Clean up the vip when delete cluster or nodes #1496
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
ks-ci-bot
added
kind/feature
|
/lgtm |
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: 021dc84cab472eeafc2e4eb4484d023842ecb07b
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: 24sama, zhouqiu0103 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 |
ks-ci-bot
added
the
approved
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
When a highly available cluster created with kube-vip is deleted,the cluster's network interface will retain the vip,so the vip needs to be cleaned up.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for reviewers:
Does this PR introduced a user-facing change?
Additional documentation, usage docs, etc.: