ExtraPortMapping Validation

[aroradaman]

Using random host ports for validating extra port mapping defined without host ports (default behaviour for provider docker and podman)

Fixes #3301

[aojea]

we have a default stage in pkg/internal/apis/config/default.go

[aojea]

point is we should default things in defaulting stage, not here in validation

[aroradaman]

should I remove defaults from pkg/cluster/internal/providers/<provider>/provision.go then and add it as part of SetDefaultsCluster in default stage .. defaulting with respect to provider ?

kind/pkg/cluster/internal/providers/docker/provision.go

Lines 363 to 377 in 3610f60

	// do provider internal defaulting
	// in a future API revision we will handle this at the API level and remove this
	if pm.ListenAddress == "" {
	switch clusterIPFamily {
	case config.IPv4Family, config.DualStackFamily:
	pm.ListenAddress = "0.0.0.0" // this is the docker default anyhow
	case config.IPv6Family:
	pm.ListenAddress = "::"
	default:
	return nil, errors.Errorf("unknown cluster IP family: %v", clusterIPFamily)
	}
	}
	if string(pm.Protocol) == "" {
	pm.Protocol = config.PortMappingProtocolTCP // TCP is the default
	}

kind/pkg/cluster/internal/providers/podman/provision.go

Lines 376 to 390 in 3610f60

	// do provider internal defaulting
	// in a future API revision we will handle this at the API level and remove this
	if pm.ListenAddress == "" {
	switch clusterIPFamily {
	case config.IPv4Family, config.DualStackFamily:
	pm.ListenAddress = "0.0.0.0"
	case config.IPv6Family:
	pm.ListenAddress = "::"
	default:
	return nil, errors.Errorf("unknown cluster IP family: %v", clusterIPFamily)
	}
	}
	if string(pm.Protocol) == "" {
	pm.Protocol = config.PortMappingProtocolTCP // TCP is the default
	}

[aojea]

/lgtm
/assign @BenTheElder

for final approval

[aojea]

/lgtm cancel

don't we need to modify ./pkg/internal/apis/config/default.go too?

[aroradaman]

@aojea Is ./pkg/internal/apis/config/default.go generated by code-generator ?
If yes, can you point me to documentation for the same ?

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aroradaman
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from aojea. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[BenTheElder]

I've been out sick and I'm going to need some more time to think about how to better structure this, but I don't think exporting all of these values is the answer.

Thanks for working on this problem!

[prahaladramji]

I've been out sick and I'm going to need some more time to think about how to better structure this, but I don't think exporting all of these values is the answer.

Thanks for working on this problem!

Just following up to find out what's the current thoughts on this PR, I'm looking for a resolution to #3301.

@BenTheElder Is the feedback more around the implementation details of this PR or is the above mentioned issue the desired behaviour of kind moving forward post v0.18.0?

[BenTheElder]

I was hoping for a response to the existing comments before reviewing further.

[aroradaman]

/retest

[prahaladramji]

@aroradaman is there anything I can help with here? Or is this a test that could pass with a retest?

[aroradaman]

@prahaladramji I don't think retest would help here, and also the error is not related to this PR.

@BenTheElder do we still need pull-kind-e2e-kubernetes-1-24 given that it has already reached EOL. I also see pull-kind-e2e-kubernetes-1-28 to be missing.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@aroradaman: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-kind-e2e-kubernetes-1-24	6fa6758	link	true	/test pull-kind-e2e-kubernetes-1-24

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[aroradaman]

/test pull-kind-e2e-kubernetes-1-29

[aroradaman]

ping @BenTheElder

[prahaladramji]

The 1 failing check seemes to be related to vagrant as part of the ci step and not related to this change.

A general look at that error seems like it could just be flakey vagrant step (potentially a retry may work). But if not, I'm happy to try and help look at fixing that step.

[k8s-ci-robot]

PR needs rebase.

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.

[aroradaman]

/close in favor of #3513
cc. @prahaladramji