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

Consider supporting GC verb and STATUS verb added in CNI v1.2.0 #6348

Open
tnqn opened this issue May 20, 2024 · 3 comments
Open

Consider supporting GC verb and STATUS verb added in CNI v1.2.0 #6348

tnqn opened this issue May 20, 2024 · 3 comments
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence.

Comments

@tnqn
Copy link
Member

tnqn commented May 20, 2024

Describe what you are trying to solve

CNI v1.2.0 adds two new verbs:

GC verb
The GC verb allows runtimes to specify the set of known-good attachments, allowing plugins to clean up stale and leaked resources such as IPAM reservations. Libcni will also synthesize a CNI DEL for any stale cached attachments, so all users will have a form of GC, even if their plugins do not support CNI v1.1

STATUS verb
The STATUS verb allows a plugin to report its readiness to accept ADD requests. Runtimes such as containerd and cri-o will no longer have to rely merely on the presence of a CNI configuration file to determine network readiness.

If runtimes have supported them, we could consider implementing them to better integrate with runtimes.

@tnqn tnqn added kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence. labels May 20, 2024
@antoninbas
Copy link
Contributor

It would be nice if GC was implemented for the host-local plugin.
It could essentially replace this custom code that we had to write: https://github.com/antrea-io/antrea/blob/main/pkg/agent/cniserver/ipam/hostlocal/gc.go
I opened an issue for this: containernetworking/plugins#1047

Copy link
Contributor

This issue is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment, or this will be closed in 90 days

@github-actions github-actions bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 19, 2024
@tnqn tnqn removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Aug 19, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This issue is stale because it has been open 90 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment, or this will be closed in 90 days. You can add a label "lifecycle/frozen" to skip stale checking.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 18, 2024
@antoninbas antoninbas removed the lifecycle/stale Denotes an issue or PR has remained open with no activity and has become stale. label Nov 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
kind/feature Categorizes issue or PR as related to a new feature. priority/backlog Higher priority than priority/awaiting-more-evidence.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants