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 docs for clusterset IP feature #1181

Merged
merged 4 commits into from
Nov 20, 2024

Conversation

tpantelis
Copy link
Contributor

User guide and subctl commands.

@submariner-bot
Copy link

🤖 Created branch: z_pr1181/tpantelis/clusterset_ip

Comment on lines 695 to 696
Lighthouse DNS will return the cluster set virtual IP from queries instead of a constituent cluster IP address. However, Submariner
does not perform load balancing and relies on some external component to do so.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

This gives the impression that the virtual IP won’t work unless the user does something else — is that so?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

yes. This is for Istio support - they need a VIP and will handle the rest. We could also not document this feature.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

How is the routing handled for the virtualIP? Are we adding any iptable rules to support the datapath?

Lighthouse DNS will return the cluster set virtual IP from queries instead of a constituent cluster IP address. However, Submariner does not perform load balancing and relies on some external component to do so.

Normally when we return the clusterIP itself (or the associated GlobalIngressIP) kube-proxy does the load-balancing once the remote traffic lands in the local cluster (where the service is exprted). Can you please eloborate how this use-case works with virtualIP?

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Currently we're not doing any routing. This feature currently will be used only by Istio and it will take care of routing. Current submariner connectivity doesn't support this use case.

This use case can also be used by someone using Lighthouse-only for MCS service discovery and using their own MCS controller for datapath.

Copy link
Member

@skitt skitt Sep 30, 2024

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It seems to me that this should be documented because users could end up shooting themselves in the foot.

Can we make the caveat more general? It’s not just load balancing, it’s any kind of routing.

Suggested change
Lighthouse DNS will return the cluster set virtual IP from queries instead of a constituent cluster IP address. However, Submariner
does not perform load balancing and relies on some external component to do so.
Lighthouse DNS will return the cluster set virtual IP from queries instead of a constituent cluster IP address. However, Submariner
does not route this virtual IP and relies on some external component to do so.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Currently we're not doing any routing. This feature currently will be used only by Istio and it will take care of routing. Current submariner connectivity doesn't support this use case.

Can you point me to any links/doc on how this will be used in Istio?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Can you point me to any links/doc on how this will be used in Istio?

The use case was presented on an App Eng Exchange call a few weeks ago. The only doc I know of is https://docs.google.com/document/d/1RXjvYTKMKDFM8KNI9X3HT5M6oqKKwkMde7GeuKLD93Q/edit#heading=h.7mxk48pcmgyk shared by Jacek Ewertowski.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

0.19.0 has been released so revisiting this PR. @sridhargaddam Have you been able to review the Istio use case?

User guide and subctl commands.

Signed-off-by: Tom Pantelis <[email protected]>
Copy link

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further
activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Oct 15, 2024
@tpantelis tpantelis removed the stale label Oct 15, 2024
@tpantelis tpantelis marked this pull request as ready for review October 25, 2024 14:53
Copy link

github-actions bot commented Nov 9, 2024

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further
activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the stale label Nov 9, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot removed the stale label Nov 12, 2024
@tpantelis tpantelis enabled auto-merge (rebase) November 20, 2024 16:08
@tpantelis tpantelis merged commit 223d09d into submariner-io:devel Nov 20, 2024
9 checks passed
@submariner-bot
Copy link

🤖 Closed branches: [z_pr1181/tpantelis/clusterset_ip]

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.

7 participants