Skip to content
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

Improve AzureDataExplorerExporter: add support for WorkloadIdentity #33668

Conversation

mipnw
Copy link
Contributor

@mipnw mipnw commented Jun 20, 2024

Description: Add support for WorkloadIdentity in exporter/azuredataexplorerexporter

Link to tracking Issue: 33667

Testing:

  • ran make
  • ran all go tests under exporter/azuredataexplorerexporter including e2e_test.go which currently uses environment identity to authenticate to kusto with a client secret.
Screenshot 2024-06-22 at 4 11 25 PM

Documentation: edited the README.md for that exporter.

@mipnw mipnw requested review from a team and bryan-aguilar June 20, 2024 01:38
Copy link

linux-foundation-easycla bot commented Jun 20, 2024

CLA Signed

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

  • ✅ login: mipnw / name: mipnw (9e29d7c)

Azure Identity supports WorkloadIdentity for authenticating workloads
running in Kubernetes to Azure resources. This improvement targets
workloads that want to export telemetry from Kubernetes pods
to Azure Data Explorer, and those pods use a service account that
is bound to an Azure managed identity.
@mipnw mipnw force-pushed the feature/azuredataexplorer_workloadidentity branch from 0e1509e to 9e29d7c Compare June 22, 2024 21:10
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Jul 7, 2024

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Jul 7, 2024
@mipnw
Copy link
Contributor Author

mipnw commented Jul 13, 2024

I received an automated notification informing me this issue was at risk of being automatically closed for lack of activity. Would the pending reviewers please comment on the status of this PR, does it need to be retracted, does it need additional work? Thank you.
@bryan-aguilar

@github-actions github-actions bot removed the Stale label Jul 14, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days.

@evan-bradley
Copy link
Contributor

@asaharn @ag-ramachandran could one of you please take a look?

@ag-ramachandran
Copy link
Contributor

Thanks @evan-bradley , having a look. Will add comments to the PR by tomorrow

@ag-ramachandran
Copy link
Contributor

Hello @evan-bradley Looks good, was this tested on a WIF based environment like AKS

Copy link
Contributor

This PR was marked stale due to lack of activity. It will be closed in 14 days.

@github-actions github-actions bot added the Stale label Aug 25, 2024
Copy link
Contributor

github-actions bot commented Sep 9, 2024

Closed as inactive. Feel free to reopen if this PR is still being worked on.

@github-actions github-actions bot closed this Sep 9, 2024
@SatyKrish
Copy link

@mipnw could you complete this PR. Thanks.

@mipnw
Copy link
Contributor Author

mipnw commented Sep 27, 2024

@SatyKrish I'm not sure what you're asking me to do. I don't have permission to merge this I'm not a maintainer on this repo. I don't see any comments inside the PR. I see @ag-ramachandran asked if this was tested in a WIF environment. I honestly no longer remember what testing I did for this, I submitted this PR months ago and any status I would have written inside the PR at the time. I had access to a Kusto cluster at the time. I no longer do and I no longer have bandwidth to re run the testing.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants