Add content for SCTP by jboxman · Pull Request #20036 · openshift/openshift-docs

jboxman · 2020-02-26T16:45:07Z

https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSDOCS-929

openshift-docs-preview-bot · 2020-02-26T16:47:18Z

The preview will be available shortly at:

https://OSDOCS-929--ocpdocs.netlify.com/

vishnoianil · 2020-03-13T21:44:44Z

modules/nw-sctp-enabling.adoc

"you can load and enable blacklisted SCTP Kernel module"

modules/nw-sctp-enabling.adoc

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc

vishnoianil · 2020-03-13T22:33:50Z

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc

This command is to run the sctp server, we need example that shows how to launch deployment with one pod from where user can fire sctp client to connect to this server. @danwinship @trozet do you have instructions to start pod and run sctp sample application, otherwise i will dig into the ci tests to find something.

I found a good example which can fire both sctp server pod and sctp client in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796157, the configuration steps are from @fedepaol who can comment on this

The instructions on the bz are fine. They were for the default namespace but they can be modified to apply to a custom namespace.

@vishnoianil @fedepaol

Should a customer install an image from quay.io? Or is there a different image that makes sense?

Should this be done in a different namespace than default?

Thanks!

I asked @sferich888, and we can't use the quay.io image for this -- Is there a different way to validate that uses a Red Hat supported image?

Sorry for the late reply.
Just plain fedora is fine I think. It is what I used in the kba.

Or any other image that has installed lskctp-tools.

@fedepaol, do you know how to find images that might include lskctp-tools? Fedora isn't permissible, either.

Could I just log in to a node and confirm sctp is loaded in by running lsmod?

@jboxman this needs to be changed I think. Once you have the server pod running, you need to spin up a new pod (client) to which you bash into and try to connect to the server (as described in https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1796157 )
The pod description is the one named sctpclient. Client connection instructions in:
5. Connect to the client pod and launch sctp_test in client mode, using the server pod's address:

@fedepaol, okay, I didn't realize a second Pod was still necessary for this.

danwinship · 2020-03-17T15:34:41Z

modules/nw-sctp-about.adoc

The docs don't expand "TCP" and "UDP", so I wouldn't expand "SCTP" either. People always just refer to it by the acronym. (I am sure that most of our customers who have demanded SCTP support could not actually tell you what "SCTP" stands for. I'm not sure I would have guessed correctly if I hadn't just read it... I might have gone with "Sequence" rather than "Stream"...)

@danwinship, that makes sense; I may have been overzealous in expanding acronyms. But for SCTP, I think it may be valuable for search engine traffic.

danwinship · 2020-03-17T15:47:41Z

modules/nw-sctp-about.adoc

(We don't expand "IP" anywhere else in the docs either.)

The customers who actually need SCTP support already know exactly what it is, so it might be useful to aim this description at people who don't need SCTP support, to assure them that they don't need to care about it and can just skip this section. eg, maybe add something about "it is not widely used except in the telecom industry".

modules/nw-sctp-about.adoc

jboxman · 2020-03-23T17:59:30Z

@fedepaol, to get this merged for 4.4, I'm going to omit the verification steps for now and revisit them in a separate PR.

fedepaol · 2020-03-23T18:03:30Z

@fedepaol, to get this merged for 4.4, I'm going to omit the verification steps for now and revisit them in a separate PR.

Sorry I missed your reply. That is fine. Can you list what images are allowed? Ubi8 would be fine as well, but it is more tricky to get the subscription manager right from there.

jboxman · 2020-03-23T18:09:28Z

@fedepaol, images from https://catalog.redhat.com/software/containers/explore are okay.

jboxman · 2020-03-24T00:06:03Z

@openshift/team-documentation, this currently excludes modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc pending validation steps that are permissible to include.

fedepaol · 2020-03-24T07:16:25Z

@jboxman just did a quick try with ubi8 and it works.

Pod definition:

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
  name: sctpserver
  labels:
    app: sctpserver
spec:
  containers:
    - name: sctpserver
      image: registry.access.redhat.com/ubi8/ubi
      command: ["/bin/sh", "-c"]
      args:
        ["dnf install -y lksctp-tools && sctp_test -H localhost -P 30100 -l"]
      ports:
        - containerPort: 30100
          name: sctpserver
          protocol: SCTP

sferich888 · 2020-03-24T12:14:51Z

Is lkctp-tools in the ubi repo? If not the dnf install will fail.
@xltian do we have a test case for this?

fedepaol · 2020-03-24T12:27:22Z

Is lkctp-tools in the ubi repo? If not the dnf install will fail.
@xltian do we have a test case for this?

@sferich888 I tried that pod before posting it.

fedepaol · 2020-03-24T12:46:23Z

Pod logs:

oc logs sctpserver
Updating Subscription Management repositories.
Unable to read consumer identity
Subscription Manager is operating in container mode.
This system is not registered to Red Hat Subscription Management. You can use subscription-manager to register.
Red Hat Universal Base Image 8 (RPMs) - BaseOS  145 kB/s | 761 kB     00:05    
Red Hat Universal Base Image 8 (RPMs) - AppStre 6.3 MB/s | 3.4 MB     00:00    
Red Hat Universal Base Image 8 (RPMs) - CodeRea  63 kB/s | 9.1 kB     00:00    
Dependencies resolved.
================================================================================
 Package            Architecture Version               Repository          Size
================================================================================
Installing:
 lksctp-tools       x86_64       1.0.18-3.el8          ubi-8-baseos       100 k

Transaction Summary
================================================================================
Install  1 Package

Total download size: 100 k
Installed size: 251 k
Downloading Packages:
lksctp-tools-1.0.18-3.el8.x86_64.rpm            831 kB/s | 100 kB     00:00    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total                                           816 kB/s | 100 kB     00:00     
Running transaction check
Transaction check succeeded.
Running transaction test
Transaction test succeeded.
Running transaction
  Preparing        :                                                        1/1 
  Installing       : lksctp-tools-1.0.18-3.el8.x86_64                       1/1 
  Running scriptlet: lksctp-tools-1.0.18-3.el8.x86_64                       1/1 
  Verifying        : lksctp-tools-1.0.18-3.el8.x86_64                       1/1 
Installed products updated.

Installed:
  lksctp-tools-1.0.18-3.el8.x86_64                                              

Complete!
local:addr=::1, port=rwp, family=10
seed = 1585034107

Starting tests...
	socket(SOCK_SEQPACKET, IPPROTO_SCTP)  ->  sk=3
	bind(sk=3, [a:::1,p:rwp])  --  attempt 1/10
	listen(sk=3,backlog=100)
Server: Receiving packets.
	recvmsg(sk=3) %

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc

fedepaol · 2020-04-01T15:49:17Z

So, together with @weliang1 we had some fun in debugging sctp_tool not working.
Looks like the latest version is not working, whereas for example nc is.

For this reason, I think the following are more suitable for docs:

kind: Pod
metadata:
  name: sctpclient
  labels:
    app: sctpclient
spec:
  containers:
    - name: sctpclient
      image: registry.access.redhat.com/ubi8/ubi
      command: ["/bin/sh", "-c"]
      args:
        ["dnf install -y nc && sleep inf"]

apiVersion: v1
kind: Pod
metadata:
  name: sctpserver
  labels:
    app: sctpserver
spec:
  containers:
    - name: sctpserver
      image: registry.access.redhat.com/ubi8/ubi
      command: ["/bin/sh", "-c"]
      args:
        ["dnf install -y nc && sleep inf"]
      ports:
        - containerPort: 30102
          name: sctpserver
          protocol: SCTP

apiVersion: v1
kind: Service
metadata:
  name: sctpservice
  labels:
    app: sctpserver
spec:
  type: NodePort
  selector:
    app: sctpserver
  ports:
    - name: sctpserver
      protocol: SCTP
      port: 30102
      targetPort: 30102

Together with using nc:

On client side:
nc 10.129.2.24 30102 --sctp

On server side:
nc -l 30102 --sctp

jboxman · 2020-04-02T15:52:49Z

@fedepaol, thanks, I'll make those changes.

jboxman · 2020-04-09T00:43:53Z

@fedepaol @weliang1

I've made the suggested changes; How does it look now? Thanks for your patience!

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc

jboxman · 2020-04-14T01:23:49Z

@weliang1, I updated the PR with your suggestions. Thanks!

weliang1 · 2020-04-14T13:51:03Z

/LGTM

kalexand-rh

Just a few picks and questions, and it LGTM.

networking/using-sctp.adoc

_topic_map.yml

modules/nw-sctp-about.adoc

kalexand-rh · 2020-04-14T17:48:42Z

modules/nw-sctp-about.adoc

On {op-system-first},

Can you add a little more context about why it's blacklisted or what that means for the user?

