-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 377
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
NPL code tidy-up for Antrea v2.0 #5943
Conversation
docs/node-port-local.md
Outdated
@@ -137,6 +138,7 @@ annotation is deprecated. The array contains a single member, equal to the | |||
`protocol` field. | |||
The `protocols` field will be removed from Antrea for minor releases post March 2023, |
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.
Hi @jianjuns @antoninbas @tnqn according to the doc, this field is deprecated almost a year, could you suggest if we should remove the field protocols
in Antrea v2.0? Thanks.
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 I think we can remove it.
6aa01a2
to
2a05e7c
Compare
/test-windows-containerd-e2e |
docs/node-port-local.md
Outdated
The `protocols` field will be removed from Antrea for minor releases post March 2023, | ||
as per our deprecation policy. | ||
Starting from Antrea v2.0, the `protocols` field is removed. |
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.
I feel the whole content starting with "Starting from the Antrea v1.7 minor release, the protocols
field ..." can be removed. There seems no much value to detail the history of a removed field when there is already a "Usage pre Antrea v1.7" section.
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.
Done
PodPort: npl.PodPort, | ||
PodIP: pod.Status.PodIP, | ||
Protocol: npl.Protocol, | ||
Protocols: npl.Protocols, |
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.
We need to remove Protocols
of rules.PodNodePort
and stop using it in AddAllRules
. Otherwise AddAllRules
won't work, I'm curious why e2e tests didn't fail. #5917 can catch the issue but currently it has to expect wrong output.
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.
Removed.
The e2e codes are updated accordingly for the change in this PR and the PodNodePort
is not used before in NPL e2e test cases.
2a05e7c
to
1f943f7
Compare
#5917 has been merged, the PR needs to rebase on main and fix the new unit test. |
1f943f7
to
042b422
Compare
Signed-off-by: Lan Luo <[email protected]>
042b422
to
f12c5f9
Compare
@tnqn the unit test failure is fixed, could you take a look again? Thanks. |
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.
LGTM
/test-all |
For #5070