-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 6.5k
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
Fix external lb error #8299
Fix external lb error #8299
Conversation
Hi @singeleaf. Thanks for your PR. I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs 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. 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. |
Thanks @singeleaf for this fix! /ok-to-test |
Thanks for fixing. /lgtm |
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: oomichi, singeleaf The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here. The pull request process is described here
Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
actually this fix produce new bug that now even external LB is present in all.yml
than it writes in control-plane nodes hosts file: so next what's happened control plane nodes can't connect to external load balancer because ex lb is now localhost changes:
kubespray need new fix after that node2 : ok=634 changed=119 unreachable=0 failed=1 skipped=640 rescued=0 ignored=2 node1,2,3 - master nodes, so 2 nodes can't connect without lb before this commit everything working fine with or without loadbalancer |
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
What this PR does / why we need it:
At the kube_control_plane node, apiserver_loadbalancer_domain_name should point to dbip
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #8290
Special notes for your reviewer:
n/a
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: