🐛 Fix testing kube-apiserver serving certificate using wrong SANs

[solidDoWant]

When configuring the kube-apiserver for a test by setting a serving address, the certificate generated for the API server does not include the serving value. In other words, if a test environment is configured like this:

testEnv = &envtest.Environment{
	ControlPlane: envtest.ControlPlane{
		APIServer: &envtest.APIServer{
			SecureServing: envtest.SecureServing{
				ListenAddr: envtest.ListenAddr{
					Address: myTestAddress,
					Port:    strconv.Itoa(6443),
				},
			},
		},
	},
}

Then when testEnv.Start() is called, the healthcheck will fail because the produced apiserver.crt serving certificate is only valid for localhost, and addresses that localhost resolves to.

This fixes the issue by providing the SecureServing and InsecureServing listening address to the cert generator function.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: solidDoWant / name: solidDoWant (9d597fd, 24176f6)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @solidDoWant!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-sigs/controller-runtime has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @solidDoWant. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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-sigs/prow repository.

[sbueringer]

/ok-to-test

[sbueringer]

Thx!

/lgtm
/assign @alvaroaleman

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: e82d5ffa6cb6e3300e28cb0b08b6122a7ba1e5ae

[alvaroaleman]

I might be missing it, but where do we test that there is actually a SAN injected? The tests here all seem to only check for localhost being there

[solidDoWant]

The following two Expect statements verify that the DNS SAN extension contains localhost, and that the IP SAN extension contains 127.0.0.1 and 1.2.3.4.

There isn't really an easy way to verify that the DNS SAN extension will contain an additional entry if SecureServing.Address is a hostname instead of an IP address. This is because the current logic (that is outside the scope of this PR) for determining SAN extension values depends on the test host's DNS resolver. If I were to add say example.com, then the underlying business logic would perform a DNS lookup for example.com, who's value would be host-dependent. The localhost value only works here because localhost typically resolves to 127.0.0.1 via the hosts file.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alvaroaleman, solidDoWant

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:

• OWNERS [alvaroaleman]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment