Add NetworkPolicy type and controller
#289
Merged
Conversation
This file contains hidden or 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
github-actions
bot
added
documentation
sujeet01
force-pushed
the
feature/network-policy
branch
5 times, most recently
from
8fed26b to
4492775
Compare
Rohit-0505
force-pushed
the
feature/network-policy
branch
from
4492775 to
363d219
Compare
sujeet01
force-pushed
the
feature/network-policy
branch
2 times, most recently
from
bdbc2a6 to
796b8bb
Compare
afritzler
requested changes
Apr 28, 2024
Member
afritzler
left a comment
afritzler
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Some initial thoughts after the first review:
- We need to review the details of the
NetworkPolicyspec and sub types - Validation needs to be revisited for mandatory fields
This is just the first review. I need to do some end to end testing on my side first in order to give a conclusive feedback.
sujeet01
force-pushed
the
feature/network-policy
branch
from
9b96879 to
11e6108
Compare
afritzler
approved these changes
May 24, 2024
afritzler
changed the title
NetworkPolicy controller with firewall rules enforcementNetworkPolicy type and controller
lukasfrank
reviewed
Jun 3, 2024
| // TargetNetworkInterface is the target of the network policy. | ||
| type TargetNetworkInterface struct { | ||
| // IP is the IP address of the target network interface. | ||
| IP net.IP `json:"ip"` |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it intended that we currently only support IPv4?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Currently we're supporting both and net.IP supports both IPv4 and IPv6 right?
afritzler
requested changes
Jun 18, 2024
| Direction: direction, | ||
| Action: metalnetv1alpha1.FirewallRuleActionAccept, | ||
| Priority: priority, | ||
| IpFamily: corev1.IPv4Protocol, //TODO: later support for IPv6 |
Member
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can't we derive the IPFamily from the ironcore-net Rule object instead of pinning it to IPv4?
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Done, derived IPFamily from Prefix.
sujeet01
force-pushed
the
feature/network-policy
branch
3 times, most recently
from
16778ca to
ec2a5c8
Compare
…ation Co-authored-by: Rohit Kumar <rohit.1si09ee045@gmail.com>
…nt with tests Co-authored-by: Rohit Kumar <rohit.1si09ee045@gmail.com>
sujeet01
force-pushed
the
feature/network-policy
branch
from
ec2a5c8 to
3002635
Compare
afritzler
approved these changes
Jun 20, 2024
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.
NetworkPolicyandNetworkPolicyRuletypes, with code generationNetworkPolicycontrollerFirewallRulesenforcement inmetalnetNicFixes #275