-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
Define NodeSpec #56
Comments
NodeSpec is a confusing word (for me) - this is different from |
cc @kubernetes/sig-node |
@justinsb I think it is stuff like the systemd NodeSpec https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/master/docs/proposals/kubelet-systemd.md I am a little confused as well and hope that @yujuhong and @dchen1107 can help to clarify the description. |
NodeSpec used to be a term that referred to node configuration that is compatible with the underlying runtime, OS and system components like systemd. It is meant to make it possible to easily add nodes to an existing kubernetes cluster. @dchen1107 might have more requirements for this feature. |
What I remember about NodeSpec is consistent with what @vishh mentioned -- we need better documentations on the requirements of a node to run kubelet. Not sure if there are any action items beyond documentations. |
NodeSpec requires enforcement of Allocatable, System and Kube cgroups On Tue, Jul 26, 2016 at 2:51 PM, Yu-Ju Hong notifications@github.com
|
@vishh, this is marked for v1.4, so I doubt we'll be enforcing all those within the timeframe :-) |
cc @luxas |
I would suspect enforcement of system reserved, etc will come in 1.5. My On Friday, July 29, 2016, Lucas Käldström notifications@github.com wrote:
|
@dawnchen says 1.4 will do node conformance test, but parts of this will land in v1.5. (I think I got that Dawn?) |
@alex-mohr yes, you are right. I will move this one to 1.5, and add node conformance test one here. |
@dchen1107 can you update the actual status of the feature? Does it target alpha, beta or stable for 1.5? |
@dchen1107 @idvoretskyi this needs an alpha-in-1.5, beta-in-1.5, or stable-in-1.5 label if it's going to be included in release notes for kubernetes 1.5; it has no stage listed in this spreadsheet... if it's not going into 1.5, we should remove it from that spreadsheet (yay multiple information sources) |
Can we please rename this to something other than NodeSpec? We already have NodeSpec here |
@dchen1107 can you review the @davidopp's suggestion? |
How about "node conformance spec" (which aligns it with the terminology in #84)? |
@dchen1107 what is the status of the feature? Does it target 1.6? |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Prevent issues from auto-closing with an If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or |
From the issue description; I guess this is referring to the System Verification Check here: https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/tree/master/test/e2e_node/system This has been merged at least for a year, and I think this issue is stale. Thanks! |
etcd: cluster-etcd-operator
…tes#56) * Add feature status page for Istio Control Plane Installation * Update control-plane-installation.md
Description
As a user, I want to add my own nodes to Kubernetes, and make sure they meet the minimum requirements for running as a Kubernetes node so that I can use pre-approved images, and speed adding new compute. cc @yujuhong @dchen1107
Progress Tracker
/pkg/apis/...
)FEATURE_STATUS is used for feature tracking and to be updated by @kubernetes/feature-reviewers.
FEATURE_STATUS: IN_DEVELOPMENT
More advice:
Design
Coding
and sometimes http://github.com/kubernetes/contrib, or other repos.
check that the code matches the proposed feature and design, and that everything is done, and that there is adequate
testing. They won't do detailed code review: that already happened when your PRs were reviewed.
When that is done, you can check this box and the reviewer will apply the "code-complete" label.
Docs
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: