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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Restore secure-verify-ca-secret annotation docs #3484

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from
Closed

Restore secure-verify-ca-secret annotation docs #3484

wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

gorshunovr
Copy link
Contributor

What this PR does / why we need it: this PR restores secure-verify-ca-secret annotation docs added in #2169, which were removed in #3203.

Which issue this PR fixes: n/a

Special notes for your reviewer: n/a

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. labels Nov 28, 2018
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: gorshunovr
To fully approve this pull request, please assign additional approvers.
We suggest the following additional approver: bowei

If they are not already assigned, you can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @bowei in a comment when ready.

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 /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@gorshunovr
Copy link
Contributor Author

I kindly ask developers to re-confirm in the source code correctness of the statement below during the review process:

If an invalid or non-existent secret is given, the NGINX ingress controller will ignore the ssl-passthrough annotation.

Thank you.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 3, 2018

Hello team. Please, add assignee and review. This is a documentation change only. Thank you.

1 similar comment
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Dec 8, 2018

Hello team. Please, add assignee and review. This is a documentation change only. Thank you.

aledbf
aledbf reviewed Dec 22, 2018
View reviewed changes
docs/user-guide/nginx-configuration/annotations.md
If you want to validate the upstream against a specific certificate, you can create a secret with it and reference the secret with the annotation `nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/secure-verify-ca-secret`.

!!! note
If an invalid or non-existent secret is given, the NGINX ingress controller will ignore the `ssl-passthrough` annotation.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

This is not correct. Using ssl-passthrough annotation bypasses ningx and any other annotation is omitted (we already mention this in the docs)

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Thank you for the review, Manuel.
Then how is secure-verify-ca-secret defined in internal/ingress/annotations/secureupstream/main.go supposed to work?

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Is this still needed, or can be closed as invalid? Or is it valid (see previous comment)? Thanks!

Copy link

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I just checked the upstream docs and doens't say anything in them but that the annotation nginx.ingress.kubernetes.io/secure-verify-ca-secret exists but not how to use it. So, I think this is still valid/needed.

I've been waiting for that annotation for a while now actually, but never found it till now.

@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Mar 25, 2019
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. and removed lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. labels May 1, 2019
@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 1, 2019

Is this still needed, or can be closed as invalid? Or is it valid (see previous comment)? Thanks!

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 2, 2019

/remove-lifecycle stale

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 2, 2019

/remove-lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label May 2, 2019
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Jul 31, 2019
@gorshunovr
Copy link
Contributor Author

/remove-lifecycle rotten

@gorshunovr
Copy link
Contributor Author

secure-verify-ca-secret annotation docs are still missing. Please, review. Thank you.

@gorshunovr
Copy link
Contributor Author

/remove-lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 2, 2019
@ramosbugs ramosbugs mentioned this pull request Oct 1, 2019
Closed
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale.
Stale issues rot after an additional 30d of inactivity and eventually close.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle stale

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Oct 31, 2019
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Stale issues rot after 30d of inactivity.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.
Rotten issues close after an additional 30d of inactivity.

If this issue is safe to close now please do so with /close.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/lifecycle rotten

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 30, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. label Nov 30, 2019
@fejta-bot
Copy link

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/close

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@gorshunovr: PR needs rebase.

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.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. label Dec 30, 2019
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@fejta-bot: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

Rotten issues close after 30d of inactivity.
Reopen the issue with /reopen.
Mark the issue as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten.

Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta.
/close

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.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@kfox1111 kfox1111 kfox1111 left review comments

@aledbf aledbf aledbf left review comments

@antoineco antoineco Awaiting requested review from antoineco

@ElvinEfendi ElvinEfendi Awaiting requested review from ElvinEfendi

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. lifecycle/rotten Denotes an issue or PR that has aged beyond stale and will be auto-closed. needs-rebase Indicates a PR cannot be merged because it has merge conflicts with HEAD. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
5 participants
@gorshunovr @k8s-ci-robot @fejta-bot @aledbf @kfox1111