DNM | WIP: PoC of sticky IPs for Kubernetes entities#377
Closed
maiqueb wants to merge 1 commit into
Closed
Conversation
Collaborator
Author
Signed-off-by: Miguel Duarte Barroso <mdbarroso@redhat.com>
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had |
This file contains hidden or 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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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 this PR does / why we need it:
This is a proof of concept of implementing sticky IP allocations for whereabouts.
Any interested party can use whereabouts to have persistent IP allocations across their workload lifecycle - e.g. KubeVirt VMs.
You indicate this whereabouts build you want to have persistent IPs for a certain allocation by specifying which enitity owns the allocation - in our case, the allocations are asked for a KubeVirt VM. Thus, the pod must be templated w/ the required CNI args:
We are using the
OverlappingRangeIPReservationto block the IP allocations (it is its purpose at the end of the day ...) but the "real" proposal will probably add a new CRD for the same function.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 #
Special notes for your reviewer (optional):