KEP-2008: changed to target 1.25

[adrianreber]

• One-line PR description: changed KEP 2008 target to 1.25
• Issue link: Add Forensic Container Checkpointing KEP #1990
• Minimal checkpointing support kubernetes#104907

@mrunalp @mikebrow @derekwaynecarr PTAL

Let me know if the KEP needs more details about the CRI API changes. Most of the discussion happened so far in the code PR (kubernetes/kubernetes#104907)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @adrianreber. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

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.

[ehashman]

/ok-to-test
/lgtm

[rphillips]

/lgtm

[mrunalp]

/lgtm

[dims]

/milestone v1.25

[zouyee]

/lgtm

[adrianreber]

@rphillips @mrunalp PTAL. I removed the unused ContainerRestore RPC as it was something many reviewers were uncomfortable with. I am able to restore a container going through Create/Start so that the Restore RPC is not needed anymore.

This update of the PR only removes things which makes the whole KEP and code PR simpler. Please add your /lgtm once more if you still think this is ready.

[mrunalp]

/lgtm

[mikebrow]

needs a security statement / set of requirements for this service, validating the request and destination are authorized. see https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/pull/1990/files#r798031530

[adrianreber]

@mikebrow Thanks for helping with this KEP. Can you be more specific what you would expect here. Looking at @derekwaynecarr comment on the original KEP it says:

please add detail on checkpoint authorization, we will need to restrict access to the kubelet api resource.

on the container runtime, the actual checkpoint is stored in a location is restricted, but prior to beta, we need clear security practices documented.

Are there already other kubelet API resources which have this kind of authorization? Accessing the kubelet API is not possible without access to the certificates as far as I understand it. Do we need additional authorization? If there is an existing mechanism I am happy to include this. If there is any authorization available on the kubelet API I am not sure I have the necessary understanding of the kubelet to introduce something like that.

[derekwaynecarr]

/approve
/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: adrianreber, derekwaynecarr, rst0git

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:

• keps/sig-node/OWNERS [derekwaynecarr]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[derekwaynecarr]

@adrianreber thanks for the work, and look forward to refining the use case.