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

core/v1: deprecate Service topologyKeys #96736

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Dec 9, 2020
Merged

core/v1: deprecate Service topologyKeys #96736

merged 1 commit into from Dec 9, 2020

Conversation

andrewsykim
Copy link
Member

@andrewsykim andrewsykim commented Nov 20, 2020 •
edited

Signed-off-by: Andrew Sy Kim kim.andrewsy@gmail.com

What type of PR is this?
/kind deprecation

What this PR does / why we need it:
topologyKeys as an API is being deprecated in favor of two upcoming KEPs to be implemented in v1.21: Topology Aware Subsetting and Service Internal Traffic Policy.

Some of the limitations of topologyKeys and where it was lacking can be found in this thread: https://groups.google.com/g/kubernetes-sig-network/c/wXd1D_fKjqU.

Deprecation and eventual removal of this field should be feasible since it was alpha feature gated ever since it was introduced in v1.17.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

Deprecate the `topologyKeys` field in Service. This capability will be replaced with upcoming work around Topology Aware Subsetting and Service Internal Traffic Policy.

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

@andrewsykim
core/v1: deprecate Service topologyKeys
c753c48 
Signed-off-by: Andrew Sy Kim <kim.andrewsy@gmail.com>
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. kind/deprecation Categorizes issue or PR as related to a feature/enhancement marked for deprecation. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 20, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@andrewsykim: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

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 needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API sig/apps Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Apps. and removed do-not-merge/needs-sig Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `sig/foo` label and requires one. labels Nov 20, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

@andrewsykim: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: robsc.

Note that only kubernetes members, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

/assign @thockin @robsc

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.

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

/assign @thockin @robscott

@robscott
Copy link
Member

Thanks! We probably also need to update the KEP that goes along with topologyKeys.

/lgtm

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Nov 20, 2020
@fejta-bot
Copy link

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

@liggitt
Copy link
Member

liggitt commented Nov 20, 2020

If it's alpha-level, and we'll never enable it, why not drop it immediately?

@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

I would feel bad for users if we removed this feature without at-least having the equivalent alpha-level replacement ready to use, which we will hopefully have for v1.21.

thockin
thockin reviewed Nov 20, 2020
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Member

@thockin thockin left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Is there a plan for the sequence?

Deprecate in 21, remove in 22? Possible to backport the deprecation to 20?

I'm mostly worried about the code in kube-proxy that has to coexist with the new features and then eventually be surgically removed..

/lgtm
/approve

@k8s-ci-robot
Copy link
Contributor

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: andrewsykim, thockin

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

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Nov 20, 2020
@andrewsykim
Copy link
Member Author

Possible to backport the deprecation to 20?

So did we want to try to get this into v1.20? @jeremyrickard thoughts on this? This is just a deprecation so no risk for the release.

@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot merged commit ddf3eb5 into kubernetes:master Dec 9, 2020
@k8s-ci-robot k8s-ci-robot added this to the v1.21 milestone Dec 9, 2020
@github-actions github-actions bot mentioned this pull request Dec 16, 2020
Open
@robscott robscott mentioned this pull request Mar 1, 2021
Closed
@robscott robscott mentioned this pull request May 18, 2021
Closed
1 task
@dipesh-rawat dipesh-rawat mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2023
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@thockin thockin thockin left review comments

@gmarek gmarek Awaiting requested review from gmarek

@sttts sttts Awaiting requested review from sttts

Assignees

@robscott robscott

@thockin thockin

Labels
approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. cncf-cla: yes Indicates the PR's author has signed the CNCF CLA. kind/api-change Categorizes issue or PR as related to adding, removing, or otherwise changing an API kind/deprecation Categorizes issue or PR as related to a feature/enhancement marked for deprecation. lgtm "Looks good to me", indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. needs-priority Indicates a PR lacks a `priority/foo` label and requires one. needs-triage Indicates an issue or PR lacks a `triage/foo` label and requires one. release-note Denotes a PR that will be considered when it comes time to generate release notes. sig/apps Categorizes an issue or PR as relevant to SIG Apps. size/XS Denotes a PR that changes 0-9 lines, ignoring generated files.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
v1.21
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
6 participants
@andrewsykim @k8s-ci-robot @robscott @fejta-bot @liggitt @thockin