Feat/service import backend support#1705
Conversation
|
Can someone re-trigger the CI? Looks like the upload to codecov broke in the run. |
|
/retest |
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #1705 +/- ##
==========================================
- Coverage 65.22% 65.04% -0.18%
==========================================
Files 86 86
Lines 12318 12452 +134
==========================================
+ Hits 8034 8099 +65
- Misses 3772 3832 +60
- Partials 512 521 +9
|
|
@arkodg , I think this can go in with using ClusterSetIP type which will have VIPs in multi cluster service import. EndpointSlice can be used once that PR gets in. It will be similar to service backend. |
|
Rethinking, you're right @tanujd11, this PR can go in by itself. |
|
did a first pass, it looks good ! added some minor comments |
|
ptal @envoyproxy/gateway-maintainers, a decision also needs be made here on whether we want the ServiceImport API to be opt in or not |
b2ac94a to
36113fe
Compare
|
@arkodg, if we are removing the serviceImport CRD from EG chart, then it automatically becomes the a Opt-in feature where user needs to install the CRD to use this feature. I can add a validation to check if the CRD exist before someone uses serviceImport as part of the backend. for example if the user has mentioned serviceImport as backendRef and the CRD does not exist, we can reject the config with status |
|
/retest |
great idea, +1 to this, but from an implementation perspective, won't the |
arkodg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, thanks for adding this !
You are right, the current one is throwing error. Should we implement a way to check the presence of CRD for watching also. Or is there any other way in your mind to tackle this |
|
@tanujd11 can you share the error you are seeing ? one way to solve the opt in problem is add a knob in EnvoyGateway.ExtensionApis |
|
LGTM after conflicts are resolved and CI passed. |
34bcbfd to
ee27f2a
Compare
|
@arkodg , can you take a relook at this work? I have added the knob at the place suggested by you. I will work on the doc in a subsequent PR |
|
had a chat with @tanujd11 who is trying to implement the functionality w/o having to add an explicit API knob |
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
2c53c2f to
e4c3241
Compare
|
hey @tanujd11 just took a peek at your PR, the approach of using the o/p. of |
|
seeing some test yaml fail, recommend running |
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
4a7946d to
f84cf2b
Compare
arkodg
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM, added some minor nits around error string
thanks for adding this !
Signed-off-by: tanujd11 <dwiveditanuj41@gmail.com>
|
can you add a user face doc in following PR. |
What type of PR is this?
FeatureWhat this PR does / why we need it:
Adds serviceImport Backend for Routes.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #9