-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 819
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
Provide an easier way to bring your own certificates via helm chart installation #2175
Comments
We do have a few parameters related to certificates. From https://agones.dev/site/docs/installation/install-agones/helm/#configuration
I think it would be useful if you could enumerate which certificates you want to be able to disable / bring yourself. Also, does it suffice to have a single flag to control on/off or would we want to introduce individual configuration parameters for each certificate? The latter seems more flexible, but it means you would have to specify a bunch of different arguments when installing your helm chart. |
The specific certificates I'm referring to are related to the allocator - the server cert and key for the allocator grpc service. In the chart, disabling From my original description
To elaborate on that, since the chart only allows either auto-generated certs, or switches to using the Reference to current chart: agones/install/helm/agones/templates/service/allocation.yaml Lines 289 to 295 in 6f8ed2c
Furthermore, I don't want to completely disable tls or mTLS for the allocator service. This means that none of the currently provided flags provides any route forward for me. As it stands in my branch, I would very much prefer to simply disable the creation of all allocator certificates and create them myself. This means the Note that this only applies to the allocator. This seems sufficient to me because the allocator is the only service that is being used from outside of the kubernetes cluster. The controller and the admission webhook are internal to the system, and can be rotated/changed/etc. as much as needed since both client and server exist in a controlled system. Link to my branch for the example - https://github.com/fairwindsops/agones/blob/sudermanjr/allow-disabling-allocator-certs/install/helm/agones/templates/service/allocation.yaml |
The way I read "Set to true to generate client TLS certificates or false to provide certificates in So what you are looking for isn't to "bring your own certificates via helm chart installation" (by making helm more flexible to install them a different way) but instead to "bring your own certificates instead of installing them with the helm chart". This sounds good and I think we should document this since pattern in https://agones.dev/site/docs/advanced/allocator-service/ in addition to adding the new flag to the helm chart configuration page so that it gets more visibility. |
Sure, that's probably a good way to put it.
That definitely appears to be the intent, but with Helm, it is much nicer to just install the chart from the repository rather than having to keep a copy of it around somewhere. |
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
There doesn't seem to be a great way to bring your own certificates when using the helm installation method. As it stands now, it's possible to either allow automatic certificate generation, or disable generation of certs, which then puts in place static certificates that exist in the helm chart.
The only way to bring your own certificates is to clone the chart, edit the files, and then install from the clone.
Describe the solution you'd like
I have a working branch that allows disabling the creation of all k8s secrets (specifically for the allocator). This enables me to provision the secrets up-front in kubernetes, and then start up agones using those secrets (and thus certificates). I think this is the ideal situation.
Describe alternatives you've considered
The other possibility that could be done in addition to the proposed solution (or instead of), is to allow specifying the certs in your values file, which could then be passed in using different methods with helm (and other helm-wrapper tools). I went with the first solution in my test because it allows the handling of secrets outside of helm, which opens up more sophisticated secrets management methods.
Additional context
The diff on my proposed solution. If there are no objections, I'll gladly open a PR.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: