-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
KEP-3488: CEL admission: Add graceful rollout, warning and audit support #3732
KEP-3488: CEL admission: Add graceful rollout, warning and audit support #3732
Conversation
jpbetz
commented
Jan 12, 2023
- One-line PR description: Update the CEL admission KEP to support graceful policy rollout by adding ability to report validation failures only as warnings or audit annotations and for enhancing metrics to container the information needed to monitor a rollout.
- Issue link: KEP-3488: CEL Admission Control #3492
73776a7
to
21cade5
Compare
cc @liggitt |
LGTM but two comments for you to look at first |
Feedback applied. I've left some of the comment threads open where further discussion might be needed. |
da481d5
to
2edd5fc
Compare
db6abf8
to
87615fc
Compare
thanks for the update, I did a quick sweep and my open questions were resolved |
"kind": "Event", | ||
"apiVersion": "audit.k8s.io/v1", | ||
"annotations": { | ||
"mypolicy.mygroup.example.com/validation_failure": "{\"expression\": 1, \"message\": \"x must be greater than y\", \"enforcement\": \"Deny\", \"binding\": \"mybinding.mygroup.example.com\"}" |
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.
not something you need to address here, but I'm starting to worry that we're overusing audit annotations, and should start moving more metadata like this to dedicated fields.
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.
Good point. I'm not satisfied with how the value payload works here. I'll admit to following precedence of other audit annotations rather than trying to re-think it. That said, I'd be okay with restructuring this. Any recommendations?
Thanks @tallclair, I've incorporated the feedback into the KEP. I've left some of the comments open until you've gotten a chance to respond. |
@lavalamp this is ready for another approver pass. |
Co-authored-by: Daniel Smith <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Daniel Smith <[email protected]>
Thanks @lavalamp, feedback applied. |
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: jpbetz, lavalamp 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 |