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

🐛 fix: create ingress rules from all load balancers #4866

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Apr 1, 2024

Conversation

r4f4
Copy link
Contributor

@r4f4 r4f4 commented Mar 13, 2024

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:
Makes sure that ingress rules from all load balancers are created.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #4865

Special notes for your reviewer:

Checklist:

  • squashed commits
  • includes documentation
  • includes emojis
  • adds unit tests
  • adds or updates e2e tests

Release note:

Fixed a bug where ingress rules specified in the secondary load balancer were not applied to the security group.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added do-not-merge/invalid-commit-message Indicates that a PR should not merge because it has an invalid commit message. kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. needs-priority labels Mar 13, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Welcome @r4f4!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api-provider-aws 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api-provider-aws has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. label Mar 13, 2024
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @r4f4. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files. label Mar 13, 2024
@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Mar 13, 2024

/ok-to-test

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. and removed needs-ok-to-test Indicates a PR that requires an org member to verify it is safe to test. labels Mar 13, 2024
@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Mar 13, 2024

Looks like there's a lint fix needed. Also, could you please add a release note for the fix?

Otherwise, it looks good, thanks!

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. and removed do-not-merge/release-note-label-needed Indicates that a PR should not merge because it's missing one of the release note labels. labels Mar 13, 2024
r4f4 added 2 commits March 13, 2024 21:37
Ingress rules from both primary and secondary load balancers must be
taken into account.
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the do-not-merge/invalid-commit-message Indicates that a PR should not merge because it has an invalid commit message. label Mar 13, 2024
@r4f4
Copy link
Contributor Author

r4f4 commented Mar 13, 2024

Update: fixed linting issues, commit message issue and added a release note.

@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Mar 14, 2024

/lgtm
/test pull-cluster-api-provider-aws-e2e

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Mar 14, 2024
@Ankitasw Ankitasw added the kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API label Mar 22, 2024
@Ankitasw
Copy link
Member

Since this is an api-change, shall we wait for v1beta3 to take this change?

@vincepri
Copy link
Member

@Ankitasw It shouldn't impact v1beta3 as far as I can tell, the code is mostly cleaned up here and an older function deprecated, which should be backward compatible

@Ankitasw
Copy link
Member

/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: Ankitasw

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Mar 27, 2024
@nrb
Copy link
Contributor

nrb commented Mar 27, 2024

/milestone v2.4.next

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@nrb: You must be a member of the kubernetes-sigs/cluster-api-provider-aws-maintainers GitHub team to set the milestone. If you believe you should be able to issue the /milestone command, please contact your Cluster API Provider AWS Maintainers and have them propose you as an additional delegate for this responsibility.

In response to this:

/milestone v2.4.next

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

@vincepri
Copy link
Member

vincepri commented Apr 1, 2024

/retest

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit 6afad25 into kubernetes-sigs:main Apr 1, 2024
21 checks passed
@damdo
Copy link
Member

damdo commented Apr 8, 2024

/cherry-pick release-2.4

@k8s-infra-cherrypick-robot

@damdo: new pull request created: #4913

In response to this:

/cherry-pick release-2.4

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

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. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority ok-to-test Indicates a non-member PR verified by an org member that is safe to test. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. size/L Denotes a PR that changes 100-499 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

SecondaryControlPlaneLoadbalancer ingress rules not applied
7 participants