-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.5k
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
Migrate KEP-34 to new template #2471
Conversation
/assign @pacoxu @johnbelamaric @derekwaynecarr |
- https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/72593 | ||
- https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/74151 | ||
|
||
There may be some follow-ups required to improve usability, but I do not believe this should block graduation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
There was a note about unsafe sysctls and usability. Maybe we can add a graduation criteria to just document that on the website with workarounds so we can graduate this rather than worry about more code fixes in this release. @pacoxu
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
any scheduling enhancement we make around a node that is configured to allow unsafe sysctls would be a distinct feature.
PRR is fine, will approve after SIG approval |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
just one change requested, which is the best kind, because it removes work for GA criteria that is no longer pertinent.
|
||
#### Graduation | ||
|
||
* Promote `--experimental-allowed-unsafe-sysctls` kubelet flag to kubelet config api option |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
this flag does not exist.
it was changed to allowed-unsafe-sysctls
and no further action is needed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This was done, but it was done post-beta so I will keep it in GA criteria and add it into implementation history.
For some reason the issue was still open despite this having been fixed so I closed that issue.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
- https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/72593 | ||
- https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/issues/74151 | ||
|
||
There may be some follow-ups required to improve usability, but I do not believe this should block graduation. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
any scheduling enhancement we make around a node that is configured to allow unsafe sysctls would be a distinct feature.
thanks for updates! /approve |
@johnbelamaric over to you :) |
/approve |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: derekwaynecarr, ehashman, johnbelamaric 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 |
NOTE: This KEP was implemented in 1.4 and went beta in 1.11 and long predates PRR. I migrated the KEP to the new template and completed the PRR requirements as best I could. I think I put a note on the KEP for where the copy-pasting from the beta KEP ended.
The feature flag has defaulted to on for at least all current supported releases. We would like to graduate this in 1.21 and follow up on any remaining usability work in a separate KEP.
/cc @pacoxu
/sig node
xref #34