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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Treatment of overlapping ServiceCIDR and PodCIDRs #16340

Open
justinsb opened this issue Feb 10, 2024 · 2 comments
Open

Treatment of overlapping ServiceCIDR and PodCIDRs #16340

justinsb opened this issue Feb 10, 2024 · 2 comments
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.

Comments

@justinsb
Copy link
Member

justinsb commented Feb 10, 2024 •
edited

We may have introduced a regression, where previously overlapping ServiceCIDR and PodCIDRs were allowed, and now they are blocked by validation.

It does seem that the node-podCIDR allocation logic in kube-controller-manager automatically excludes the ServiceCIDR, so that an overlap should not give a conflict in practice (though we probably still want to discourage it). For example:
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/98b589a76d57a137d91afc487304d0f699c23288/pkg/controller/nodeipam/ipam/range_allocator.go#L103

/kind bug

(Edited to change "should yield a conflict" to "should not give a conflict" - doh!)
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. label Feb 10, 2024
@justinsb justinsb mentioned this issue Feb 10, 2024
Merged
@minkimipt
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @justinsb for creating the issue.

justinsb added a commit to justinsb/kops that referenced this issue Feb 10, 2024
@justinsb
validation: Allow overlap of pod/node CIDR and service CIDR
3719027 
We allowed this previously, so this is a regression for existing clusters.

These clusters are not obviously broken, and the
kube-controller-manager (for example) will exclude the service range
when issuing node CIDRs.  As such, remove validation until we can
determine if anything is actually broken by an overlap (and a path
forwards if so).

Issue kubernetes#16340
@justinsb justinsb mentioned this issue Feb 10, 2024
Merged
hakman pushed a commit to hakman/kops that referenced this issue Feb 11, 2024
@justinsb @hakman
validation: Allow overlap of pod/node CIDR and service CIDR
a1bba9d 
We allowed this previously, so this is a regression for existing clusters.

These clusters are not obviously broken, and the
kube-controller-manager (for example) will exclude the service range
when issuing node CIDRs.  As such, remove validation until we can
determine if anything is actually broken by an overlap (and a path
forwards if so).

Issue kubernetes#16340
@k8s-triage-robot
Copy link

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues.

This bot triages un-triaged issues according to the following rules:

  • After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
  • After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

  • Mark this issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
  • Close this issue with /close
  • Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label May 10, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
kind/bug Categorizes issue or PR as related to a bug. lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
4 participants
@justinsb @minkimipt @k8s-ci-robot @k8s-triage-robot