[fcos] GCP: add a script and a service which ensure GCP routes are set correctly #1442
Conversation
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
size/L
|
/cc @LorbusChris |
This would ensure masters / workers would report as healthy to GCP LBs
vrutkovs
changed the title
|
/approve To clarify though I think a next step is shipping this as part of the MCD binary (or at least |
| Description=Update GCP routes for forwarded IPs. | ||
| ConditionKernelCommandLine=|ignition.platform.id=gce | ||
| ConditionKernelCommandLine=|ignition.platform.id=gcp | ||
| After=network.target |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Is it recommended to use network.target or network-online.target in Fedora?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/NetworkTarget/ covers this...I think network-online.target is more right but the script retries anyways.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
since we already have network.target in vsphere UPI scripts I'll keep network.target - and replace these later
openshift-ci-robot
added
the
approved
|
/retest |
1 similar comment
|
/retest |
|
/test e2e-aws |
|
/lgtm |
|
@LorbusChris: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of master 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. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: cgwalters, LorbusChris, vrutkovs 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 |
|
Not sure if master needs it - currently this script is provided by RHCOS itself. Lets see if this works on OKD and file an enhancement to have this moved to installer / MCO? |
|
While I am an official member of the enhancement police 👮♂️ I think this change doesn't necessarily require one...it's not something an end user would care about, just shuffing around the implementation details of MCO/RHCOS. (But also, no opposition to making one!) |
|
enhancement police 😁 I'm plus one on shuffling this around, ie. landing it in master, and then subsequently removing it from the RHCOS builds in order to align FCOS and RHCOS builds, and reducing the delta we have here between fcos and master branches. I don't think we need a formal enhancement proposal for this, as it doesn't enhance anything, it just moves an existing implementation around. An optimization would be to move this into the MCD directly. |
smarterclayton
added
the
bugzilla/valid-bug
|
@LorbusChris: new pull request created: #1448 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 would ensure masters / workers would report as healthy to GCP LBs
xref okd-project/okd#38