-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 411
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
For basic validation and defaulting webhooks, default to a stronger failurepolicy #127
Comments
/kind feature |
/good-first-issue |
@DirectXMan12: Please ensure the request meets the requirements listed here. If this request no longer meets these requirements, the label can be removed In 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/test-infra repository. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
Issues go stale after 90d of inactivity. If this issue is safe to close now please do so with Send feedback to sig-testing, kubernetes/test-infra and/or fejta. |
/remove-lifecycle stale |
@DirectXMan12 I assume this feature still needs working on. Has there been any work done on determining which failurepolicy is the best option yet? |
This is already done. kubebuilder currently defaults it to |
Since we're working on making the cases of webhook use for defaulting and validation easier, we might want to consider generating webhook configs with a "stronger" failurepolicy (i.e. not "ignore") for those, so that bad objects can't sneak into the cluster if our webhook server fails.
cc @mengqiy
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: