Check if user has a correct cluster-cidr and service-cidr config #5492
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
rbrtbnfgl
approved these changes
Apr 22, 2022
brandond
reviewed
Apr 22, 2022
01e04df to
6d23e60
Compare
brandond
approved these changes
Apr 25, 2022
|
Waiting for code freeze to end.... |
27f3db0 to
521844e
Compare
Signed-off-by: Manuel Buil <mbuil@suse.com>
521844e to
314e3f5
Compare
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Signed-off-by: Manuel Buil mbuil@suse.com
Proposed Changes
This PR has two changes:
1 - It removes the nature of the node's IP to decide if we should enable IPv6. It does not matter if the node is ipv6, ipv4 or dual-stack to enable ipv6 parameters
2 - Check if cluster-cidr and services-cidr share the same IP version. Otherwise, there are strange errors
Types of Changes
"New feature" ==> avoids user shooting himself/herself in the foot
Verification
Linked Issues
#5491
User-Facing Change
Further Comments