This repository has been archived by the owner on Jul 11, 2023. It is now read-only.
ref(cert): update Manager to support mult clients #4705
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Supports multiple clients in Manager struct. Refactoring as a part of the root cert rotation work. During root cert rotation, there will be 2 CertManagers - the CertManager being rotated in and the CertManager being rotated out as specified in the MeshRootCertificates. Part of openservicemesh#4502 Signed-off-by: jaellio <[email protected]>
jaellio
force-pushed
the
certMangerMultClient
branch
from
6c09513 to
bdb3e5f
Compare
Signed-off-by: jaellio <[email protected]>
steeling
reviewed
May 2, 2022
Codecov Report
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## main #4705 +/- ##
==========================================
+ Coverage 69.45% 69.56% +0.10%
==========================================
Files 217 218 +1
Lines 15490 15595 +105
==========================================
+ Hits 10759 10848 +89
- Misses 4681 4697 +16
Partials 50 50
Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.
Continue to review full report at Codecov.
|
steeling
approved these changes
May 3, 2022
| @@ -30,6 +30,21 @@ const ( | |||
|
|
|||
| // New constructs a new certificate client using Vault's cert-manager | |||
| func New(vaultAddr, token, role string) (*CertManager, error) { | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
not a big deal, but you could keep these as one function
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I split this up in order to make the client creation (without adding the root certificate) testable. Do you have any suggestions for how to keep this a single function without requiring too much refactoring of the tests?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
oh i see. Ya you can leave as is.
Alternatively you could do something like
// package level
type getRootCAFunc func(c *CertManager)
var getRootCA = func() {...} // fill in with current getRootCa (not a function not a method)
then in tests, before running:
getRootCA = func(){...} // overridden for testing
Up to you!
Signed-off-by: jaellio <[email protected]>
jaellio
requested review from
shashankram,
snehachhabria,
nojnhuh,
draychev and
trstringer
as code owners
Signed-off-by: jaellio <[email protected]>
steeling
approved these changes
May 4, 2022
nojnhuh
approved these changes
May 4, 2022
Signed-off-by: jaellio <[email protected]>
shashankram
approved these changes
May 6, 2022
30 tasks
Sign up for free
to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Description:
Supports multiple clients in Manager struct. Refactoring
as a part of the root cert rotation work. During root cert
rotation, there will be 2 CertManagers - the CertManager
being rotated in and the CertManager being rotated out as
specified in the MeshRootCertificates.
The ca is moved from the Manager to the CertManagers
for each cert provider.
Part of #4502
Testing done:
Affected area:
Please answer the following questions with yes/no.
Does this change contain code from or inspired by another project? no
Is this a breaking change? no
Has documentation corresponding to this change been updated in the osm-docs repo (if applicable)?