-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 332
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
OCPBUGS-24363: Full implementation of KEP-1669 ProxyTerminatingEndpoints #4072
Merged
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Diff view
Diff view
There are no files selected for viewing
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Oops, something went wrong.
Oops, something went wrong.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
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.
So the logic above this line, could it be a condFn for
getEligibleEndpoints
getSelectedEligibleEndpoints
?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.
Here we're separating IPv4 from IPv6 endpoints addresses. Do I need a condFn for that?
Here actually I should use the existing
getEligibleEndpointAddresses
, but it's at the cost of adding one more iteration through the endpoints. I'm a little hesitant to do that because it gets executed by ovnkube-controller, which configures /all/ the endpoints for a given service: https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn-kubernetes/blob/master/go-controller/pkg/ovn/controller/services/services_controller.go#L392-L402There 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.
I mean the logic above this line, not the logic below. So the one where you are matching the port name & protocol of the service.
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.
oh ok, I see.
condFn
as I defined it is applied to single endpoints, because we need to check their node name, while inGetLbEndpoints
we're filtering out entire slices. I don't know if rewriting it once again for this particular usage would improve the overall readability :)