-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.4k
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
fix: use super-admin.conf for kube-vip on first CP #11242
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Hi @sathieu. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs 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-sigs/prow repository. |
|
||
kube_vip_enabled: true | ||
kube_vip_controlplane_enabled: true | ||
kube_vip_address: 10.20.30.40 # FIXME |
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.
This has to be changed. What is the subnet of the VMs?
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.
Hmm IIRC it's based on the sample inventory if you could have a template that pick a reasonable address index within kube_pods_subnet
or kube_service_addresses
that would be nice I think
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.
AH wait nvm the subnet of the vms hmmm in that case I am not sure, afaik kubevirt decides not sure if you can get an IP at that layer like that :/
c2325d5
to
a24d002
Compare
Hi @sathieu , I tried your PR and I get the following error. I think the reason is that "Kube-vip | Write static pod" is run before "Set fact first_kube_control_plane".
|
/ok-to-test |
a24d002
to
d7220e4
Compare
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: sathieu The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
1eae15a
to
0d83237
Compare
FYI, I tried the patch and hit the same issue of 'first_kube_control_plane' not defined. I did this "hack" and was able to get this to work in a bare-metal, off-prem configuration:
|
You are not testing the last version, see 0d83237. |
e8dfb4b
to
8662f58
Compare
0d83237 is based off of 4b82e90. My diff is based off of the newer 351393e commit on master branch. As mentioned by @andrewfung729, |
CI is failing for probably unrelated reason, can someone take a look? I think fixing this issue is easy, but adding proper test is harder (because we don't have an external IP available). |
8662f58
to
5c77e2b
Compare
Now failing with:
(unrelated to this PR) |
I tried the fix on 2 cp cluster with kubespray v2.25.0 and it's failing for the second master: TASK [kubernetes/control-plane : Wait for k8s apiserver] ***************************************************************************************** Am I missing anything? EDIT: sorry, was using the wrong interface.. It worked fine and the playbook finished successfully.. |
@sathieu FYI, I tried the latest patch on a 3 control plane/4 worker node on-prem k8s 1.29.5 cluster using Kubespray (2 week old pull of master branch, post 2.25.0) and it worked fine! Thanks for working on this. |
5c77e2b
to
8aecd50
Compare
See kubernetes-sigs#11229 Signed-off-by: Mathieu Parent <[email protected]>
8aecd50
to
084ca75
Compare
I've removed the CI part as it doesn't work (we need a valid VIP). Please review and merge 🙏 |
What type of PR is this?
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #11229
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: