|
| 1 | +<!-- |
| 2 | +**Note:** When your KEP is complete, all of these comment blocks should be removed. |
| 3 | +
|
| 4 | +To get started with this template: |
| 5 | +
|
| 6 | +- [ ] **Pick a hosting SIG.** |
| 7 | + Make sure that the problem space is something the SIG is interested in taking |
| 8 | + up. KEPs should not be checked in without a sponsoring SIG. |
| 9 | +- [ ] **Create an issue in kubernetes/enhancements** |
| 10 | + When filing an enhancement tracking issue, please make sure to complete all |
| 11 | + fields in that template. One of the fields asks for a link to the KEP. You |
| 12 | + can leave that blank until this KEP is filed, and then go back to the |
| 13 | + enhancement and add the link. |
| 14 | +- [ ] **Make a copy of this template directory.** |
| 15 | + Copy this template into the owning SIG's directory and name it |
| 16 | + `NNNN-short-descriptive-title`, where `NNNN` is the issue number (with no |
| 17 | + leading-zero padding) assigned to your enhancement above. |
| 18 | +- [ ] **Fill out as much of the kep.yaml file as you can.** |
| 19 | + At minimum, you should fill in the "Title", "Authors", "Owning-sig", |
| 20 | + "Status", and date-related fields. |
| 21 | +- [ ] **Fill out this file as best you can.** |
| 22 | + At minimum, you should fill in the "Summary" and "Motivation" sections. |
| 23 | + These should be easy if you've preflighted the idea of the KEP with the |
| 24 | + appropriate SIG(s). |
| 25 | +- [ ] **Create a PR for this KEP.** |
| 26 | + Assign it to people in the SIG who are sponsoring this process. |
| 27 | +- [ ] **Merge early and iterate.** |
| 28 | + Avoid getting hung up on specific details and instead aim to get the goals of |
| 29 | + the KEP clarified and merged quickly. The best way to do this is to just |
| 30 | + start with the high-level sections and fill out details incrementally in |
| 31 | + subsequent PRs. |
| 32 | +
|
| 33 | +Just because a KEP is merged does not mean it is complete or approved. Any KEP |
| 34 | +marked as `provisional` is a working document and subject to change. You can |
| 35 | +denote sections that are under active debate as follows: |
| 36 | +
|
| 37 | +``` |
| 38 | +<<[UNRESOLVED optional short context or usernames ]>> |
| 39 | +Stuff that is being argued. |
| 40 | +<<[/UNRESOLVED]>> |
| 41 | +``` |
| 42 | +
|
| 43 | +When editing KEPS, aim for tightly-scoped, single-topic PRs to keep discussions |
| 44 | +focused. If you disagree with what is already in a document, open a new PR |
| 45 | +with suggested changes. |
| 46 | +
|
| 47 | +One KEP corresponds to one "feature" or "enhancement" for its whole lifecycle. |
| 48 | +You do not need a new KEP to move from beta to GA, for example. If |
| 49 | +new details emerge that belong in the KEP, edit the KEP. Once a feature has become |
| 50 | +"implemented", major changes should get new KEPs. |
| 51 | +
|
| 52 | +The canonical place for the latest set of instructions (and the likely source |
| 53 | +of this file) is [here](/keps/NNNN-kep-template/README.md). |
| 54 | +
|
| 55 | +**Note:** Any PRs to move a KEP to `implementable`, or significant changes once |
| 56 | +it is marked `implementable`, must be approved by each of the KEP approvers. |
| 57 | +If none of those approvers are still appropriate, then changes to that list |
| 58 | +should be approved by the remaining approvers and/or the owning SIG (or |
| 59 | +SIG Architecture for cross-cutting KEPs). |
| 60 | +--> |
| 61 | +# KEP-3136: Beta APIs Are Off by Default |
| 62 | + |
| 63 | +<!-- |
| 64 | +This is the title of your KEP. Keep it short, simple, and descriptive. A good |
| 65 | +title can help communicate what the KEP is and should be considered as part of |
| 66 | +any review. |
| 67 | +--> |
| 68 | + |
| 69 | +<!-- |
| 70 | +A table of contents is helpful for quickly jumping to sections of a KEP and for |
| 71 | +highlighting any additional information provided beyond the standard KEP |
| 72 | +template. |
| 73 | +
|
| 74 | +Ensure the TOC is wrapped with |
| 75 | + <code><!-- toc --&rt;<!-- /toc --&rt;</code> |
| 76 | +tags, and then generate with `hack/update-toc.sh`. |
| 77 | +--> |
| 78 | + |
| 79 | +<!-- toc --> |
| 80 | +- [Release Signoff Checklist](#release-signoff-checklist) |
| 81 | +- [Summary](#summary) |
| 82 | +- [Motivation](#motivation) |
| 83 | + - [Goals](#goals) |
| 84 | + - [Non-Goals](#non-goals) |
| 85 | +- [Proposal](#proposal) |
| 86 | + - [User Stories (Optional)](#user-stories-optional) |
| 87 | + - [Story 1](#story-1) |
| 88 | + - [Story 2](#story-2) |
