

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@roboquat roboquat merged commit 23f41cb into main Sep 13, 2021
@roboquat roboquat deleted the aledbf/ws-proxy branch September 13, 2021 12:57
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants