Only insert hostnames if not present for internal broadcast addrs #455
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
inespot
reviewed
Nov 22, 2023
| @@ -1398,6 +1398,7 @@ public static void setCrossVpcInternodeCommunication(boolean setting) | |||
| conf.cross_vpc_internode_communication_enabled = setting; | |||
| } | |||
|
|
|||
| @Deprecated | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Let's file a github issue to remove this entirely at some point?
inespot
reviewed
Nov 22, 2023
| if (DatabaseDescriptor.isCrossVpcIpSwappingEnabled() && privatePublicIpMappings.containsKey(proposedAddress)) { | ||
| return maybeSwapIp(endpoint); | ||
| if (DatabaseDescriptor.isCrossVpcHostnameSwappingEnabled() && privateIpToHostname.containsKey(proposedAddress)) { | ||
| return maybeInsertHostname(endpoint); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: { should be on the next line
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same thing on a couple other places in this class
inespot
approved these changes
Nov 22, 2023
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
We discovered that two hostnames in a separate VPC can resolve to the same proxy IP and we were mistakenly swapping them, since we were tracking proxy/public IPs as well as private/broadcast addresses.
This PR rips out some direct IP-mapping logic, as it was quite convoluted, and focuses on hostname-related mapping only.
We now only track internal IP / broadcast address -> hostname, and will only update the endpoint we are trying to hit if the InetAddress does not contain a hostname, or has a hostname + endpoint which is from the other VPC (and therefore in our map).
If there is a hostname + we do not have the IP in the map, it must be a "public" / proxy IP, so we should leave the InetAddress as-is.
example:
For a node in another VPC hostA with broadcast address 10.100.0.1 that resolves to 10.9.0.1, 10.9.0.2, and 10.9.0.3 in the other VPC, you could have the following: