-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 23
Conversation
456a9b7
to
1d6e167
Compare
1d6e167
to
e7deb29
Compare
e7deb29
to
19ca30f
Compare
19ca30f
to
4da904f
Compare
5acb068
to
f1ed226
Compare
f1ed226
to
e6f428c
Compare
Few small comments/suggestions, but i think this is looking good. I'm not sure if |
Would you have a better place/name in mind for the GatewayWrapper package? 🤔 don't like either of those but couldn't come up with a better place and name |
a225537
to
79cb6b4
Compare
/lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: makslion, mikenairn 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 |
From the original only 1 task is left that are covered here: validate Gateway CR when it arrives for the reconciliation loop and add a test for an invalid Gateway.
In this context invalid == has a mixture single- and multicluster addresses. We expect only one type of addresses to be present at the Gateway CR.
I'm also giving a second life to the
traffic.Gateway
transforming it into theutils.GatewayWrapper
to preform the mentioned check. Keeping it separate from main packages forcloses #496