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
[release-4.10] Bug 2092895: update all egress ACLs' direction to "from-lport" #1148
[release-4.10] Bug 2092895: update all egress ACLs' direction to "from-lport" #1148
Conversation
@JacobTanenbaum: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2092895, which is invalid:
Comment In response to this:
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. |
b19ba5f
to
03166b5
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
one nit on the syntax, otherwise looks good
Direction of the ACLs built for multicast egress policy was always "from-lport", so we cannot determine if we need to update egress ACL direction based on the first egress ACL that found.
03166b5
to
60dc217
Compare
/retest |
1 similar comment
/retest |
/bugzilla refresh |
@JacobTanenbaum: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2092895, which is valid. The bug has been updated to refer to the pull request using the external bug tracker. 6 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle stale |
Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity. Mark the issue as fresh by commenting If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /lifecycle rotten |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
/lgtm
/remove-lifecycle rotten |
/label backport-risk-assessed |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: JacobTanenbaum, trozet 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 |
/assign @anuragthehatter |
/override ci/prow/unit |
@trozet: Overrode contexts on behalf of trozet: ci/prow/unit In response to this:
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. |
/label cherry-pick-approved |
/hold Revision 60dc217 was retested 3 times: holding |
/retest-required |
/bugzilla refresh |
@JacobTanenbaum: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2092895, which is valid. 6 validation(s) were run on this bug
Requesting review from QA contact: In response to this:
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. |
/retest-required |
@JacobTanenbaum: No Jira issue is referenced in the title of this pull request. Retaining the bugzilla/valid-bug label as it was manually added. In response to this:
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. |
/hold cancel |
/retest-required |
@JacobTanenbaum: The following test failed, say
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. |
@JacobTanenbaum: An error was encountered searching for external tracker bugs for bug 2092895 on the Bugzilla server at https://bugzilla.redhat.com. No known errors were detected, please see the full error message for details. Full error message.
could not parse external identifier "openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1148https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1148" as pull: invalid pull identifier with 10 parts: "openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1148https://github.com/openshift/ovn-kubernetes/pull/1148"
Please contact an administrator to resolve this issue, then request a bug refresh with In response to this:
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 is not a clean application of bc941c2 but it gets the functionality. There would have been many more patches to backport if we wanted a clean application of the upstream patch.
Direction of the ACLs built for multicast egress policy was always
"from-lport", so we cannot determine if we need to update egress ACL
direction based on the first egress ACL that found.
- What this PR does and why is it needed
- Special notes for reviewers
- How to verify it
- Description for the changelog