Fixing cilium routingMode parameters in helm configuration #9401
Conversation
|
Hi @parlakisik. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a aws member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. 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. |
eks-distro-bot
added
the
size/M
Codecov ReportAll modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅
Additional details and impacted files@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #9401 +/- ##
=======================================
Coverage 69.46% 69.46%
=======================================
Files 672 672
Lines 49360 49364 +4
=======================================
+ Hits 34286 34290 +4
Misses 13288 13288
Partials 1786 1786 ☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
| @@ -190,6 +192,7 @@ spec: | |||
| cniConfig: | |||
| cilium: | |||
| routingMode: "direct" | |||
| ipv4-native-routing-cidr: 192.168.0.0/16 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Now I understood this change, but if this is the case, shouldn't we have validation to ensure that this is specified when routingMode is set to direct? Or if it's not set, autoDirectNodeRoutes is set to true, which is what this should mention right?
Also, I believe we might be making the same mistake again as it should be the following:
| ipv4-native-routing-cidr: 192.168.0.0/16 | |
| ipv4NativeRoutingCIDR: 192.168.0.0/16 |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
yeah quick copy paste brighs some issues
|
/ok-to-test |
|
|
||
| This field can be set as follows: | ||
| The `ipv4NativeRoutingCIDR` is required to set the CIDR in which native routing can be performed. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's only ipv4 and not either that or ipv6?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
we are not supporting ipv6 yet
| } else { | ||
| delete(val, "tunnelProtocol") | ||
|
|
||
| if spec.Cluster.Spec.ClusterNetwork.CNIConfig.Cilium.IPv4NativeRoutingCIDR != "" { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This check is technically redundant then right? But doesn't hurt to check here
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes after verification check , this become redundant. but it is good verify it here.
The routingMode parameter name injecting differently "routing-mode" This cause the wrong cilium configuration deployment. With 1.15 , cilium also require ipv4NativeRoutingCIDR or ipv6NativeRoutingCIDR parameters if routingMode is set to native
|
/cherry-pick release-0.22 |
|
@sp1999: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-0.22 in a new PR and assign it to you. 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. |
|
/approve |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: vivek-koppuru 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 |
Issue #, if available:
*Description of changes: The routingMode parameter name injecting differently "routing-mode" This cause the wrong cilium configuration deployment.
With 1.15 , cilium also require ipv4NativeRoutingCIDR or ipv6NativeRoutingCIDR parameters if routingMode is set to native
*Testing (if applicable): Vsphere deployment is tested and two unit tests are added
*Documentation added/planned (if applicable): Cilium documentation updated
By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.