sidecar defaultEndPoints should be IPv6 compatible #2447
Conversation
|
/test release-notes_api |
|
gencheck failure is unrelated to this PR and will be fixed by #2446 |
|
/test gencheck_api |
Signed-off-by: Faseela K <faseela.k@est.tech>
7dcbcba to
eeb32ba
Compare
|
We do have an ipv6 job in CI - folks contributing to ipv6 should focus on improving its test coverage. |
|
@kfaseela can you provide a plan on supporting ipv6 CI? I didn't want it to block your PR but would be needed before this is released in an official istio release. |
| // connections. Arbitrary IPs are not supported. Format should be one of `127.0.0.1:PORT`, `0.0.0.0:PORT` | ||
| // (which will forward to the instance IP), or `unix:///path/to/socket` | ||
| // connections. Arbitrary IPs are not supported. Format should be one of `127.0.0.1:PORT`, | ||
| // `0.0.0.0:PORT`, `[::1]:PORT`, `[::]:PORT` (which will forward to the instance IP), |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The (which will forward to the instance IP), part is now confusing
I would have a list
- Forward to isntance ip: 0.0.0.0:PORT, [::]:PORT
- Forward to localhost: ...
- Forward to UDS socket: unix:///blah
There was a problem hiding this comment.
The
(which will forward to the instance IP),part is now confusingI would have a list
- Forward to isntance ip: 0.0.0.0:PORT, [::]:PORT - Forward to localhost: ... - Forward to UDS socket: unix:///blah
Will fix this soon
I did not really think about it. 🙂 We were not using sidecar api so far, but otherwise ipv6 works fine for us. We just started trying out a new experimental feature that recently came in which needed sidecar api, and realized that there are certain things which required change w.r.t ipv6. Let me see if I can spare some time in upstreaming some of the ipv6 test suites. |
|
In response to a cherrypick label: new pull request created: #2452 |
should be merged along with istio/istio#40265
Issue: istio/istio#40245
Signed-off-by: Faseela K faseela.k@est.tech