Skip to content
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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

✨ Add IPAddress and IPAddressClaim CRs to Experimental API #6313

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2022
Merged

✨ Add IPAddress and IPAddressClaim CRs to Experimental API #6313

merged 1 commit into from
Jul 11, 2022

Conversation

schrej
Copy link
Member

@schrej schrej commented Mar 18, 2022 •
edited
Loading

What this PR does / why we need it:
This implements the API contract described in the IPAM Proposal (#6000).
It adds two new Custom Resources to the experimental API: IPAddress and IPAddressClaim.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. labels Mar 18, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 18, 2022
@schrej schrej mentioned this pull request Mar 18, 2022
Merged
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label May 6, 2022
@schrej schrej changed the title [do-not-review] ✨ Add IPAddress and IPAddressClaim CRs to Experimental API ✨ Add IPAddress and IPAddressClaim CRs to Experimental API May 6, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 8, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 10, 2022
@schrej schrej marked this pull request as ready for review June 10, 2022 18:11
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/work-in-progress Indicates that a PR should not merge because it is a work in progress. label Jun 10, 2022
@schrej
Copy link
Member Author

schrej commented Jun 10, 2022

/hold
This PR requires go 1.18 as it uses the net/netip package. Progress is tracked at the bottom of #5968.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the do-not-merge/hold Indicates that a PR should not merge because someone has issued a /hold command. label Jun 10, 2022
@schrej schrej force-pushed the feature/ipam branch 2 times, most recently from 22ef513 to 948c005 Compare June 13, 2022 10:03
@aartij17 aartij17 mentioned this pull request Jun 13, 2022
Closed
1 task
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 22, 2022
AectannArd
AectannArd reviewed Jun 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
exp/api/v1beta1/ipam_types.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
exp/api/v1beta1/ipam_types.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
AectannArd
AectannArd reviewed Jun 24, 2022
View reviewed changes
Copy link

@AectannArd AectannArd left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

extend newtype descriptions for linking

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Jun 30, 2022
@enxebre
Copy link
Member

enxebre commented Jul 6, 2022

thanks! lgtm overall other than this question #6313 (comment)

@schrej schrej force-pushed the feature/ipam branch 2 times, most recently from 933bfcb to 4b3315e Compare July 7, 2022 09:17
@sbueringer
Copy link
Member

lgtm only pending #6313 (comment) from my side

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

Thank you very much for pushing this forward!

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Jul 8, 2022
@enxebre
Copy link
Member

enxebre commented Jul 8, 2022

/lgtm

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member

/cherry-pick release-1.2

@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@sbueringer: once the present PR merges, I will cherry-pick it on top of release-1.2 in a new PR and assign it to you.

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.2

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.

@fabriziopandini
Copy link
Member

/lgtm

@sbueringer
Copy link
Member

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: sbueringer

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Jul 11, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 05f10fd into kubernetes-sigs:main Jul 11, 2022
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.3 milestone Jul 11, 2022
@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot mentioned this pull request Jul 11, 2022
Merged
@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot
Copy link

@sbueringer: new pull request created: #6887

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-1.2

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.

@schrej schrej deleted the feature/ipam branch July 11, 2022 09:27
@schrej schrej mentioned this pull request Jul 14, 2022
Closed
@jessehu jessehu mentioned this pull request Jul 30, 2022
Closed
@geetikabatra geetikabatra mentioned this pull request Nov 10, 2022
Closed
1 task
JoelSpeed
JoelSpeed reviewed Apr 12, 2023
View reviewed changes
exp/ipam/api/v1alpha1/ipaddressclaim_types.go
// IPAddressClaimSpec is the desired state of an IPAddressClaim.
type IPAddressClaimSpec struct {
// PoolRef is a reference to the pool from which an IP address should be created.
PoolRef corev1.TypedLocalObjectReference `json:"poolRef"`
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Was reviewing the enhancement and noticed this is using GroupKind to find obejcts, just wanted to note that this is discouraged now and that the TypedLocalObjectReference exists for legacy sake. Current API conventions recommend to create your own reference types (to avoid someone adding a new API field without you noticing) and to use GroupResource for unambiguity. I the API hasn't evolved past alpha yet, it might be worth looking at making that change before it is promoted to a more stable API

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Seems to ~ fit in this discussion: #6539 ?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yes I think it does, we should revive that conversation, I'll see if I can re-review that thread

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@JoelSpeed JoelSpeed JoelSpeed left review comments

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini fabriziopandini left review comments

@sbueringer sbueringer sbueringer left review comments

@enxebre enxebre enxebre left review comments

@AectannArd AectannArd AectannArd left review comments

@stmcginnis stmcginnis Awaiting requested review from stmcginnis

@vincepri vincepri Awaiting requested review from vincepri

@ykakarap ykakarap Awaiting requested review from ykakarap

Assignees

@enxebre enxebre

@sbueringer sbueringer

@fabriziopandini fabriziopandini

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XXL Denotes a PR that changes 1000+ lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.3
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
8 participants
@schrej @k8s-ci-robot @sbueringer @enxebre @k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot @fabriziopandini @AectannArd @JoelSpeed