| 89 | + - [Notes/Constraints/Caveats (Optional)](#notesconstraintscaveats-optional) |
| 90 | + - [Risks and Mitigations](#risks-and-mitigations) |
| 91 | +- [Design Details](#design-details) |
| 92 | + - [Test Plan](#test-plan) |
| 93 | + - [Graduation Criteria](#graduation-criteria) |
| 94 | + - [GA](#ga) |
| 95 | + - [Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy](#upgrade--downgrade-strategy) |
| 96 | + - [Version Skew Strategy](#version-skew-strategy) |
| 97 | +- [Production Readiness Review Questionnaire](#production-readiness-review-questionnaire) |
| 98 | +- [Implementation History](#implementation-history) |
| 99 | +- [Drawbacks](#drawbacks) |
| 100 | +- [Alternatives](#alternatives) |
| 101 | +- [Infrastructure Needed (Optional)](#infrastructure-needed-optional) |
| 102 | +<!-- /toc --> |
| 103 | + |
| 104 | +## Release Signoff Checklist |
| 105 | + |
| 106 | +<!-- |
| 107 | +**ACTION REQUIRED:** In order to merge code into a release, there must be an |
| 108 | +issue in [kubernetes/enhancements] referencing this KEP and targeting a release |
| 109 | +milestone **before the [Enhancement Freeze](https://git.k8s.io/sig-release/releases) |
| 110 | +of the targeted release**. |
| 111 | +
|
| 112 | +For enhancements that make changes to code or processes/procedures in core |
| 113 | +Kubernetes—i.e., [kubernetes/kubernetes], we require the following Release |
| 114 | +Signoff checklist to be completed. |
| 115 | +
|
| 116 | +Check these off as they are completed for the Release Team to track. These |
| 117 | +checklist items _must_ be updated for the enhancement to be released. |
| 118 | +--> |
| 119 | + |
| 120 | +Items marked with (R) are required *prior to targeting to a milestone / release*. |
| 121 | + |
| 122 | +- [ ] (R) Enhancement issue in release milestone, which links to KEP dir in [kubernetes/enhancements] (not the initial KEP PR) |
| 123 | +- [ ] (R) KEP approvers have approved the KEP status as `implementable` |
| 124 | +- [ ] (R) Design details are appropriately documented |
| 125 | +- [ ] (R) Test plan is in place, giving consideration to SIG Architecture and SIG Testing input (including test refactors) |
| 126 | + - [ ] e2e Tests for all Beta API Operations (endpoints) |
| 127 | + - [ ] (R) Ensure GA e2e tests for meet requirements for [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md) |
| 128 | + - [ ] (R) Minimum Two Week Window for GA e2e tests to prove flake free |
| 129 | +- [ ] (R) Graduation criteria is in place |
| 130 | + - [ ] (R) [all GA Endpoints](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/pull/1806) must be hit by [Conformance Tests](https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/sig-architecture/conformance-tests.md) |
| 131 | +- [ ] (R) Production readiness review completed |
| 132 | +- [ ] (R) Production readiness review approved |
| 133 | +- [ ] "Implementation History" section is up-to-date for milestone |
| 134 | +- [ ] User-facing documentation has been created in [kubernetes/website], for publication to [kubernetes.io] |
| 135 | +- [ ] Supporting documentation—e.g., additional design documents, links to mailing list discussions/SIG meetings, relevant PRs/issues, release notes |
| 136 | + |
| 137 | +<!-- |
| 138 | +**Note:** This checklist is iterative and should be reviewed and updated every time this enhancement is being considered for a milestone. |
| 139 | +--> |
| 140 | + |
| 141 | +[kubernetes.io]: https://kubernetes.io/ |
| 142 | +[kubernetes/enhancements]: https://git.k8s.io/enhancements |
| 143 | +[kubernetes/kubernetes]: https://git.k8s.io/kubernetes |
| 144 | +[kubernetes/website]: https://git.k8s.io/website |
| 145 | + |
| 146 | +## Summary |
| 147 | + |
| 148 | +From the Kubernetes release where this change is introduced, and onwards, beta APIs will not be enabled in clusters by default. |
| 149 | +Existing beta APIs and new versions of existing beta APIs, will continue to be enabled by default: |
| 150 | +if v1beta.some.group is currently enabled by default and we create v1beta2.some.group, v1beta2.some.group will still be enabled by default. |
| 151 | + |
| 152 | +## Motivation |
| 153 | + |
| 154 | +Beta APIs are not considered stable and reliance upon APIs in this state leads to exposure to bugs, |
| 155 | +guaranteed migration pain for users when the APIs move to stable, and the risk that dependencies will |
| 156 | +grow around unfinished APIs. |
| 157 | +Enabling beta APIs by default, exacerbates these problems by making them on in nearly every cluster. |
| 158 | +We observed these problems as we removed long-standing beta APIs and the PRR survey tells us that over |
| 159 | +90% of cluster-admins leave production clusters with these APIs enabled. |
| 160 | +Unsuitability for production use is documented at https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/#api-versioning |
| 161 | +("The software is not recommended for production uses"), but defaulting on means they are present in nearly every |
| 162 | +production cluster. |
| 163 | +By disabling beta APIs by default, a cluster-admin can opt-in for specific APIs without having every |
| 164 | +incomplete API present in the cluster. |
| 165 | +This is now practical to do since conformance no longer relies on non-stable APIs. |
| 166 | + |
| 167 | +### Goals |
| 168 | + |
| 169 | +1. Disable new beta APIs by default. |
| 170 | +2. Continue enabling existing beta APIs and new version of existing beta APIs by default: |
| 171 | + if v1beta.some.group is currently enabled by default and we create v1beta2.some.group, v1beta2.some.group will still be enabled by default. |
| 172 | +3. Allow enabling specific resources in beta. Enable coolnewjobtype.v1beta1.batch.k8s.io without enabling other-neat-job.v1beta1.batch.k8s.io |
| 173 | + |
| 174 | +### Non-Goals |
| 175 | + |
| 176 | +1. Change feature gate defaults. |
| 177 | + Feature gates control new features (not just new APIs) and they are on by default for beta features. |
| 178 | + This KEP is not changing the lifecycle flow for feature gates. |
| 179 | + It is currently alpha=off-by-default, beta=on-by-default, stable=locked-to-on. |
| 180 | + |
| 181 | +## Proposal |
| 182 | + |
| 183 | +New beta APIs will be placed into the `DisableVersions` stanza instead of the `EnableVersions` stanza (see [DefaultAPIResourceConfigSource](https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/blob/0669da445fa8c1ae07c15c0827f0e83da11cbe58/pkg/controlplane/instance.go#L643)). |
| 184 | +The `--runtime-config` flag will be extended to allow `group/version/resource=true`, to enable specific resources. |
| 185 | +To enable a beta API, a cluster-admin will have to add the appropriate `--runtime-config` flags. |
| 186 | + |
| 187 | +### User Stories (Optional) |
| 188 | + |
| 189 | +#### Story 1 |
| 190 | + |
| 191 | +As a cluster-admin I want to enable the coolnewjobtype.v1beta1.batch.k8s.io API in my cluster. |
| 192 | + |
| 193 | +To do this I call `kube-apiserver --runtime-config=batch.k8s.io/v1beta1/coolnewjobtype`. |
| 194 | + |
| 195 | +#### Story 2 |
| 196 | + |
| 197 | +As a cluster-admin I want to enable all beta APIs as in past releases. |
| 198 | + |
| 199 | +To do this I call `kube-apiserver --runtime-config=api/beta=true`. |
| 200 | +This already exists and will continue to function. |
| 201 | + |
| 202 | + |
| 203 | +### Notes/Constraints/Caveats (Optional) |
| 204 | + |
| 205 | +Installers, utilities, controllers, etc that need to know if a certain beta API is present can continue to use the |
| 206 | +existing discovery mechanisms (example: kubectl's api-resources sub command or the `/api/apps/v1` REST API). |
| 207 | + |
| 208 | +### Risks and Mitigations |
| 209 | + |
| 210 | +Adoption of beta features will slow. |
| 211 | +Given how kubernetes is now treated, this is a good thing, not a bad thing. |
| 212 | +Those users that want to move quickly and get new features can do so by enabling all beta feature |
| 213 | +or just enabling those that are important for their workload. |
| 214 | +The [PRR survey](https://datastudio.google.com/reporting/2e9c7439-202b-48a9-8c57-4459e0d69c8d/page/Cv5HB) shows that |
| 215 | +over 30% of cluster-admins have enabled alpha features on at least some production clusters, so cluster-admins are willing and able to enable features |
| 216 | +that are not on by default when they are desired. |
| 217 | + |
| 218 | +If two or more APIs are tightly coupled together, it will now be possible to enable them independently. |
| 219 | +This can lead to unanticipated failure modes, but should only impact beta APIs with beta dependencies. |
| 220 | +While this is a risk, it is not very common and components should fail safe as a general principle. |
| 221 | + |
| 222 | +If beta APIs are off by default, it's possible that fewer clients will use them and provide feedback. |
| 223 | +This is a risk, but early adopters are able to enable these features and have a history of enabling alpha features. |
| 224 | +When moving from beta to GA, it will be important for sigs to explicitly seek feedback. |
