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

OSASINFRA-3090: External LB support for on-prem platforms #6812

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 22, 2023
Merged

OSASINFRA-3090: External LB support for on-prem platforms #6812

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 22, 2023

Conversation

EmilienM
Copy link
Member

@EmilienM EmilienM commented Jan 27, 2023 •
edited
Loading

Support for External LB for BM, vsphere, OpenStack, ovirt and Nutanix platforms

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. label Jan 27, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 27, 2023 •
edited by openshift-ci bot
Loading

@EmilienM: This pull request references OSASINFRA-3090 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

  • Golang vendoring for platform LB API
  • Revert "vSphere Zonal: Validate DNS and LB": not needed anymore since we keep CoreDNS
  • Support for External LB for BM, vsphere, OpenStack, ovirt and Nutanix platforms

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.

This was referenced Jan 27, 2023
Closed
Closed
@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/uncc AnnaZivkovic bostrt
/cc rvanderp3 jcpowermac patrickdillon

This is highly VIP now but I'll use it as a baseline and apply changes from the enhancement in this PR.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from jcpowermac, patrickdillon and rvanderp3 and removed request for bostrt and AnnaZivkovic January 27, 2023 15:51
@EmilienM EmilienM force-pushed the osp-external-lb2 branch 2 times, most recently from 17fab84 to ccdb5df Compare January 30, 2023 20:54
@cfergeau cfergeau mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2023
Closed
mandre
mandre reviewed Jan 31, 2023
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@mandre mandre left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems like a good start. We'll need to see what type of validation we want to add.

I suggest we iterate on the patch with the OpenStack code first until we're happy with the result then port the same logic to other platforms.

pkg/asset/installconfig/vsphere/validation.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
data/data/openstack/masters/private-network.tf Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
data/data/openstack/variables-openstack.tf Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/asset/ignition/machine/node.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/tfvars/openstack/openstack.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@jcpowermac
Copy link
Contributor

@EmilienM if loadBalancerType is external we can check for the existance of the LB and warn if not found.
I would rather you not remove at least that check for vsphere.

I thought this was tech preview? If so it should be added here:
https://github.com/openshift/installer/blob/master/pkg/types/validation/installconfig.go#L985-L1027

A little concerned we are changing how vSphere UPI is installed, @patrickdillon @rvanderp3 wdyt?
The positive for the change is all the onprem platforms will be the same, negative we are adding fields and CoreDNS that isn't required for vSphere UPI.

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci-robot commented Jan 31, 2023 •
edited by openshift-ci bot
Loading

@EmilienM: This pull request references OSASINFRA-3090 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

  • Golang vendoring for platform LB API
  • Support for External LB for BM, vsphere, OpenStack, ovirt and Nutanix platforms

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.

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

@EmilienM if loadBalancerType is external we can check for the existance of the LB and warn if not found. I would rather you not remove at least that check for vsphere.

This was a mistake, I removed the revert.

I thought this was tech preview? If so it should be added here: https://github.com/openshift/installer/blob/master/pkg/types/validation/installconfig.go#L985-L1027

Ok, I didn't know that interface. I'll add it here of course.

A little concerned we are changing how vSphere UPI is installed, @patrickdillon @rvanderp3 wdyt? The positive for the change is all the onprem platforms will be the same, negative we are adding fields and CoreDNS that isn't required for vSphere UPI.

I agree it'll require your users to add apiVIPs and ingresVIPs fields. And that CoreDNS will be deployed, but I thought it was something we agreed in the enhancement...
I'll defer to @patrickdillon and his team but I think we should make the implementation consistent across all on-prem platforms...

@jcpowermac
Copy link
Contributor

@EmilienM if loadBalancerType is external we can check for the existance of the LB and warn if not found. I would rather you not remove at least that check for vsphere.

This was a mistake, I removed the revert.

I thought this was tech preview? If so it should be added here: https://github.com/openshift/installer/blob/master/pkg/types/validation/installconfig.go#L985-L1027

Ok, I didn't know that interface. I'll add it here of course.

