-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 493
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
Add v1.0.0 Conformance Report of Envoy Gateway #2558
Conversation
Signed-off-by: bitliu <[email protected]>
f982a27
to
74050f9
Compare
/cc @arkodg |
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.
/approve
thanks !
/lgtm |
I'm probably missing something obvious, but how is it possible to pass all tests with v1.0.0 per https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/gateway-api/pull/2535/files#r1378650459? |
/hold for clarification |
@robscott the current code in v1.0.0 made an extra assertion that the Route is not |
Thanks @arkodg! I guess the question was how that test could pass (Accepted == false) at the same time as a nearly identical test that requires Accepted to be true:
Just trying to understand the difference here when this seems to be a blocker for many implementations to pass conformance on v1.0.0. Maybe Envoy Gateway is making a distinction between the two test cases that other implementations are not? |
Envoy Gateway defines its own custom reason (for the Route) for this case/test-
The listener is not ready in this test because the cert is invalid
|
Got it, makes sense, thanks for the explanation @arkodg! /hold cancel |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: arkodg, robscott, tao12345666333, Xunzhuo 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 |
What type of PR is this?
/area conformance
What this PR does / why we need it:
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #2557
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: