Skip to content

identity: Introduce reserved:unmanaged identity#5898

Merged
tgraf merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
pr/tgraf/unmanaged-identity
Oct 16, 2018
Merged

identity: Introduce reserved:unmanaged identity#5898
tgraf merged 1 commit intomasterfrom
pr/tgraf/unmanaged-identity

Conversation

@tgraf
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@tgraf tgraf commented Oct 16, 2018

Unmanaged endpoints are currently labeled with the identity reserved:init. This
change was introduced for 1.3. While reserved:init correctly implements the
cluster entity and also allows to define policy. It does not provide clear
visibility and does not allow to define policy for unmanaged pods without also
affecting managed pods in the init phase.

Introduced a new identity reserved:unmanaged to map unmanaged endpoints to
instead. The numeric value for the previous cluster identity can be utilized
for this purpose. There is almost a 1:1 mapping of the previous intent of the
cluster entity so re-using the value will cause the least potential for
disruption when upgrading from 1.2 to 1.3.


This change is Reviewable

@tgraf tgraf added the wip label Oct 16, 2018
@tgraf tgraf requested a review from a team October 16, 2018 01:40
@tgraf tgraf requested a review from a team as a code owner October 16, 2018 01:40
@tgraf tgraf requested a review from a team October 16, 2018 01:40
@tgraf tgraf requested a review from a team as a code owner October 16, 2018 01:40
@tgraf tgraf requested review from a team October 16, 2018 01:40
@tgraf
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

tgraf commented Oct 16, 2018

test-me-please

Legit failure due to typo in header file generation

@tgraf tgraf force-pushed the pr/tgraf/unmanaged-identity branch from f87285d to e2ac6e0 Compare October 16, 2018 08:14
@tgraf
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

tgraf commented Oct 16, 2018

test-me-please

@tgraf tgraf added pending-review kind/bug This is a bug in the Cilium logic. and removed wip labels Oct 16, 2018
@aanm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

aanm commented Oct 16, 2018

test-missed-k8s

@aanm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

aanm commented Oct 16, 2018

(just to check if there's upgrade/downgrade issues)

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@jrajahalme jrajahalme left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just small nits

Comment thread bpf/lib/policy.h Outdated
Comment thread pkg/identity/identity_test.go Outdated
@tgraf
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

tgraf commented Oct 16, 2018

green builds. will address feedback from @jrajahalme

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@joestringer joestringer left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

BPF bits LGTM.

Unmanaged endpoints are curently labeled with the identity reserved:init. This
change was introduced for 1.3. While reserved:init correctly implements the
cluster entity and also allows to define policy. It does not provide clear
visibility and does not allow to define policy for unmanaged pods without also
affecting managed pods in the init phase.

Introduced a new identity reserved:unmanaged to map unmanaged endpoints to
instead. The numeric value for the previous cluster identity can be utilized
for this purpose. There is almost a 1:1 mapping of the previous intent of the
cluster entity so re-using the value will cause the least potential for
disruption when upgrading from 1.2 to 1.3.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Graf <thomas@cilium.io>
@tgraf tgraf force-pushed the pr/tgraf/unmanaged-identity branch from e2ac6e0 to 4230413 Compare October 16, 2018 18:37
@tgraf
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

tgraf commented Oct 16, 2018

test-me-please

@tgraf tgraf merged commit 0a9685e into master Oct 16, 2018
@tgraf tgraf deleted the pr/tgraf/unmanaged-identity branch October 16, 2018 20:34
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

kind/bug This is a bug in the Cilium logic.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants