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

Bug 1659970: data/aws/route53: Block private Route 53 zone on public record #1508

Merged

Conversation

wking
Copy link
Member

@wking wking commented Apr 1, 2019

We've been using the tagged private zone to look up the public zone since the non-Terraform destroy code landed in a8fc89b (#324). When there's an existing cluster with a given domain, that can lead to false-positive removals like:

  1. Cluster 1 comes up like usual.
  2. Cluster 2 creates a private zone.
  3. Cluster 2 dies when its public record conflicts with cluster 1 (new since d1c17b7, Bug 1659970: terraform/exec/plugins/vendor: Bump terraform-provider-aws to v2.2.0 #1442).
  4. 'destroy cluster' on cluster 2's metadata.json removes cluster 2 resources (good) and cluster 1's public record (bad).

With the explicit dependency in this commit, we ensure that we only ever create the private zone after we have successfully claimed ownership of the public record.

We've been using the tagged private zone to look up the public zone
since the non-Terraform destroy code landed in a8fc89b (vendor: add
aws deprovision, openshift#324).  When there's an existing cluster with a given
domain, that can lead to false-positive removals like [1]:

1. Cluster 1 comes up like usual.
2. Cluster 2 creates a private zone.
3. Cluster 2 dies when its public record conflicts with cluster 1 (new
   since d1c17b7, terraform/exec/plugins/vendor: Bump
   terraform-provider-aws to v2.2.0, 2019-03-19, openshift#1442).
4. 'destroy cluster' on cluster 2's metadata.json removes cluster 2
   resources (good) and cluster 1's public record (bad).

With the explicit dependency in this commit, we ensure that we only
ever create the private zone after we have successfully claimed
ownership of the public record.

[1]: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1659970#c7
@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Apr 1, 2019
@abhinavdahiya
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci-robot openshift-ci-robot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Apr 1, 2019
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: abhinavdahiya, wking

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:
  • OWNERS [abhinavdahiya,wking]

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

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit bd9d357 into openshift:master Apr 1, 2019
@wking wking deleted the private-route53-after-public branch April 1, 2019 18:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants