Addressing v0.8.0 API Review feedback #2261
Merged
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
k8s-ci-robot
added
release-note-none
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
size/M
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
approved
robscott
commented
Aug 4, 2023
Comment on lines
-73
to
+86
| // Port, and Protocol. Below combinations are considered Core and MUST be | ||
| // supported: | ||
| // Port, and Protocol. | ||
| // | ||
| // Within the HTTP Conformance Profile, the below combinations of port and | ||
| // protocol are considered Core and MUST be supported: | ||
| // | ||
| // 1. Port: 80, Protocol: HTTP | ||
| // 2. Port: 443, Protocol: HTTPS | ||
| // | ||
| // Port and protocol combinations not in this list are considered Extended. | ||
| // Within the TLS Conformance Profile, the below combinations of port and | ||
| // protocol are considered Core and MUST be supported: | ||
| // | ||
| // 1. Port: 443, Protocol: TLS | ||
| // | ||
| // Port and protocol combinations not listed above are considered Extended. |
robscott
commented
Aug 4, 2023
| @@ -25,7 +25,7 @@ import ( | |||
| // with "Core" support: | |||
| // | |||
| // * Gateway (Gateway conformance profile) | |||
| // * Service (Mesh conformance profile) | |||
| // * Service (Mesh conformance profile, experimental, ClusterIP Services only) | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Does this update line up with what we're targeting for GAMMA?
k8s-ci-robot
requested review from
howardjohn,
keithmattix,
kflynn and
mikemorris
|
/hold for consensus |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
do-not-merge/hold
youngnick
reviewed
Aug 7, 2023
Comment on lines
-73
to
+86
| // Port, and Protocol. Below combinations are considered Core and MUST be | ||
| // supported: | ||
| // Port, and Protocol. | ||
| // | ||
| // Within the HTTP Conformance Profile, the below combinations of port and | ||
| // protocol are considered Core and MUST be supported: | ||
| // | ||
| // 1. Port: 80, Protocol: HTTP | ||
| // 2. Port: 443, Protocol: HTTPS | ||
| // | ||
| // Port and protocol combinations not in this list are considered Extended. | ||
| // Within the TLS Conformance Profile, the below combinations of port and | ||
| // protocol are considered Core and MUST be supported: | ||
| // | ||
| // 1. Port: 443, Protocol: TLS | ||
| // | ||
| // Port and protocol combinations not listed above are considered Extended. |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
keithmattix
approved these changes
Aug 7, 2023
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: keithmattix, robscott 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 |
|
/hold cancel |
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
do-not-merge/hold
k8s-ci-robot
removed
the
lgtm
|
/lgtm |
k8s-ci-robot
added
the
lgtm
Closed
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 type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup
What this PR does / why we need it:
This addresses feedback from #2245.
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: