Make CIDR validation consistent #123174
Merged
Make CIDR validation consistent #123174
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
Move apivalidation.ValidateCIDR to apimachinery, and rename it and change its return value to match the other functions. Also, add unit tests. (Also, while updating NetworkPolicy validation for the API change, fix a variable name that implied that IPBlock.Except[] is IP-valued rather than CIDR-valued.)
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
sig/apps
tnqn
reviewed
Feb 8, 2024
|
/triage accepted |
k8s-ci-robot
added
triage/accepted
In preparation for rewriting LoadBalancerSourceRanges validation,
add/update the existing unit tests to cover some of the more exciting
edge cases of the existing validation code:
- The values in service.Spec.LoadBalancerSourceRanges are allowed to
have arbitrary whitespace around them.
- The annotation must be unset for non-LoadBalancer services, but
for LoadBalancer services, "set but empty" and "whitespace-only"
are treated the same as "unset".
- The annotation value is only validated if the field is not set.
Also fix some of the existing tests to be more precise about what they
are testing.
Also fix the CIDR values to actually be valid. Sigh.
Inline the LoadBalancerSourceRanges parsing to make it more obvious what it's requiring (and more importantly, *not* requiring), and change it to use IsValidCIDR as well.
danwinship
force-pushed
the
cidr-validation-cleanup
branch
from
f530895
to
593b1c6
Compare
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
kind/api-change
|
This PR may require API review. If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review. Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project. |
|
/lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 463208e40547983e42024f624e51912d9f0a3543
|
aojea
reviewed
Feb 14, 2024
aojea
reviewed
Feb 14, 2024
| in: "2001:DB8::/64", | ||
| }, | ||
|
|
||
| // BAD VALUES WE CURRENTLY CONSIDER GOOD |
|
Epic! /lgtm |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, danwinship, thockin 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 |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
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 type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
/sig network
/sig api-machinery
What this PR does / why we need it:
Followup to #122931, another subset of #122550.
This cleans up validation of CIDRs, moving the validation function from
pkg/apis/core/validationtok8s.io/apimachinery/pkg/util/validation, and then rewriting the LoadBalancerSourceRanges validation to use it, rather than using a random function with crazy semantics. (Of course, we have to preserve the crazy semantics for backward-compatibility, but now they're explicit inpkg/apis/core/validationrather than being hidden in the helper function.)As with #122931, this does not change any validation results, it just paves the way for making CIDR validation more strict later.
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?