@kalexand-rh, it's due to an oversight. Perhaps blacklisted is too harsh. (Although that's the technical term, as the kernel cannot load the SCTP module until it is removed from the blacklist.) Not sure how to diplomatically say "sorry, our bad."

Could say

On {op-system-first}, the SCTP module is disabled by default.

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc

kalexand-rh · 2020-04-14T17:53:03Z

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc

Is the nc package available by default to RHEL? Support's filed several tickets asking that I purge 'jq' commands from the collection because the package isn't always available, so it might be worth checking before we publish this method.

@kalexand-rh, I wondered that myself. The UBI image used for the verification pods includes nc.

- https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSDOCS-929

openshift-ci-robot · 2020-04-15T02:38:05Z

New changes are detected. LGTM label has been removed.

jboxman · 2020-04-16T19:36:17Z

/cherry-pick enterprise-4.4

openshift-cherrypick-robot · 2020-04-16T19:36:27Z

@jboxman: new pull request created: #21237

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick enterprise-4.4

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.

jboxman added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. branch/enterprise-4.4 labels Feb 26, 2020

jboxman added this to the Future Release milestone Feb 26, 2020

jboxman self-assigned this Feb 26, 2020

openshift-ci-robot added size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. labels Feb 26, 2020

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch from b2b8ffc to 67a74cb Compare February 28, 2020 03:20

openshift-ci-robot added size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Feb 28, 2020

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch from 67a74cb to d3ee313 Compare March 4, 2020 02:30

openshift-ci-robot added size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. and removed size/M Denotes a PR that changes 30-99 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Mar 4, 2020

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch 2 times, most recently from 1eba9c9 to df2ab8c Compare March 10, 2020 23:51

vishnoianil reviewed Mar 13, 2020

View reviewed changes

danwinship reviewed Mar 17, 2020

View reviewed changes

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch from df2ab8c to 815a717 Compare March 18, 2020 19:52

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch from 815a717 to dd317bb Compare March 23, 2020 23:49

jboxman added the peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR label Mar 24, 2020

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch 2 times, most recently from ca799b5 to 4db73ea Compare March 24, 2020 22:08

weliang1 reviewed Mar 30, 2020

View reviewed changes

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch 3 times, most recently from f54b047 to fa066e4 Compare April 8, 2020 15:23

weliang1 reviewed Apr 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

weliang1 reviewed Apr 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

weliang1 reviewed Apr 9, 2020

View reviewed changes

modules/nw-sctp-verifying.adoc Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch 2 times, most recently from 512b054 to b7780f7 Compare April 14, 2020 01:09

openshift-ci-robot assigned weliang1 Apr 14, 2020

openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 14, 2020

kalexand-rh reviewed Apr 14, 2020

View reviewed changes

kalexand-rh added peer-review-done Signifies that the peer review team has reviewed this PR and removed peer-review-needed Signifies that the peer review team needs to review this PR labels Apr 14, 2020

Add content for SCTP

6755334

- https://issues.redhat.com/browse/OSDOCS-929

jboxman force-pushed the OSDOCS-929 branch from b7780f7 to 6755334 Compare April 15, 2020 02:38

openshift-ci-robot removed the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 15, 2020

jboxman merged commit 04deb56 into openshift:master Apr 16, 2020

jboxman deleted the OSDOCS-929 branch April 16, 2020 19:36

openshift-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Apr 16, 2020

[enterprise-4.4] Add content for SCTP #21237

Merged

vikram-redhat modified the milestones: Future Release, OCP 4.4 GA May 4, 2020

Conversation

jboxman commented Feb 26, 2020

Uh oh!

openshift-docs-preview-bot commented Feb 26, 2020

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jboxman commented Mar 23, 2020

Uh oh!

fedepaol commented Mar 23, 2020

Uh oh!

jboxman commented Mar 23, 2020

Uh oh!

jboxman commented Mar 24, 2020

Uh oh!

fedepaol commented Mar 24, 2020

Uh oh!

sferich888 commented Mar 24, 2020

Uh oh!

fedepaol commented Mar 24, 2020

Uh oh!

fedepaol commented Mar 24, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

fedepaol commented Apr 1, 2020

Uh oh!

jboxman commented Apr 2, 2020

Uh oh!

jboxman commented Apr 9, 2020

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

jboxman commented Apr 14, 2020

Uh oh!

weliang1 commented Apr 14, 2020

Uh oh!

kalexand-rh left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!