mv TokenRequest and TokenRequestProjection to GA

[zshihang]

What type of PR is this?

/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:
move TokenRequest and TokenRequestProjection features to GA in v1.20

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

+ `TokenRequest` and `TokenRequestProjection` features have been promoted to GA. This feature allows generating service account tokens that are not visible in Secret objects and are tied to the lifetime of a Pod object. See https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-service-account/#service-account-token-volume-projection for details on configuring and using this feature. The `TokenRequest` and `TokenRequestProjection` feature gates will be removed in v1.21.
+ kubeadm's kube-apiserver Pod manifest now includes the following flags by default "--service-account-key-file", "--service-account-signing-key-file", "--service-account-issuer".

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

- [KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-auth/1205-bound-service-account-tokens/README.md

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @zshihang. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[zshihang]

/assign @soltysh

[zshihang]

/cc @mikedanese

[fejta-bot]

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.

[zshihang]

/label api-review

[mikedanese]

@kubernetes/sig-auth-pr-reviews

[liggitt]

/lgtm
/approve
/hold for @neolit123 ack on kubeadm bits

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: liggitt, neolit123, zshihang

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:

• api/OWNERS [liggitt]
• cmd/kube-apiserver/OWNERS [liggitt]
• cmd/kube-controller-manager/OWNERS [liggitt]
• cmd/kubeadm/OWNERS [liggitt,neolit123]
• hack/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/api/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/features/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/kubeapiserver/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/registry/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/volume/OWNERS [liggitt]
• plugin/pkg/admission/noderestriction/OWNERS [liggitt]
• plugin/pkg/auth/authorizer/OWNERS [liggitt]
• test/OWNERS [liggitt,neolit123]

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

[liggitt]

@zshihang go ahead and open a WIP docs PR agains the https://github.com/kubernetes/website/tree/dev-1.20 branch to update https://kubernetes.io/docs/tasks/configure-pod-container/configure-service-account/#service-account-token-volume-projection with the --api-audiences flag and the GA status.

[zshihang]

regarding the kubeadm, the only diff is the default value for issuer and necessary changes to pass unit test.

[liggitt]

/hold cancel

based on #93258 (comment) and #93258 (comment)

[neolit123]

Lgtm. Thanks for the updates.

[kikisdeliveryservice]

Q: Is this related to an enhancement?

[neolit123]

@kikisdeliveryservice

hi, yes this is for:
https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-auth/1205-bound-service-account-tokens/README.md

@zshihang

could you please add the docs block as seen at the bottom here (the docs type is needed around the block):
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/master/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md

- [KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-auth/1205-bound-service-account-tokens/README.md

also could you please add some sort of a mention about kubeadm in the release-note:

kubeadm's kube-apiserver Pod manifest now includes the following flags by default "--service-account-key-file", "--service-account-signing-key-file", "--service-account-issuer".

[zshihang]

@neolit123 added. thanks.

[kikisdeliveryservice]

Hi all,

I don't see any open (or closed) issue 1205 nor is this enhancement tracked for 1.20 in the spreadsheet: http://bit.ly/k8s-1-20-enhancements

Can someone please explain what the tracking issue for this is? As this was not tracked and there was no underlying tracking issue an exception will need to be filed. See: https://github.com/kubernetes/sig-release/blob/master/releases/release_phases.md#exceptions

Thanks,
Kirsten
1.20 Enhancements Lead

[liggitt]

Apologies for the disconnect. The KEP is at https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/blob/master/keps/sig-auth/1205-bound-service-account-tokens and was updated with v1.20 plans prior to enhancements freeze in kubernetes/enhancements#1912

The KEP number came from the original PR that converted a pre-KEP design to KEP format (kubernetes/enhancements#1205)

[kikisdeliveryservice]

Hi @liggitt

There is no tracking issue (which is required for all enhancements), and the enhancement is not being tracked by the release team for 1.20. The KEP is also misnumbered as the naming should be - as per the templates found here: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/NNNN-kep-template

The requirement to have a 1.20 milestoned issue was also mentioned in my email on October 5 sent to k-dev: https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-dev/c/1KF6mmO1WsQ/m/IFWMkeKVCwAJ

Please open an exception request ASAP.

Thanks,
Kirsten

[liggitt]

There is no tracking issue (which is required for all enhancements), and the enhancement is not being tracked by the release team for 1.20. The KEP is also misnumbered as the naming should be - as per the templates found here: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/tree/master/keps/NNNN-kep-template

Understood. The template/process has changed since this KEP was created, and work to sweep existing designs/KEPs that predated those changes has been inconsistent. This highlights a gap in the release process that relies on keeping multiple disconnected information sources (kep.yaml files, enhancements issues, tracking spreadsheet, etc) in sync manually.

Opened kubernetes/enhancements#2126 as a tracking issue and started the thread for the exception at https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-sig-release/c/VLiE7Lsy6Es