Networking APIs graduation to v1

[whitneygriffith]

As discussed in Release Channels RFC, v1beta1 networking APIs can be promoted to v1.

[istio-policy-bot]

😊 Welcome @whitneygriffith! This is either your first contribution to the Istio api repo, or it's been
a while since you've been here.

You can learn more about the Istio working groups, Code of Conduct, and contribution guidelines
by referring to Contributing to Istio.

Thanks for contributing!

Courtesy of your friendly welcome wagon.

[whitneygriffith]

/test release-notes

[linsun]

Do we feel all network APIs (excluding proxyconfig) can be promoted to v1? Feel some are newer and less used, for example workload entry and workload group.

[costinm]

WorkloadEntry and group are newer - but that's because they are improvements to ServiceEntry, and replace the 'mesh expansion' use in ServiceEntry based on what we learned. It would be pretty bad to promote ServiceEntry to v1 ( with the parts we know are obsolete and should be replaced with WE ) and not promote WE. I'm pretty concerned with the user perception that everything in the API is covered by v1 - we have plenty of fields that are obsolete like the SE endpoints ( replaced by WE), and other fields that got added as 'experimental'. Old doesn't (always) mean good, in particular in Istio APIs where we have no mechanism to make changes after 'experimental/alpha'.

…

On Thu, Mar 7, 2024 at 7:07 AM Lin Sun ***@***.***> wrote: Do we feel all network APIs can be promoted to v1? Feel some are newer and less used, for example workload entry and workload group. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3111 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAUR2QTJCTLW5PC7HZDON3YXB7DHAVCNFSM6AAAAABEJOLIM6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSOBTG4YTAMZZGY> . You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[keithmattix]

It would be pretty bad to promote ServiceEntry to v1 ( with the parts we
know are obsolete and should be replaced with WE ) and
not promote WE.

IIUC based on the PR, WorkloadEntry/Group are being promoted as well?

[whitneygriffith]

It would be pretty bad to promote ServiceEntry to v1 ( with the parts we
know are obsolete and should be replaced with WE )

If there is consensus on fields that should be deprecated I am not in opposition of promoting a subset of ServiceEntry fields to v1 .

The deprecated fields will be removed when the v1beta1 API is eventually deprecated as planned.

[costinm]

It would be great to remove some of the fields in ServiceEntry. Re. ProxyConfig - usage is low, I don't mind keeping it at beta or even deprecating it. However we should make sure that the annotation and mesh config are also treated as alpha/beta and don't get promoted. We have not discussed the status of annotations and labels.

…

On Fri, Mar 8, 2024 at 12:08 PM Whitney Griffith ***@***.***> wrote: It would be pretty bad to promote ServiceEntry to v1 ( with the parts we know are obsolete and should be replaced with WE ) If there is consensus on fields that should be deprecated I am not in opposition of promoting a subset of ServiceEntry fields to v1 . The deprecated fields will be removed when the v1beta1 API is eventually deprecated as planned <https://docs.google.com/document/d/1onST4-swbZE1UPCDMQm1c7T5rzYEn7Wo4uFNShz0kNw/edit#heading=h.ev9kkx8ollvx> . — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#3111 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAUR2VSWS5IRGO7TWBLAXLYXILD3AVCNFSM6AAAAABEJOLIM6VHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMYTSOBWGM2DSNBQGU> . You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[whitneygriffith]

It would be great to remove some of the fields in ServiceEntry. Re. ProxyConfig - usage is low, I don't mind keeping it at beta or even deprecating it. However we should make sure that the annotation and mesh config are also treated as alpha/beta and don't get promoted. We have not discussed the status of annotations and labels.

Which fields will you propose removing from ServiceEntry?

[whitneygriffith]

From today's working group meeting, we have agreed to promote all Networking APIs as is excepting ProxyConfig. Those changes have been made. PTAL

[hzxuzhonghu]

I am ok without proxyConfig

[ericvn]

These changes LGTM.

[howardjohn]

LGTM, we should get broad signoff like for the PA change though

[whitneygriffith]

LGTM, we should get broad signoff like for the PA change though

PTAL @nrjpoddar @therealmitchconnors @linsun

[linsun]

LGTM thanks @whitneygriffith

[louiscryan]

LGTM. Thanks @whitneygriffith

[whitneygriffith]

Thanks all! We are just waiting on one last approval to merge the changes.

[whitneygriffith]

Part of 173