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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

e2e network policy enclose IPv6 destinations #96856

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 9, 2020
Merged

e2e network policy enclose IPv6 destinations #96856

merged 1 commit into from Dec 9, 2020

Conversation

aojea
Copy link
Member

@aojea aojea commented Nov 25, 2020 •
edited

We moved from testing against a DNS destination to use IP:Port,
so we need to be sure that IPv6 addresses are enclosed in square
brackets with that format.

/kind bug

The test now fails with:

Nov 25 08:14:46.564: INFO: stdout: "UNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address\nUNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address\nUNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address\nUNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address\nUNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address\n"
Nov 25 08:14:46.564: INFO:
Last 100 log lines of client-can-connect-80-r9gjz:
UNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address
UNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address
UNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address
UNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address
UNKNOWN: address fd00:10:96::8198:80: too many colons in address

because of

Command:
  /bin/sh
Args:
  -c
  for i in $(seq 1 5); do /agnhost connect fd00:10:96::8198:80 --protocol tcp --timeout 8s && exit 0 || sleep 1; done; exit 1
State:          Terminated

NONE

e2e network policy enclose IPv6 destinations
60f739a 
We moved to DNS destination to IP:Port, so we need to be sure
that IPv6 addresses are enclosed in square brackets with that
format.
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. area/test sig/network Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Network. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 25, 2020
@aojea
Copy link
Member Author

aojea commented Nov 25, 2020

/sig network
/triage accepted
/assign @spiffxp @dcbw @danwinship

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on. label Nov 25, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. label Nov 25, 2020
aojea
aojea commented Nov 25, 2020
View reviewed changes
test/e2e/network/network_policy.go
Labels: map[string]string{
"special-label": f.UniqueName,
}},
},
Copy link
Member Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

this is my linter things 🤷

@spiffxp
Copy link
Member

spiffxp commented Nov 30, 2020

/milestone v1.20
/hold
@kubernetes/release-team I think this should be included in v1.20 vs. 1.20.1. Please remove /hold if you agree, or remove from milestone if you disagree.

  • pro: fixes a network policy test when ipv6 is used, we landed dual stack services in alpha as part of v1.20
  • con: tests aren't release-blocking, the enhancement is only alpha, this will change the SHA if we're looking for continuous passes on a SHA

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Nov 30, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.20 milestone Nov 30, 2020
spiffxp
spiffxp approved these changes Nov 30, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@spiffxp spiffxp left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

/approve
/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 30, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, spiffxp

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 30, 2020
@spiffxp
Copy link
Member

spiffxp commented Nov 30, 2020

/priority important-soon

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. and removed needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 30, 2020
@saschagrunert
Copy link
Member

Hey @spiffxp and @aojea, we're about to cut v1.20.0-rc.0 which also creates the release-1.20 branch. From that point on we have to cherry-pick all changes which should be included in v1.20.0.

From my perspective this PR is fine to be merged, but I'd like to give @jeremyrickard a head nod.

@aojea
Copy link
Member Author

aojea commented Dec 1, 2020

thanks @saschagrunert , @jeremyrickard I appreciate if we can have it in 1.20, as you can see, network policies tests with ipv6 doesn't work 🤷

hasheddan
hasheddan reviewed Dec 1, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@hasheddan hasheddan left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@aojea @spiffxp thanks for the fix and context here! While the blast radius on this change is rather small, the fact that this is a non-blocking test-only fix indicates that we should not break code / test freeze for inclusion. Would love to see this cherry-picked for v1.20.1 :)

/milestone clear

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed this from the v1.20 milestone Dec 1, 2020
@aojea
Copy link
Member Author

aojea commented Dec 9, 2020

/hold cancel
master reopened, we should be good to go

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Dec 9, 2020
@aojea aojea mentioned this pull request Dec 9, 2020
Merged
@aojea
Copy link
Member Author

aojea commented Dec 9, 2020

/retest

This sounds familiar :)
Kubernetes e2e suite: [sig-api-machinery] ResourceQuota should create a ResourceQuota and capture the life of a pod. [Conformance] expand_less

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 77d150a into kubernetes:master Dec 9, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.21 milestone Dec 9, 2020
@trozet trozet mentioned this pull request Mar 17, 2021
Merged
@stbenjam stbenjam mentioned this pull request Mar 19, 2021
Merged
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot mentioned this pull request Mar 23, 2021
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@hasheddan hasheddan hasheddan left review comments

@spiffxp spiffxp spiffxp approved these changes

@m1093782566 m1093782566 Awaiting requested review from m1093782566

@thockin thockin Awaiting requested review from thockin

Assignees

@spiffxp spiffxp

@danwinship danwinship

@dcbw dcbw

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. area/test cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. priority/important-soon Must be staffed and worked on either currently, or very soon, ideally in time for the next release. release-note-none Denotes a PR that doesn't merit a release note. sig/network Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Network. sig/testing Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Testing. size/S Denotes a PR that changes 10-29 lines, ignoring generated files. triage/accepted Indicates an issue or PR is ready to be actively worked on.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.21
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
7 participants
@aojea @spiffxp @k8s-ci-robot @saschagrunert @hasheddan @danwinship @dcbw