| 225 | +We will address this by extending the PRR questionnaire to include a GA-targeted question to validate that the feature |
| 226 | +was reasonably validated in production use-cases. |
| 227 | + |
| 228 | +If beta APIs are off by default, it is possible that sigs don't treat taking an API as an indication of a "mostly-baked" API. |
| 229 | +If this happens, then more transformation may be required. |
| 230 | +Keeping our beta API rules consistent and continuing to enforce easy to use APIs seems to be the best option. |
| 231 | + |
| 232 | +## Design Details |
| 233 | + |
| 234 | +<!-- |
| 235 | +This section should contain enough information that the specifics of your |
| 236 | +change are understandable. This may include API specs (though not always |
| 237 | +required) or even code snippets. If there's any ambiguity about HOW your |
| 238 | +proposal will be implemented, this is the place to discuss them. |
| 239 | +--> |
| 240 | + |
| 241 | +### Test Plan |
| 242 | + |
| 243 | +Integration tests will be written to ensure that no new beta APIs are enabled in the kube-apiserver by default. |
| 244 | +Unit tests will be written to ensure that the new flag functionality works as expected. |
| 245 | + |
| 246 | +### Graduation Criteria |
| 247 | + |
| 248 | +This KEP is a policy KEP, not a feature KEP. It will start as GA. |
| 249 | + |
| 250 | +#### GA |
| 251 | + |
| 252 | +- Integration and unit tests from above. |
| 253 | +- updating the enablement docs for beta |
| 254 | + - https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/using-api/#api-versioning |
| 255 | + - https://kubernetes.io/docs/reference/command-line-tools-reference/feature-gates/#using-a-feature |
| 256 | + Even though that is talking about feature gates, it is likely worth calling out there that new beta REST APIs are no |
| 257 | + longer enabled by default) |
| 258 | +- email to [email protected] to explain the new policy |
| 259 | +- blog post explaining change in time for 1.24 release |
| 260 | +- CI configuration updated to have a testing mode that enables beta APIs, likely set using `kube-apiserver --runtime-config=api/beta=true` |
| 261 | +- extend the PRR questionnaire to include a GA-targeted question to validate that the feature was reasonably validated in production use-cases. |
| 262 | + |
| 263 | +### Upgrade / Downgrade Strategy |
| 264 | + |
| 265 | +The additional command line flag format for `--runtime-config` will not be recognized on older levels of kubernetes. |
| 266 | +This means that when downgrading, cluster-admins will have to adjust their CLI arguments if they opted into a new beta API. |
| 267 | +This is congruent to flag handling for new features today. |
| 268 | +Because this only impacts new beta APIs, there is no behavior change for existing APIs on upgrade. |
| 269 | + |
| 270 | +### Version Skew Strategy |
| 271 | + |
| 272 | +Because this only impacts new beta APIs, there is no novel skew risk. |
| 273 | + |
| 274 | +## Production Readiness Review Questionnaire |
| 275 | + |
| 276 | +Not applicable because this is a policy KEP. |
| 277 | + |
| 278 | +## Implementation History |
| 279 | + |
| 280 | +<!-- |
| 281 | +Major milestones in the lifecycle of a KEP should be tracked in this section. |
| 282 | +Major milestones might include: |
| 283 | +- the `Summary` and `Motivation` sections being merged, signaling SIG acceptance |
| 284 | +- the `Proposal` section being merged, signaling agreement on a proposed design |
| 285 | +- the date implementation started |
| 286 | +- the first Kubernetes release where an initial version of the KEP was available |
| 287 | +- the version of Kubernetes where the KEP graduated to general availability |
| 288 | +- when the KEP was retired or superseded |
| 289 | +--> |
| 290 | + |
| 291 | +## Drawbacks |
| 292 | + |
| 293 | +<!-- |
| 294 | +Why should this KEP _not_ be implemented? |
| 295 | +--> |
| 296 | + |
| 297 | +## Alternatives |
| 298 | + |
| 299 | +<!-- |
| 300 | +What other approaches did you consider, and why did you rule them out? These do |
| 301 | +not need to be as detailed as the proposal, but should include enough |
| 302 | +information to express the idea and why it was not acceptable. |
| 303 | +--> |
| 304 | + |
| 305 | +## Infrastructure Needed (Optional) |
| 306 | + |
| 307 | +<!-- |
| 308 | +Use this section if you need things from the project/SIG. Examples include a |
| 309 | +new subproject, repos requested, or GitHub details. Listing these here allows a |
| 310 | +SIG to get the process for these resources started right away. |
| 311 | +--> |
0 commit comments