A little concerned we are changing how vSphere UPI is installed, @patrickdillon @rvanderp3 wdyt? The positive for the change is all the onprem platforms will be the same, negative we are adding fields and CoreDNS that isn't required for vSphere UPI.

I agree it'll require your users to add apiVIPs and ingresVIPs fields. And that CoreDNS will be deployed, but I thought it was something we agreed in the enhancement... I'll defer to @patrickdillon and his team but I think we should make the implementation consistent across all on-prem platforms...

Right...but as currently implemented you are requiring this change in 4.13 even though this is tech preview.

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

Right...but as currently implemented you are requiring this change in 4.13 even though this is tech preview.

I understand the concern and I don't know how to handle it, I'll defer to installer folks to make a decision. I'm ok with whatever option.

@rvanderp3
Copy link
Contributor

Right...but as currently implemented you are requiring this change in 4.13 even though this is tech preview.

I understand the concern and I don't know how to handle it, I'll defer to installer folks to make a decision. I'm ok with whatever option.

I think it makes sense to keep this behind the tech preview feature gate for 4.13. @jcpowermac and I were under the impression this wasn't targeting 4.13 for GA.

@cfergeau cfergeau mentioned this pull request Jan 31, 2023
Merged
@EmilienM EmilienM force-pushed the osp-external-lb2 branch 5 times, most recently from 1d76c77 to 7390880 Compare February 1, 2023 03:10
@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/retest-required

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD d412809 and 1 for PR HEAD 1f3aae2 in total

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/retest-required

1 similar comment
@pierreprinetti
Copy link
Member

/retest-required

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/retest-required

we have to wait for openshift/origin#27736

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/retest-required

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD c8c5d59 and 0 for PR HEAD 1f3aae2 in total

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 21, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 21, 2023
@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Feb 21, 2023
@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/hold for CI

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 21, 2023
@jcpowermac
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/hold cancel
no need to hold, CI jobs are voting anyway.

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Feb 21, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 21, 2023
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 21, 2023
@jcpowermac
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Feb 21, 2023
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD c8c5d59 and 2 for PR HEAD 625932f in total

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/test e2e-vsphere-upi-zones

@EmilienM
Copy link
Member Author

/retest-required
/skip

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 0 against base HEAD 8e2f4df and 1 for PR HEAD 625932f in total

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 22, 2023

@EmilienM: The following tests failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name Commit Details Required Rerun command
ci/prow/e2e-vsphere-upi 1f3aae2 link true /test e2e-vsphere-upi
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn 625932f link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-ovn
ci/prow/e2e-nutanix-sdn 625932f link false /test e2e-nutanix-sdn
ci/prow/okd-scos-e2e-aws-upgrade 625932f link false /test okd-scos-e2e-aws-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-vsphere-upi-zones 625932f link false /test e2e-vsphere-upi-zones
ci/prow/e2e-openstack-proxy 625932f link false /test e2e-openstack-proxy
ci/prow/e2e-ovirt-sdn 625932f link false /test e2e-ovirt-sdn
ci/prow/okd-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade 625932f link false /test okd-e2e-aws-ovn-upgrade
ci/prow/e2e-aws-ovn-workers-rhel8 625932f link false /test e2e-aws-ovn-workers-rhel8
ci/prow/e2e-nutanix-ovn 625932f link false /test e2e-nutanix-ovn

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit 50e4071 into openshift:master Feb 22, 2023
@EmilienM EmilienM deleted the osp-external-lb2 branch February 22, 2023 01:23
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@mandre mandre mandre left review comments

@patrickdillon patrickdillon patrickdillon left review comments

@pierreprinetti pierreprinetti pierreprinetti approved these changes

@rvanderp3 rvanderp3 rvanderp3 left review comments

@jcpowermac jcpowermac Awaiting requested review from jcpowermac

Assignees

@patrickdillon patrickdillon

@pierreprinetti pierreprinetti

@jcpowermac jcpowermac

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. jira/valid-reference Indicates that this PR references a valid Jira ticket of any type. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@EmilienM @openshift-ci-robot @jcpowermac @rvanderp3 @pierreprinetti @patrickdillon @mandre @openshift-merge-robot