-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.5k
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 a way to deploy cilium alongside another CNI #6373
Add a way to deploy cilium alongside another CNI #6373
Conversation
Hi @MrFreezeex. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. |
0faf88d
to
921b961
Compare
921b961
to
df49807
Compare
@MrFreezeex Don't you also want to add check in download role (where cilium is checked) ? |
/ok-to-test |
Signed-off-by: Arthur Outhenin-Chalandre <[email protected]>
df49807
to
b01903b
Compare
@floryut Indeed thanks for the reminder! I updated my PR accordingly. I will also send another PR to update the minimum kernel version. |
love it! And I even think flannel could be setup the same way as it can be used along with other CNIs (like calico) /lgtm |
I like the idea, but I think it will be easy to forget about the Would |
I also thought about It too, but I preferred to make It this way to have a smaller PR and because I think a list of network plugin would be a bit overkill for a special case like that. It is however true that It would be easier in term of maintainability to have no special case at all... I can update my PR to have a list of network plugin but the patchset would be significantly larger. WDYT ? |
/approve There was a discussion on Slack about this, good enough for now. |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Miouge1, MrFreezeex 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 |
* 'master' of https://github.com/kubernetes-sigs/kubespray: Add a way to deploy cilium alongside another CNI (kubernetes-sigs#6373) Cleanup old build-cephfs-provisioner.yml playbook (kubernetes-sigs#6418) Always enable GitLab CI artifacts for cluster-dump (kubernetes-sigs#6412) Remove allow-release-candidate-upgrades already include in experimental-upgrades flag (kubernetes-sigs#6349) add calico-node selinux (kubernetes-sigs#6359) Add oomichi to reviwers of MetalLB addon (kubernetes-sigs#6393) Respect kube_override_hostname during removal/upgrade (kubernetes-sigs#6347) Fixed fedora modular repos activation for fcos (kubernetes-sigs#6300) Fix kube-proxy post deployment removal (kubernetes-sigs#5554) Remove old csi-attacher flag and fix RBAC for Cinder CSI (kubernetes-sigs#6358) Update cilium minimum kernel preinstall check (kubernetes-sigs#6376) Add readiness probe to dns-autoscaler (kubernetes-sigs#6382) Add Fedora CoreOS kubevirt image for tests (kubernetes-sigs#6337) allow kubeadm to upgrade etcd (kubernetes-sigs#6345) crio: harden downloads with retry (kubernetes-sigs#6374) Add workaround with include_task for mitogen (kubernetes-sigs#6312)
Signed-off-by: Arthur Outhenin-Chalandre <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Arthur Outhenin-Chalandre [email protected]
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
This add a simple way to deploy Cilium alongside another CNI.
With this (and my others PR #5554 and #6334) kubespray could deploy cilium as a replacement for kube-proxy alongside other CNI to benefit from all the features of cilium (observability, high performance with eBPF/XDP/...).
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #
Special notes for your reviewer:
I added a simple exception for cilium because I believe It is the only CNI that can replace kube-proxy while running with another CNI (or at least I didn't see any documentation for It in others CNI).
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: