-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
promote ServiceNodePortStaticSubrange to stable #4158
Conversation
xuzhenglun
commented
Aug 22, 2023
- One-line PR description: KEP-3668: promote to stable
- Issue link: Reserve nodeport ranges for dynamic and static allocation #3668
- Other comments:
/lgtm |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
One minor comment from PRR side - other than that LGTM.
- No issues reported during two releases. | ||
- No issues reported during one release. This is because the feature is built on the top of | ||
[ServiceIPStaticSubrange](https://kep.k8s.io/3070), which has been GA since v1.26. | ||
Consequently, there is no need for any additional probation period. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can't comment on unchanged lines, so commenting here:
L367: have those metrics been added? If so, please update, if not, I would like to see them added before approving GA graduation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes, those metrics have been added in 1.27.
https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/114418/files#diff-5532df35d48ad268e48b9761bd16d6c1204a7fa05cfd97afffcf47008ba012f7R31
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you please update the wording in the PRR to reflect that?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It's updated.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thanks!
/lgtm
/approve
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, thockin, wojtek-t, xuzhenglun 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 |