Skip to content
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

Add http- prefix to port names to resolve similar issue to PR-1862 #2018

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

dcw329
Copy link

@dcw329 dcw329 commented Aug 7, 2022

Which problem is this PR solving?

jaegertracing/helm-charts#344 (comment) (partially)

Short description of the changes

Adding a prefix to service port names, resolves issues with istioctl

istioctl analyze
Info [IST0118] (Service istio-system/jaeger-operator-webhook-service) Port name  (port: 443, targetPort: 9443) doesn't follow the naming convention of Istio port.
Info [IST0118] (Service istio-system/streaming-jaeger-collector-headless) Port name otlp-grpc (port: 4317, targetPort: 4317) doesn't follow the naming convention of Istio port.
Info [IST0118] (Service istio-system/streaming-jaeger-collector-headless) Port name otlp-http (port: 4318, targetPort: 4318) doesn't follow the naming convention of Istio port.
Info [IST0118] (Service istio-system/streaming-jaeger-collector) Port name otlp-grpc (port: 4317, targetPort: 4317) doesn't follow the naming convention of Istio port.
Info [IST0118] (Service istio-system/streaming-jaeger-collector) Port name otlp-http (port: 4318, targetPort: 4318) doesn't follow the naming convention of Istio port.

@dcw329
Copy link
Author

dcw329 commented Aug 7, 2022

I am installing default istioctl istio, and jaeger via jaeger operator. Failing on istioctl analyze with above error.

istioctl version
client version: 1.14.2
control plane version: 1.14.2
data plane version: 1.14.2

I dont think this requires additional discussion. It just seems the prior PR was not a complete one to resolve the naming issue.

More Istio Documentation
https://istio.io/v1.5/docs/reference/config/analysis/ist0118/
https://istio.io/latest/about/faq/#naming-port-convention

@iblancasa
Copy link
Collaborator

@dcw329, could you take a look to the failing PR checks? I think you need to sign off your commits

@frzifus
Copy link
Member

frzifus commented Aug 18, 2022

hi @dcw329 thanks for your contribution. To continue you need to sign off your commits. [contributing-code]

2. All commits in the PR must be signed (verified by the DCO check on GitHub).

@codecov
Copy link

codecov bot commented Aug 18, 2022

Codecov Report

Base: 88.28% // Head: 88.28% // No change to project coverage 👍

Coverage data is based on head (288345b) compared to base (53f3e0a).
Patch coverage: 100.00% of modified lines in pull request are covered.

Additional details and impacted files
@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #2018   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   88.28%   88.28%           
=======================================
  Files         100      100           
  Lines        6437     6437           
=======================================
  Hits         5683     5683           
  Misses        556      556           
  Partials      198      198           
Impacted Files Coverage Δ
pkg/deployment/otlp.go 88.23% <100.00%> (ø)
pkg/service/collector.go 98.87% <100.00%> (ø)

☔ View full report at Codecov.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

@frzifus
Copy link
Member

frzifus commented Sep 6, 2022

hi @dcw329, could you please have a look?

@frzifus
Copy link
Member

frzifus commented Sep 16, 2022

Closed as inactive. Feel free to reopen if this PR is still being worked on.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants