Skip to content

WIP: Support for mixed protocol LB services #880

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

Open
wants to merge 10 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
+553 −269
Open

WIP: Support for mixed protocol LB services #880

Changes from 1 commit
Commits
Show all changes
10 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
e4c7e91
Add doc for MixedProtocolLBService support
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
9b33c10
fixup! Add doc for MixedProtocolLBService support
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
72ed8d1
controller support for mixed protocol LB services
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
55ca64d
fixup! controller support for mixed protocol LB services
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
3cda00c
refactor into one flow
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
9327597
refactor into designed declarative approach
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
3224275
fixup! refactor into designed declarative approach
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
4d49b9a
Update protocol ports
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
a068f95
Implement multi forwardingRule in interanal case
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
796dc40
fixup! Implement multi forwardingRule in interanal case
justinsb Jul 25, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
8 changes: 8 additions & 0 deletions docs/design-docs/multi-protocol-cidr.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -66,6 +66,14 @@ The necessary changes would be localized within the GCP-specific implementation
* gce.EnsureLoadBalancerDeleted: This function would need to be updated to iterate through all potential forwarding rules based on the new naming scheme and delete them.
* **Resource Naming Functions:** Helper functions that generate names for GCP resources would need to be adapted to produce the protocol-specific forwarding rule names.

### 5. Production Readiness

For ease of introduction, we will implement a feature flag for the support. If the feature flag is not set,
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

is not really an error , is it? the status gets updated to indicate one protocol is not supported

the existing behaviour will be used - specifying a service with multiple protocols will be an error.

So that traffic is not interrupted, if a ForwardingRule exists with the "old" naming convention (`k8s-fw-\[service-uid\]`),
that name will be used for the matching desired ForwardingRule.

### **5\. Alternatives Considered**

* **Continue with Dual-Service Workaround:** This is the current state. It is not a true implementation of the Kubernetes feature and places an unnecessary operational burden on users.
Expand Down