-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 359
add ImageId to the set of additional cloud provider labels #1119
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
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
The ImageId is per-node metadata that allows cluster owners to: 1. Identify the set of image ids running a cluster 2. Track rollouts of images through a cluster 3. Quickly identify bad image builds being rolled out to cluster The aws cloud-provider already exposes similar instance-level metadata such as instance type, topology information. This introduces a new label applied to each node in a cluster: `k8s.aws/image-id=`. It does not require any additional API calls as the describe instance call already has the ImageId.
|
Welcome @justinmir! |
|
Hi @justinmir. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the I understand the commands that are listed here. DetailsInstructions 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. |
|
/ok-to-test |
|
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all PRs. This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle stale |
|
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all PRs. This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /lifecycle rotten |
|
The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs. This bot triages PRs according to the following rules:
You can:
Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community. /close |
|
@k8s-triage-robot: Closed this PR. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
/reopen |
|
@justinmir: Reopened this PR. DetailsIn response to this:
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. |
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. DetailsNeeds approval from an approver in each of these files:Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
| // integer starting at 1. | ||
| LabelNetworkNodePrefix = "topology.k8s.aws/network-node-layer-" | ||
| // LabelImageID is a machine image label that can be applied to node resources. | ||
| LabelImageID = "k8s.aws/image-id" |
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.
i think node.k8s.aws/image-id would be better wdyt?
|
/triage accepted |
|
/remove-lifecycle rotten |
|
/lgtm |
What type of PR is this?
/kind feature
What this PR does / why we need it:
Introduces new label applied to each node in a cluster:
k8s.aws/image-id=.This gives cluster administrators better visibility into images being used by nodes
in their cluster.
It does not require any additional API calls as the describe instance call already has the ImageId.
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #1118
Special notes for your reviewer:
N/A
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: