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

kubeadm: Form correct URL for IPv6 in HTTPProxy check #82267

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Sep 3, 2019

Conversation

@kad
Copy link
Member

commented Sep 3, 2019

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
Force correct syntax on host/port in URL of HTTPProxy check
if the host argument is a raw IPv6 address string

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes kubernetes/kubeadm#1769

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

kubeadm: fix for HTTPProxy check for IPv6 addresses (kubernetes/kubeadm#1769)

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:


Force correct syntax on host/port in URL of HTTPProxy check
if the host argument is a raw IPv6 address string
@neolit123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Sep 3, 2019

thanks @kad
/lgtm
/approve
/milestone v1.16

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.16 milestone Sep 3, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm label Sep 3, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Contributor

commented Sep 3, 2019

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kad, neolit123

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

@neolit123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Sep 3, 2019

/retest

@neolit123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Sep 3, 2019

/retest
/priority important-soon

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 975d073 into kubernetes:master Sep 3, 2019
24 checks passed
24 checks passed
cla/linuxfoundation kad authorized
Details
pull-kubernetes-bazel-build Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-bazel-test Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-conformance-image-test Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-conformance-kind-ipv6 Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-cross Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-dependencies Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-100-performance Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-csi-serial Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-device-plugin-gpu Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-iscsi Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-iscsi-serial Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-storage-slow Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-godeps Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-integration Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-kubemark-e2e-gce-big Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-local-e2e Skipped.
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-typecheck Job succeeded.
Details
pull-kubernetes-verify Job succeeded.
Details
pull-publishing-bot-validate Skipped.
tide In merge pool.
Details
@neolit123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Sep 3, 2019

@kad if you find the time a release-note would be nice to have.
i forgot to mention that.

@kad

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member Author

commented Sep 3, 2019

@kad if you find the time a release-note would be nice to have.
i forgot to mention that.

do we need release note for that simple fix? I can add it, for sure, however for me it sounds really trivial and minimal bugfix that doesn't deserve to be mentioned in release notes.

@neolit123

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
Member

commented Sep 3, 2019

yeah, not super important to have the release note.

u := (&url.URL{Scheme: hst.Proto, Host: hst.Host}).String()
u := &url.URL{Scheme: hst.Proto, Host: hst.Host}
if utilsnet.IsIPv6String(hst.Host) {
u.Host = net.JoinHostPort(hst.Host, "1234")

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@tedyu

tedyu Sep 4, 2019

Contributor

May I know where "1234" came from ?

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@kad

kad Sep 4, 2019

Author Member

It is random port to assign in the formed URL. For detecting proxy configuration it is ignored, so it wouldn't be any difference with "80", "443" or any other port valid URL port number.

This comment has been minimized.

Copy link
@tedyu

tedyu Sep 5, 2019

Contributor

After reading the code, I got same conclusion.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.