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

Route ingress: Allow setting termination policy via annotation #124

Merged

Conversation

alvaroaleman
Copy link
Contributor

Ingress objects are more common in the Kube ecosystem and have deeper
integration with other components. Right now they can not be used when a
terminationPolicy other than Edge is required. This PR changes that by
allowing to set an annotation on the Ingress.

cc @hongkailiu

Ingress objects are more common in the Kube ecosystem and have deeper
integration with other components. Right now they can not be used when a
terminationPolicy other than Edge is required. This PR changes that by
allowing to set an annotation on the Ingress.
@alvaroaleman
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@alvaroaleman
Copy link
Contributor Author

/assign @Miciah

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Jul 12, 2020

This looks good, but I'd like to discuss it with the team before merging it.

By the way, during review, I was confused about insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy. Although the API documentation implies that insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy is applicable only to edge-terminated routes (https://github.com/openshift/api/blob/af4dd20aed231f81f1c76f0a98dc60947f12a7a4/route/v1/types.go#L250-L257), the validation allows insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy to be used with edge, reencrypt, and passthrough, with the caveat that insecureEdgeTerminationPolicy: Allow is prohibited for passthrough routes (https://github.com/openshift/openshift-apiserver/blob/3dc75d3dd5b8de9487122d4a798ab1600217efb8/pkg/route/apis/route/validation/validation.go#L243-L264).

@alvaroaleman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@Miciah yeah that we can not validate and provide feedback is not ideal. Does openshift already have a webhook or anything else that can be used to add additional validations for objects served by the kube-apiserver, do you know?

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Jul 13, 2020

Does openshift already have a webhook or anything else that can be used to add additional validations for objects served by the kube-apiserver, do you know?

I'm not aware of anything, sorry. I'd ask someone from the API team.

@Miciah
Copy link
Contributor

Miciah commented Jul 28, 2020

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 28, 2020
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alvaroaleman, Miciah

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

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 28, 2020
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

1 similar comment
@openshift-bot
Copy link
Contributor

/retest

Please review the full test history for this PR and help us cut down flakes.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit b6f2430 into openshift:master Jul 28, 2020
@hongkailiu
Copy link
Member

@Miciah

Is it possible to backport it 4.5?

@alvaroaleman
Copy link
Contributor Author

@hongkailiu right now there is a follow-up open to fix some issues with this: #128 That would need to merge first

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

6 participants