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.

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

CCM may not work when Instances or InstancesV2 isn't implemented #72

Open
xagent003 opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 0 comments
Open

CCM may not work when Instances or InstancesV2 isn't implemented #72

xagent003 opened this issue Jul 22, 2024 · 0 comments

Comments

@xagent003
Copy link

Usecase: We want to use the CCM for LBaaS. We don't have and/or don't want to implement a cloud compute API. The LBaaS functionality just relies on the Service and Node resources.

So kubelet taints the nodes when they come up, until the CCM does it's initialization.

However the CCM expects either Instances or InstancesV2 to be implemented to fetch some metadata. If neither are implemented or the metadata returned is nil, it returns an error here:

return nil, fmt.Errorf("failed to get instances from cloud provider")

syncNode returns prematurely here if metadata is nil or there is an error:

As a result, it never gets here to remove the taint from the node and update the Node:

n.Spec.Taints = excludeCloudTaint(n.Spec.Taints)

Therefore the node remains tainted and unuseable. But if you look at the code, it seems like the instances metadata can be empty - just not nil. I think syncNode should work if Instances is not implemented - is there any absolute requirement on instances/instance metadata when we want to leverage CCM just for loadbalancers?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant